Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(Newark) City Without Fathers (illegitimacy and Crime)
City Journal ^ | 08/09/07 | Steven Malanga

Posted on 08/10/2007 7:29:53 AM PDT by Clemenza

The horrific, execution-style killing of three teens in Newark last weekend has sparked widespread outrage and promises of reform from politicians, religious leaders, and community activists, who are pledging a renewed campaign against the violence that plagues New Jersey’s largest city. But much of the reaction, though well-intentioned, misses the point. Behind Newark’s persistent violence and deep social dysfunction is a profound cultural shift that has left many of the city’s children growing up outside the two-parent family—and in particular, growing up without fathers. Decades of research tell us that such children are far likelier to fail in school and work and to fall into violence than those raised in two-parent families. In Newark, we are seeing what happens to a community when the traditional family comes close to disappearing.

According to 2005 figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, only 32 percent of Newark children are being raised by their parents in a two-adult household. The rest are distributed among families led by grandparents, foster parents, and single parents—mostly mothers. An astonishing 60 percent of the city’s kids are growing up without fathers. It isn’t that traditional families are breaking up; they aren’t even getting started. The city has one of the highest out-of-wedlock birthrates in the country, with about 65 percent of its children born to unmarried women. And 70 percent of those births are to women who are already poor, meaning that their kids are born directly into poverty.

The economic consequences of these numbers are unsettling, since single parenthood is a road to lasting poverty in America today. In Newark, single parents head 83 percent of all families living below the poverty line. If you are a child born into a single-parent family in Newark, your chances of winding up in poverty are better than one in five, but if you are born into a two-parent family, those chances drop to just one in twelve.

And the social consequences are even more disturbing. Research conducted in the 1990s found that a child born out of wedlock was three times more likely to drop out of school than the average child, and far more likely to wind up on welfare as an adult. Studies have also found that about 70 percent of the long-term prisoners in our jails, those who have committed the most violent crimes, grew up without fathers.

The starkness of these statistics makes it astonishing that our politicians and policy makers ignore the subject of single parenthood, as if it were outside the realm of civic discourse. And our religious leaders, who once preached against such behavior, now also largely avoid the issue, even as they call for prayer vigils and organize stop-the-violence campaigns in Newark. Often, in this void, the only information that our teens and young adults get on the subject of marriage, children, and family life comes through media reports about the lifestyles of our celebrity entertainers and athletes, who have increasingly shunned matrimony and traditional families. Once, such news might have been considered scandalous; today, it is reported matter-of-factly, as if these pop icons’ lives were the norm.

Faced with such a profound shift in attitudes, even well-designed, well-intentioned government programs that have worked elsewhere may have only limited success in a community like Newark. The city’s dynamic new mayor, Cory Booker, has moved quickly to import successful ideas and programs, including rigorous quality-of-life policing from New York City. Booker is advocating sensible changes to fix the city’s troubled school system, which graduates a shockingly low number of students, and he’s looking at job training programs to get fathers involved, at least economically, in their children’s lives.

But Booker has also shown frustration at the slow pace of change in Newark, and earlier this week he observed that the city’s problems didn’t start yesterday and won’t be solved tomorrow. Given that some 3,750 kids are born every year into fatherless Newark families, Booker’s prediction may be depressingly correct.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS: bluezone; census; cities; joisey; newark; newjersey; urban; urbanwasteland; welfare
Newarks problems have little to do with "disinvestment" after the '67 Riots.

BTW: The overwhelming majority of homicides in Newark are black-on-black, although the crime mentioned in the article was a degenerate illegal killing black kids.

1 posted on 08/10/2007 7:29:58 AM PDT by Clemenza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

There are criminals and victims in Newark. And the politicians are too busy trying to get paid to do anything about it.


2 posted on 08/10/2007 7:32:44 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

It’s just the result of “The Great Society,” courtesy of LBJ.


3 posted on 08/10/2007 7:33:14 AM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Crimmigration also has a role.


4 posted on 08/10/2007 7:34:57 AM PDT by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Back in the 1980’s there was a great quote:

If you come to Newark without a gun, we will issue you one.


5 posted on 08/10/2007 7:36:37 AM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
And reinforced by the current loony left. I teach publik scewl and I see this every day. I have pregnant teens being raised by young grandparents. They are being raised by young grandparents because these grandparents did not do a good job with their children. Now these people are raising a third generation and starting to raise a fourth generation. We have 30+ year teachers who have seen three generations of students.
6 posted on 08/10/2007 7:38:05 AM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed less people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
only 32 percent of Newark children are being raised by their parents in a two-adult household.

I'm surprised it's that many. You would think that between them, a husband and a wife would have better sense and better options than to raise a family in Newark.

When I was a kid (in the Stone Age) I was allowed to travel by myself, most anywhere between Philly and Manhattan. One of the areas I was warned to avoid was Newark, and that was before the commotion.

7 posted on 08/10/2007 7:43:09 AM PDT by Graymatter ( Fort Knox needs an audit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Another Democrat success story...


8 posted on 08/10/2007 7:43:28 AM PDT by johnny7 ("But that one on the far left... he had crazy eyes")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
Newarks problems have little to do with "disinvestment" after the '67 Riots.

I agree.

But people forget that before Sharpe James there was Kenny Gibson and before Kenny Gibson there was Hugh Addonizio.

Addonizio turned the Newark municipal government into a Mafia patronage factory.

"Disinvestment" may have accelerated after the riots, but it was proceeding apace before then, due to business owners choosing not to be shaken down by the Boiardo crew and their cronies in the NPD.

My mother-in-law lived in Irvington in 1965 and worked in Newark for PSE&G - and she was shot in the leg with a ricocheted .22 round by a wiseguy who decided to intimidate the owner of a local market by firing of rounds into the ceiling of the store.

Newark was falling apart before the riots for a number of reasons - starting right after WWII.

9 posted on 08/10/2007 7:46:07 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
A report like this should be instructive to two groups of people, though it's likely neither of them will listen to it:

1) the black establishment, which never seems to see any reason except "racism" for the failure of black kids to achieve in school and get someplace in life; and

2) the liberals and libertarian-type conservatives who insist that government policies should never be formulated with marriage and family structure in mind.

10 posted on 08/10/2007 7:49:45 AM PDT by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Everybody acknowledges that family values is the key to creating a stable Newark, but when put into practice our government schools wants education without morality. Paraphrasing what Theodore Roosevelt once said, “if society educates a person with knowledge devoid of morality, then society will end up with an educated menance.”


11 posted on 08/10/2007 7:50:50 AM PDT by Fee (An American empire can only be built by leaders with the stomach of Romans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
Its politically incorrect to state the truth.

Feminism has failed children and men and women.

The disintegration of the traditional family leads immediately to the disintegration of society.

12 posted on 08/10/2007 7:56:42 AM PDT by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: Clemenza
"and in particular, growing up without fathers."

WHAT is our country going to do about changing this dynamic? More welfare, and social programs are not the answer. Until people particularly from this social class begin to marry again, BEFORE they procreate, these problems will continue, and they will also continue to spread to the more upwardly mobile social classes.

14 posted on 08/10/2007 8:04:48 AM PDT by TAdams8591 ( Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag. Mitt Romney for president in 2008! : ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
"It isn’t that traditional families are breaking up; they aren’t even getting started. The city has one of the highest out-of-wedlock birthrates in the country, with about 65 percent of its children born to unmarried women. And 70 percent of those births are to women who are already poor, meaning that their kids are born directly into poverty."

It has become a way of life passed on from generation to generation, and is as NORMAL to some people as the traditional family was.

15 posted on 08/10/2007 8:10:12 AM PDT by TAdams8591 ( Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag. Mitt Romney for president in 2008! : ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

I sincerely wish the Newarks of our country well, but they keep making the same mistakes over and over. Decades of wrong values, wrong decisions, wrong politics . . it’s a never-ending circle.

Why they don’t get it is beyond me, but nothing’s going to change.


16 posted on 08/10/2007 8:15:40 AM PDT by A_Former_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

How dare you point out that this is a direct consequence of a “liberal” program! The said they meant well, and some of them actually DID mean well.


17 posted on 08/10/2007 8:17:18 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
only 32 percent of Newark children are being raised by their parents in a two-adult household.

What is this guy, some kind of religious fanatic trying to force his beliefs off onto the rest of us?

/libertarian

18 posted on 08/10/2007 8:19:24 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Fred Dalton Thompson - POTUS 44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

Not to mention another example of the Atlas Shrugged principal


19 posted on 08/10/2007 8:31:31 AM PDT by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pietro
"The disintegration of the traditional family leads immediately to the disintegration of society...."

No doubt about it....One's family is the root by which we grow...it is so painfully simple.....
20 posted on 08/10/2007 8:42:11 AM PDT by PigRigger (Donate to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org - The Troops have our front covered, let's guard their backs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

Re: Crimmigration

That needs to be part of a bumber sticker.


21 posted on 08/10/2007 8:42:38 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Truth : Liberals :: Kryptonite : Superman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Stop the press!!!

Hillary’s got the answer.

It takes a village.


22 posted on 08/10/2007 8:48:07 AM PDT by detch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

Well, as a “libertarian-type conservative”, I stick to my views. Government is a failure in virtually every area it gets involved in. Why should we think it would be different for “marriage and family structure”?

I agree that absent fathers are at the heart of this problem, and many (cultural) liberals may true to ignore that fact. But it’s not something that can be changed through government.


23 posted on 08/10/2007 8:59:10 AM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MinnesotaLibertarian
But it’s not something that can be changed through government.

It's probably not something that can be *improved* by government, but what do you say about the effect of government-sanctioned same-sex "marriages"? I say that it makes traditional marriage meaningless and serves to erode the institution.

How say the libertarians upon this issue?

24 posted on 08/10/2007 9:37:37 AM PDT by Max in Utah (O Great and Benevolent Rulers of America: WHERE'S OUR FENCE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MinnesotaLibertarian
But it’s not something that can be changed through government.

Even though, as we all know, it was created as a result of government policies and programs.

25 posted on 08/10/2007 9:47:25 AM PDT by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter

I got to say this, if you are a young man in Newark (any race, creed or religion) who does take on the responsibility of being the active father of your kids and spouse to your children’s mother, your first thought is to get your kids and spouse the hell out of Newark ASAP.

So there numbers are a bit skewed do to “nuclear family flight” out to wherever, anywhere but Camden is better than Newark.


26 posted on 08/10/2007 10:37:06 AM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Max in Utah

I think marriage is a religious institution and government should have nothing to do with it. I think marriage should be up to the churches, and civil unions (for heterosexual and homosexual couples) should be the jurisdiction of the government.


27 posted on 08/10/2007 10:37:43 AM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

Let me clarify - it cannot be IMPROVED through government. Almost anything can be made WORSE by government.


28 posted on 08/10/2007 10:38:39 AM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MinnesotaLibertarian

Why just couples?


29 posted on 08/10/2007 10:44:10 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

I suppose it wouldn’t necessary have to be just couples, but I think a primary partnership would have to be defined for certain things, such as medical decisions. Spousal privilege is another good reason for limiting the number to one - otherwise we could have cover-ups by civil union. Also, I think it’s reasonable for companies to limit marriage/domestic partner benefits to only one other person. But, as far as inheritance, distrubtion of assets, etc., people can involve as many others as they want.


30 posted on 08/10/2007 11:28:26 AM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MinnesotaLibertarian
I've thumbed once again through my handy dandy pocket sized copy of the US Constitution and I can't find the word "marriage" in their anywhere.

I'm also unable to locate the words 'civil union' in there as well.

Maybe they've emanated from a penumbra I've missed...

L

31 posted on 08/10/2007 11:34:48 AM PDT by Lurker (Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to ebola.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

This is the fruits of Feminism and Liberalism. Enjoy, America.


32 posted on 08/10/2007 11:35:48 AM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

That’s correct. I was referring to states having civil unions, if that’s what they decided they wanted.


33 posted on 08/10/2007 11:47:58 AM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MinnesotaLibertarian
What's wrong with a simple contract drawn up by an attorney? Why does the State need to get involved at all?

L

34 posted on 08/10/2007 11:53:36 AM PDT by Lurker (Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to ebola.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
"Newark was falling apart before the riots for a number of reasons - starting right after WWII."

Which interestingly happens to be right about when the last Republicans were elected there. Coincidence ? Naaaaah.

35 posted on 08/10/2007 12:36:52 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~~~Jihad Fever -- Catch It !~~~ (Backup tag: "Live Fred or Die"))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
ping...

According to 2005 figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, only 32 percent of Newark children are being raised by their parents in a two-adult household.
I call BS.

Surely the percentages can't be that high.

36 posted on 08/10/2007 1:48:39 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

OK, everybody, let’s blame it on the mothers again. Crime is not the fault of criminals. I am so tired of hearing this from the Manhattan Institute—I think they must sing it in round from at lunch.


37 posted on 08/10/2007 1:53:54 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

The end of WWII was when all the defense work dried up, and there was much of it in Newark.


38 posted on 08/10/2007 1:56:19 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

from = form


39 posted on 08/10/2007 1:57:17 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

The author says... “single parenthood is a road to lasting poverty in America today.”

Not only today and not only in America - it is a BAD idea anywhere and anytime it has been tried. Why do you think ‘middle-class values’ came into such wide acceptance? As the wisdom of marrying BEFORE having kids spread through society, the prosperity of society increased - that’s why America grew such a big middle class. Stability and prosperity rest on middle-class morality. Government cannot mandate it, but can support and encourage it - and I think they should. Society can also do its part by reintroducing social pressure - if we can get past the fear of being considered prudish and judgemental.


40 posted on 08/10/2007 3:12:03 PM PDT by Shazolene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Nonsense. More new gun laws will solve everything. </if I need to put a sarcasm tag on this than forget it>


41 posted on 08/10/2007 3:28:32 PM PDT by Eric Blair 2084 (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms shouldn't be a federal agency...it should be a convenience store.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

It is essentially just a legal contract. However, some things, namely spousal priviledge, cannot be granted without the recognition of the state.


42 posted on 08/10/2007 4:04:21 PM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan
Crimmigration also has a role.

In Newark, the overwhelming majority of homicides are black on black, the recent high profile murder nothwithstanding. As a matter of fact, the area of Newark with the lowest crime rate is the one with the highest number of immigrants (Ironbound/the East Ward). There aren't that many immigrants, illegal or legal, in the sh-tholes that are the South and West Wards.

Now if we were talking about certain nabes in Houston and the entire city of El Paso, then you would have a point...

43 posted on 08/11/2007 9:23:23 PM PDT by Clemenza (Rudy Giuliani, like Pesto and Seattle, belongs in the scrap heap of '90s Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: firebrand; Coleus; jocon307; Alberta's Child; Pharmboy; Calpernia; Malsua; dead; nj26; OldFriend; ..
OK, everybody, let’s blame it on the mothers again. Crime is not the fault of criminals. I am so tired of hearing this from the Manhattan Institute—I think they must sing it in round from at lunch.

A great deal of the crime is driven by the profits from the war on drugs. Legalize it for those over 21 years of age and tax it like alcohol and tobacco with severe penalties for anyone that gives it to anyone under 21. Transfer the DEA personnel to the Border Patrol.

44 posted on 08/14/2007 9:36:55 PM PDT by neverdem (Call talk radio. We need a Constitutional Amendment for Congressional term limits. Let's Roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MrB; Enterprise; Clemenza; Calpernia; neverdem

What?

Do you mean that Bill Clinton’s Midnight Basketball programs are not working?

and the 90,000 man march in DC didn’t help?

c’mon, you’re fooin’ with me, right?

Whatever happened to the nuclear family?


45 posted on 08/14/2007 10:11:42 PM PDT by Coleus (Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

down with the nuclear family

up with in loco parentis!


46 posted on 08/14/2007 10:27:21 PM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Wow, those “severe penalties” sure will do the trick. Just as they are now for illegal drugs.


47 posted on 08/15/2007 2:31:30 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: firebrand
Wow, those “severe penalties” sure will do the trick. Just as they are now for illegal drugs.

It would be better than the corrupted mess we have now. Nothing's perfect.

Stop Abusing Snitchin' - The government's morally dubious use of drug informants

The Politics of Prohibition - How government greed, not individual rights, ended America's ban on alcohol.

48 posted on 08/15/2007 3:25:13 PM PDT by neverdem (Call talk radio. We need a Constitutional Amendment for Congressional term limits. Let's Roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson