> Is she really suggesting that an unstable, abusive 2P household is significant better than any 1P household? She does not consider the quality of the househo

> Is she really suggesting that an unstable, abusive 2P household is significant better than any 1P household? She does not consider the quality of the household whatsoever. That is the problem. > TFA states that 50% of children in the US are born to unmarried mothers. Should we assume that 50% of fathers are abusive or demanding or just an overall net negative like Matt suggests? That seems like /quite/ a stretch. That doesn't mean 50% are divorced. For instance, my own partner and I are unmarried and recently had a child together, but we aren't divorced. > Matt assumes that the single mothers turning down “$44,000 and free childcare” must be doing so rationally ? No he doesn't. > quite naively assumes that unmarried mothers have the same ability to find a long-term partner as somebody without kids Again, no he doesn't assume this at all. In fact, the article doesn't mention repartnering whatsoever.