Reports that American Marriage is Increasingly Only for the Wealthy
A March 4 article in the Washington Post reports that married couples with children now occupy less than one if four American households – the lowest ever recorded by the US Census.
What is more, it seems to be disproportionately impacting the lower income brackets.
As marriage with children becomes an exception rather than the norm, social scientists say it is also becoming the self-selected province of the college-educated and the affluent. The working class and the poor, meanwhile, increasingly steer away from marriage, while living together and bearing children out of wedlock.
“The culture is shifting, and marriage has almost become a luxury item, one that only the well educated and well paid are interested in,” said Isabel V. Sawhill, an expert on marriage and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Marriage has declined across all income groups, but it has declined far less among couples who make the most money and have the best education. These couples are also less likely to divorce. Many demographers peg the rise of a class-based marriage gap to the erosion since 1970 of the broad-based economic prosperity that followed World War II.
“We seem to be reverting to a much older pattern, when elites marry and a great many others live together and have kids,” said Peter Francese, demographic trends analyst for Ogilvy & Mather, an advertising firm.
The article goes on to note that the affluent also tend to marry the affluent rather than those on a lower economic scale – which only makes sense. But it also quotes economist Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution, who attributes 13 percent of the nation’s rise in income inequality since the 1970s to such couplings.
The article is a bit unsatisfying though. It never really explores why lower income couples are deciding not to marry. The article notes that surveyed young, lower income couples “often do not think they can afford marriage.” The article also quotes one such couple (one of whom has a Mormon background, incidentally) who feel that marriage simply “ruins relationships.” But beyond these blurbs, there’s is next to no discussion of why a poorer couple would find marriage prohibitively more expensive than simply co-habitating and having children.
Perhaps some of our readers can shed some light on this…
Anyway, interesting stuff. Hope the link works, I can’t access the story on my computer anymore without a subscription.
By the way, a shout out to one of the readers on By Common Consent who brought this story to my attention. Wish I had thought to remember who it was and which thread the post came from. Thank you, and my apologies.
Comment by Seth R. — March 8, 2007 @ 2:04 pm
According to About: Marriage, “It is estimated that the national average cost of a wedding in the United States is $22,360.” Although I have paid that much for a car, it still seems like a lot of money to me. If I was single and didn’t believe that marriage was important, and if I factored in the cost of the divorce and the child support payments down the road, I would probably think twice about getting married.
Comment by Steve S — March 8, 2007 @ 5:08 pm
Would you think twice of getting married or twice about having a wedding. That’s what I don’t get. It’s not the marriage itself that’s pricey, but the trappings. Clearly, the focus is a bit out of whack.
Comment by alea — March 8, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Steve S,
My wife and I got married for a grand total of $3,000. The most expensive item was the wedding photos for about $1,000, which my dad insisted on getting for us. My wife’s ring was about $1,000. Didn’t even have to borrow money for the whole affair. So this item doesn’t really cut it for me. I agree with alea.
Unless all Americans are convinced that you simply cannot get married without all “the fixins.” Which raises some serious issues with our society’s collective mental health.
Comment by Seth R. — March 8, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
I had just posted about this on Blogger of Jared, but our server is down, so I’m glad to see this. I thought the article was interesting.
Seth, if you copy and paste the link, you should be able to get back into the story.
I ran into the same problem last night but that workaround worked for me. FWIW.
Comment by m&m — March 8, 2007 @ 8:33 pm
Although I was a nervous about getting married, I never had any doubts about whether it was the right thing to do, and I have almost never regretted my choice. We didn’t spend a lot, but if we had needed to omit the reception and the honeymoon, that would have been OK.
Comment by Steve S — March 8, 2007 @ 9:52 pm
My husband and I spent around $7,000 for our reception and wedding related stuff (dress, rings, etc.). Afterwards, we wished we’d just saved it toward a downpayment on a house. Not that it wasn’t a nice reception, just – it was over in a flash, we barely registered the whole thing.
Expensive mormon wedding receptions are kinda silly. How nice can you make a cultural hall look, anyway? And all that money on a dress that just ends up all covered up anyway. during the important part. I didn’t know about that part until the wedding ceremony and I cried. Yes, I’m a dork.
Comment by Sue — March 8, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
I don’t blame you Sue. You spend all that effort getting something that looks nice, and they make you cover it up with something that ends up looking more like a white pillow case.
Sorry about the inadvertent poaching m&m. Despite having the coolest name in the bloggernacle, I still don’t have Blogger of Jared on my aggregator yet.
Comment by Seth R. — March 9, 2007 @ 9:44 am
We offered Sarah $5000 to skip the wedding. She said no. It ended up costing us $7000. I would so do it differently if we had it to do over, so would she. I’m pretty sure she would take the money since they are poor as church mice.
I think it would be cheaper to be married (not get) because you can qualify for insurance and filing jointly.
Although I sure know a lot of kids who are living together for years in lieu of marriage. It bothers me, but oh well.
Comment by annegb — March 12, 2007 @ 9:27 am