Monday, May 03, 2004
Death of the single-income family?
A major article in the Sunday Star Times this week points out that two-parent families trying to survive on just one income (even an above-average income) are a dying breed. Fewer than a quarter of two-parent families now have mum at home and dad at work.
It's not surprising that things have got to this. Back in the 1960s in New Zealand, the average family paid negative tax. In other words, they received more in benefits and tax rebates than they paid. This was a mighty incentive for a family to stay together and have children.
All those benefits have now been stripped away from the traditional family, and handed over to solo parents or those on low incomes. Into the bargain, the government is stressing over and over that women should be out in the workforce, and developing policy and legislation every which way it can to make sure that mum doesn't stay home. Even if she (shock, horror!) wants to. Under the government's diktate, a woman should be "an autonomous economic unit", and that is official government policy.
(Incidentally, that is "should" as in "must", not should as in "may". The Ministry of Women's Affairs Policy for Women is riddled with this.)
There was a reason that the government back in the 1960s used to give all that support to the family. It's the same reason that the Australian government still understands by even now dispensing the family benefit that New Zealand discarded. The married two-parent family provides the foundation for a healthy society. When the family falls apart, so does society.
A major article in the Sunday Star Times this week points out that two-parent families trying to survive on just one income (even an above-average income) are a dying breed. Fewer than a quarter of two-parent families now have mum at home and dad at work.
It's not surprising that things have got to this. Back in the 1960s in New Zealand, the average family paid negative tax. In other words, they received more in benefits and tax rebates than they paid. This was a mighty incentive for a family to stay together and have children.
All those benefits have now been stripped away from the traditional family, and handed over to solo parents or those on low incomes. Into the bargain, the government is stressing over and over that women should be out in the workforce, and developing policy and legislation every which way it can to make sure that mum doesn't stay home. Even if she (shock, horror!) wants to. Under the government's diktate, a woman should be "an autonomous economic unit", and that is official government policy.
(Incidentally, that is "should" as in "must", not should as in "may". The Ministry of Women's Affairs Policy for Women is riddled with this.)
There was a reason that the government back in the 1960s used to give all that support to the family. It's the same reason that the Australian government still understands by even now dispensing the family benefit that New Zealand discarded. The married two-parent family provides the foundation for a healthy society. When the family falls apart, so does society.
