Skip to content

Informative Speech Outline On Single Parenting Essay

Family is defined in Webster’s dictionary as “a group consisting of parents and children living in a household together”. But not all families have a mother, father, and children. Some families only have one parent making it a single parent household. Since the 1960’s single parent households have been increasing year after year. Information provided by the U.S. Census Bureau shows an increase of 3% in single parent homes from 2008 to 2012.

Research shows by the University of Washington’s West Coast Poverty Center, that having only one income earner in the home puts single parent households at risk for poverty. Living in poverty is stressful and can have many emotional effects on children, including low self-esteem, increased anger, frustration, and an increased risk for violent behavior. Besides financial constraints, other emotional effects of growing up in a single parent household may include feelings of abandonment, sadness, loneliness, difficulty socializing, and connecting with others. Effects vary from child to child, however, and the individual parenting style of the single parent is also a big influence on the child’s development. For the financial side, income loss appears to affect the well-being of children by putting a negative impact on family relations and parenting. The link between economic stress and mental health has been documented in various studies. Single mothers must obtain sufficient money to cover the most basic needs, such as food, shelter, and clothing. Financial strain is one of the strongest predictors of depression in single parents that then affect the children. Poor single mothers often experience a cycle of hopelessness and despair which is detrimental to both themselves and their children.

Mother-only families are more likely to be poor because of the lower earning capacity of women, inadequate public assistance, and lack of enforced child support from the fathers. Most single-parent households are run by mothers, and the absence of a father — coupled with lower household income — can increase the risk of children performing poorly in school. The lack of financial support from a father often results in single mothers working more, which can in turn affect children because they receive less attention and guidance with their homework. Researcher Virginia Knox concluded from data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, that for every $100 of child support mothers receive, their children’s standardized test scores increase by 1/8 to 7/10 of a point. In addition, Knox found that children with single mothers who have contact and emotional support from their fathers tend to do better in school than children who have no contact with their fathers. In an article published by the New York Times, Sheila Fitzgerald and Andrea Beller, professors of human resources and family studies at the University of Illinois say “time spent with a single parent during the formative preschool years seems to have particularly bad effects on a boy’s education.” The two Illinois researchers said they studied effects on education because it ”has been shown to be a predictor of welfare and persistent poverty”. They used two long-term surveys to study two generations of mothers and their offspring, totaling 2,500 boys and girls. ”In general, the longer time spent in a single-parent family, the greater the reduction in education”

Single mothers who work outside the home appear to provide greater incentive as role models for their daughters than for their sons, said Andrea Beller in a telephone interview. The role-model influence in the case of girls appears to compensate for the loss of the mother’s time at home, she said. ”The boy doesn’t have this model,” ”He just has the loss of a parent.” Data provided by the National KIDS COUNT shows that in 2012 35% of homes were single parent households. Breaking down the numbers even further, those of Asian descent were at 17% for having only one parent in the home. Hispanics made up for 42%, American Indians were at 50%, the Black population was at 67%, and Whites made up for 25%. These percentages today have risen 30% since 1960. So why is this matter not the center of policy discussions? There are three reasons. The first stems from the political debate. Many people do not want to lean one way or another, writing and funding grants, which can go against their political party’s values. Politics is not always about whom you are for but who you’re against. The second reason is that the minority communities have been hit the hardest. Even bringing up this issue a person can be claimed as being racist. Last is that there is no quick fix. Welfare reform began in the mid 1990’s and only offered modest marriage incentives. But the first step to fixing a problem is admitting there is one.

References

Maranto, Robert (2014, April 20) Ignoring an Inequality Culprit: Single-Parent Familie http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303603904579493612156024266 The Future of Children (2005, Fall) Why Do Single-Parent Families Put Children at Risk?

http://futureofchildren.org/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=37&articleid=107§ionid=692 Kunz, Marnie (2014, Jan 6) The Effects of a Single Parent Home on a Child’s Behavior http://www.livestrong.com/article/83670-effects-single-parent-home-childs/ Kirby, Jacqueline (1993) Single-parent Families in Poverty

http://www3.uakron.edu/schulze/401/readings/singleparfam.htm AP (1988, June 29) Single-Parent Homes: The Effect on Schooling
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/29/garden/single-parent-homes-the-effect-on-schooling.html Data Center (2012) Children in single parent families by race
http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/Tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by-race?loc=1&loct=1#detailed/1/any/false/868,867,133,38,35/10,168,9,12,1,13,185/432,431

Family is defined in Webster’s dictionary as “a group dwelling of parents and kids populating in a family together” . But non all households have a female parent. male parent. and kids. Some households merely have one parent doing it a individual parent family. Since the 1960’s individual parent families have been increasing twelvemonth after twelvemonth. Information provided by the U. S. Census Bureau shows an addition of 3 % in individual parent places from 2008 to 2012.

Research shows by the University of Washington’s West Coast Poverty Center. that holding merely one income earner in the place puts individual parent families at hazard for poorness. Populating in poorness is nerve-racking and can hold many emotional effects on kids. including low self-esteem. increased choler. defeat. and an increased hazard for violent behaviour. Besides fiscal restraints. other emotional effects of turning up in a individual parent family may include feelings of forsaking. unhappiness. solitariness. trouble socialising. and linking with others. Effectss vary from kid to child. nevertheless. and the single parenting manner of the individual parent is besides a large influence on the child’s development. For the fiscal side. income loss appears to impact the wellbeing of kids by seting a negative impact on household dealingss and rearing. The nexus between economic emphasis and mental wellness has been documented in assorted surveies. Single female parents must obtain sufficient money to cover the most basic demands. such as nutrient. shelter. and vesture. Financial strain is one of the strongest forecasters of depression in individual parents that so affect the kids. Poor individual female parents frequently experience a rhythm of hopelessness and desperation which is damaging to both themselves and their kids.

Mother-only households are more likely to be hapless because of the lower earning capacity of adult females. unequal public aid. and deficiency of implemented child support from the male parents. Most single-parent families are run by female parents. and the absence of a male parent – coupled with lower family income – can increase the hazard of kids executing ill in school. The deficiency of fiscal support from a male parent frequently consequences in individual female parents working more. which can in bend affect kids because they receive less attending and counsel with their prep. Researcher Virginia Knox concluded from informations from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. that for every $ 100 of child support female parents receive. their children’s standardized trial tonss increase by 1/8 to 7/10 of a point. In add-on. Knox found that kids with individual female parents who have contact and emotional support from their male parents tend to make better in school than kids who have no contact with their male parents. In an article published by the New York Times. Sheila Fitzgerald and Andrea Beller. professors of human resources and household surveies at the University of Illinois say “time spent with a individual parent during the formative preschool old ages seems to hold peculiarly bad effects on a boy’s instruction. ” The two Illinois research workers said they studied effects on instruction because it “has been shown to be a forecaster of public assistance and relentless poverty” . They used two long-run studies to analyze two coevalss of female parents and their progeny. numbering 2. 500 male childs and misss. “In general. the longer clip spent in a single-parent household. the greater the decrease in education”

Single female parents who work outside the place appear to supply greater inducement as function theoretical accounts for their girls than for their boies. said Andrea Beller in a telephone interview. The role-model influence in the instance of misss appears to counterbalance for the loss of the mother’s clip at place. she said. “The male child doesn’t have this theoretical account. ” “He merely has the loss of a parent. ” Data provided by the National KIDS COUNT shows that in 2012 35 % of places were individual parent families. Interrupting down the Numberss even further. those of Asiatic descent were at 17 % for holding merely one parent in the place. Spanish americans made up for 42 % . American Indians were at 50 % . the Black population was at 67 % . and White persons made up for 25 % . These per centums today have risen 30 % since 1960. So why is this affair non the centre of policy treatments? There are three grounds. The first stems from the political argument. Many people do non desire to tilt one manner or another. authorship and support grants. which can travel against their political party’s values. Politicss is non ever about whom you are for but who you’re against. The 2nd ground is that the minority communities have been hit the hardest. Even conveying up this issue a individual can be claimed as being racialist. Last is that there is no speedy hole. Welfare reform began in the mid 1990’s and merely offered modest matrimony inducements. But the first measure to repairing a job is acknowledging there is one.

Mentions

Maranto. Robert ( 2014. April 20 ) Ignoring an Inequality Culprit: Single-Parent Familie hypertext transfer protocol: //online. wsj. com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303603904579493612156024266 The Future of Children ( 2005. Fall ) Why Do Single-Parent Families Put Children at Risk?

hypertext transfer protocol: //futureofchildren. org/publications/journals/article/index. xml? journalid=37 & A ; articleid=107§ionid=692 Kunz. Marnie ( 2014. Jan 6 ) The Effects of a Single Parent Home on a Child’s Behavior hypertext transfer protocol: //www. livestrong. com/article/83670-effects-single-parent-home-childs/ Kirby. Jacqueline ( 1993 ) Single-parent Families in Poverty

hypertext transfer protocol: //www3. uakron. edu/schulze/401/readings/singleparfam. htm AP ( 1988. June 29 ) Single-Parent Homes: The Effect on Schooling
hypertext transfer protocol: //www. nytimes. com/1988/06/29/garden/single-parent-homes-the-effect-on-schooling. hypertext markup language Data Center ( 2012 ) Children in individual parent households by race
hypertext transfer protocol: //datacenter. kidscount. org/data/Tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by-race? loc=1 & A ; loct=1 # detailed/1/any/false/868. 867. 133. 38. 35/10. 168. 9. 12. 1. 13. 185/432. 431