David Frum: Latino family structures disintegrate upon contact with dysfunctional Americans

[mota bhai 2,675]

The 23% of young Americans who are Latino earn only about 9% of the country's associate diplomas and bachelor degrees.

...

There is good reason to fear that we will see retrogression in third-generation Hispanic immigrants. In their study of Mexican-American immigrants, Generations of Exclusion, Edward Telles and Vilma Ortiz found that educational progress slowed to a halt after the second generation.

One reason for that slow-down is ... the disintegration of Latino family structures on contact with American realities ... younger Latinos are having more children outside marriage than their parents did, just as whites and African-Americans are.

...

Among whites and African Americans, non-marital childbearing is associated with wage stagnation and downward economic mobility. Latinos are unlikely to be spared those same dire outcomes.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/24/the-immigrants-haven-t-changed-the-destination-has.html

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I wonder how that correlates with the data that shows when women are given an opportunity to have a quality education, they tend to wait until later to have children, and have less of them (when they work outside the home)?

[GandD 5,966]

I wonder how that correlates with the data that shows when women are given an opportunity to have a quality education, they tend to wait until later to have children, and have less of them (when they work outside the home)?

There's a good amount of women I know that make it all the way through to a masters degree, get a job as a teacher, have kids, then either become a stay at home mom or take a part time job way below their qualifications. Such a waste.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I wonder how that correlates with the data that shows when women are given an opportunity to have a quality education, they tend to wait until later to have children, and have less of them (when they work outside the home)?

This one? Where it was found that poor economic outlook is what causes early child bearing rather than that being the other way around. It's an interesting read for those truly interested.

Why Are Teen Moms Poor? Surprising new research shows it’s not because they have babies. They have babies because they’re poor.

[Darnell 8,478]

How to count George Zimmerman, then? His Mom isn't anglo anything....

[duraaraa 203]

This is a very interesting topic for me, because of my experience in Mongolia.

To sum it up, the poorer people in Mongolia have kids because the kids help around the house and take care of everything while the parents work. Then, when the kids are old enough to work, they are loyal to their parents and support them, so the more kids you have, the better retirement plan you have.

In the U.S., it's kind of the opposite. We tend to stress the importance of a happy childhood, and by happy, we generally tend to mean having no responsibilities other than school, sports, and maybe taking out the trash or doing the dishes in some families. Ironically, these spoiled kids tend to grow up and not care so much about looking after their parents.

It's a weird world we live in.

Edited May 28, 2013 by duraaraa

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This is a very interesting topic for me, because of my experience in Mongolia.

To sum it up, the poorer people in Mongolia have kids because the kids help around the house and take care of everything while the parents work. Then, when the kids are old enough to work, they are loyal to their parents and support them, so the more kids you have, the better retirement plan you have.

In the U.S., it's kind of the opposite. We tend to stress the importance of a happy childhood, and by happy, we generally tend to mean having no responsibilities other than school, sports, and maybe taking out the trash or doing the dishes in some families. Ironically, these spoiled kids tend to grow up and not care so much about looking after their parents.

It's a weird world we live in.

Interesting observation. There's got to be a happy medium somewhere between the two extremes.

[GandD 5,966]

This is a very interesting topic for me, because of my experience in Mongolia.

To sum it up, the poorer people in Mongolia have kids because the kids help around the house and take care of everything while the parents work. Then, when the kids are old enough to work, they are loyal to their parents and support them, so the more kids you have, the better retirement plan you have.

In the U.S., it's kind of the opposite. We tend to stress the importance of a happy childhood, and by happy, we generally tend to mean having no responsibilities other than school, sports, and maybe taking out the trash or doing the dishes in some families. Ironically, these spoiled kids tend to grow up and not care so much about looking after their parents.

It's a weird world we live in.

I suppose it's hard to consider the well being of others when you never had to care about your own

[duraaraa 203]

I suppose it's hard to consider the well being of others when you never had to care about your own

Yeah, exactly.

People who live in privileged households tend to take things for granted. Those who struggled saw how much their parents did to provide food for them, and they appreciate it, and take care of their parents in their old age.

My stepkids have grown up with tons of responsibilities. Even the 10 year old is perfectly capable of shopping for ingredients and making meals, going to the bank and paying bills, cleaning the home, etc. He does such things on top of getting straight As at school in Mongolia. He's been doing this since he was five or six, and is also extremely happy and positive towards life. I certainly hope that his, and the other kids' ability to be responsible doesn't change when he comes to the U.S.

My fiancee and I do everything we can for the kids, and the kids do everything they can for us.

On the other hand, my siblings and I grew up in a privileged L.A. suburb treating our mom like Eric Cartman.

Edited May 28, 2013 by duraaraa

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Yeah, exactly.

People who live in privileged households tend to take things for granted. Those who struggled saw how much their parents did to provide food for them, and they appreciate it, and take care of their parents in their old age.

My stepkids have grown up with tons of responsibilities. Even the 10 year old is perfectly capable of shopping for ingredients and making meals, going to the bank and paying bills, cleaning the home, etc. He does such things on top of getting straight As at school in Mongolia. He's been doing this since he was five or six, and is also extremely happy and positive towards life. I certainly hope that his, and the other kids' ability to be responsible doesn't change when he comes to the U.S.

My fiancee and I do everything we can for the kids, and the kids do everything they can for us.

On the other hand, my siblings and I grew up in a privileged L.A. suburb treating our mom like Eric Cartman.

With my wife's family and perhaps the Filipino culture - there seems to be this high importance of putting the wants and needs of the child above all else. They want their kids to excel at everything and are extremely proud of their children's achievements. Her mother washed and ironed all the children's clothing - even picking out what to wear. All the children were primarily responsible for was to be successful in their achievements - particularly academic.

Me, on the other hand, was born and raised here in the states, in a middle-class family with four siblings. My parents were much more laid back with us and kind of left it up to us experiencing and discovering what we like or are capable of, and we had chores (including things like collecting chicken eggs from the coop, milking the goats). They didn't push us hard to excel academically, but made it clear we were expected to apply ourselves.

Which method is better? I don't know, but perhaps a mixture of both.

[duraaraa 203]

With my wife's family and perhaps the Filipino culture - there seems to be this high importance of putting the wants and needs of the child above all else. They want their kids to excel at everything and are extremely proud of their children's achievements. Her mother washed and ironed all the children's clothing - even picking out what to wear. All the children were primarily responsible for was to be successful in their achievements - particularly academic.

Me, on the other hand, was born and raised here in the states, in a middle-class family with four siblings. My parents were much more laid back with us and kind of left it up to us experiencing and discovering what we like or are capable of, and we had chores (including things like collecting chicken eggs from the coop, milking the goats). They didn't push us hard to excel academically, but made it clear we were expected to apply ourselves.

Which method is better? I don't know, but perhaps a mixture of both.

I don't know that there necessarily is a 'better,' per se. It depends on what you want your kids to turn out like. I think the way I mentioned my fiancee has raised her kids will turn out people who are hard-working. They also are willing to accept "no" for an answer... my fiancee couldn't afford extras for them.

I grew up never accepting "no" from my parents. This lead me to think anything was possible as an adult, and I've tried, succeeded, and failed at many things regular people would never try because of that.

I am creative, artistic, and I have various skills, but in my childhood, I was extremely lazy. That changed when I studied in Asia, lived alone, and took care of myself. I had to learn about discipline as a young adult, as I didn't really have it taught to me well as a child. My siblings, who stayed in the U.S. their whole lives, even in their 30s, lack discipline, and expect someone to come along and take care of anything difficult for them when they don't want to do it themselves. My sister had my mother take her car in to be repaired after a small accident, because it was "too stressful" and she "didn't want to do it herself." My elderly mother drove 100 miles round trip to my sister's house and took the car in for her, and I don't even think my sister thanked her. Things like that. On the other hand, my siblings are very well educated and are or will be more successful than I am, financially.

Edited May 28, 2013 by duraaraa

[Darnell 8,478]

One reason for that slow-down is ... the disintegration of Latino family structures on contact with American realities ... younger Latinos are having more children outside marriage than their parents did, just as whites and African-Americans are.

Yay - more moral decay bleeding over into minority groups. Stellar !

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Yay - more moral decay bleeding over into minority groups. Stellar !

Yay, m'lady? I say, neigh!

[RGinWA 816]

I think a lot of this data is skewed by the areas that first generation or undocumented Latin's are settling. Many of those areas are wrought with their own social-economic issues (poverty, drugs, gangs, poor public schools and crime etc..) Although the second generation might have an advantage to succeed, many succumb to the challenges of of those areas long before having the opportunity to proceed with a higher education. It's the same challenges that any person would have in any depressed economic area in the US.

As far as the Philippine emphasis on children and education I find it to be very direct. With at least my fiancee's family, one parent works outside the country just to put the children through college. I find that level of sacrifice admirable to say the least.

Just my two cents...

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I blame CABA women.