No matter what your reasons or occupation, when concerns of children’s well-being are taken into consideration they cannot, rather they should not be viewed solely and exclusively in a vacuum. A wider, more comprehensive approach needs to take place so as to account for the multitude of possibilities that exist when determining what is and is not in a child’s best interest as well as the positive and negative contributions to their wellbeing. This can be quite a task considering the obstacles each of face on a daily basis within not only our local society, but also the global perception as well. In his article, “Why Marriage Matters for Child Wellbeing”, Ribar explores various components associated with marriage, single-parenting, co-habitation, and absentee parent style methods of child rearing as they relate to a child’s wellbeing.
Ribar’s argument is that more positive contributions than negative ones are distributed from marriages than not. That “marriage is more than the sum of these particular parts…and the advantages of marriage for children’s wellbeing are likely to be hard to replicate through policy interventions other than those that bolster marriage itself” (Ribar, 2015, p. 11). With this in mind should not the sanctity of marriage be taken more serious since …show more content…
This simplistic approach is easy to follow and understand on a multi-faceted scale. It weighs the pros and cons of each living dynamic against the other so as to make an educated decision on which method most benefits the child’s wellbeing. Furthermore, Ribar’s approach uses preconceived assumptions about each method in order to make his claims. On this I have to agree because we have to begin somewhere and if there are other possibilities to explore then at least we have a foundation from which to
Ribar’s argument is that more positive contributions than negative ones are distributed from marriages than not. That “marriage is more than the sum of these particular parts…and the advantages of marriage for children’s wellbeing are likely to be hard to replicate through policy interventions other than those that bolster marriage itself” (Ribar, 2015, p. 11). With this in mind should not the sanctity of marriage be taken more serious since …show more content…
This simplistic approach is easy to follow and understand on a multi-faceted scale. It weighs the pros and cons of each living dynamic against the other so as to make an educated decision on which method most benefits the child’s wellbeing. Furthermore, Ribar’s approach uses preconceived assumptions about each method in order to make his claims. On this I have to agree because we have to begin somewhere and if there are other possibilities to explore then at least we have a foundation from which to