Dermot Ahern, Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, called for a rational debate on the question of lone parents when he launched the "Review of the One-Parent Family Payment" this week. Despite containing much valuable information, this review studiously avoids grappling with many of the complex and difficult questions posed by the issue of lone parenthood, much less suggesting innovative answers. As a result, it does little or nothing to stimulate debate of any kind.
Lone parents have been subjected to much unfair commentary which hints that they are responsible for many of the ills of society. As for those who believe that lone parents are spongers off an overly-generous system, it is hard not to wish them the joy of some day subsisting on the equivalent of the One-Parent Family Payment (OFP) so they may discover how "generous" it actually is.
Such commentary is even more unfair given the fact that most lone parents shoulder a huge burden of responsibility, often at great personal cost. After all, they are the ones who have chosen to carry a child to term rather than abort; or, in other cases, the ones left with the burden when an absent parent reneges on all responsibilities.
There should be no question that people parenting alone are entitled to the support of society, and that includes payments by the State. Yet no one dreams as a child of being a lone parent when he or she grows up. No parent wishes it for his or her child. That's because it's a bloody hard station. The bland statistic that 30 per cent of lone parent families live below the 50 per cent relative poverty line might best be illustrated by a comment of one lone parent: "You wouldn't even be able to buy a pair of tights for yourself".
But grinding poverty is not the only problem. Parenting itself is a hugely demanding task. In the 1970s, social science researchers were rather dismissive of the need for two parents. Thirty years on, current thinking might be summed up the conclusions of Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur, who co-authored the influential book Growing Up With A Single Parent.
McLanahan, herself once a single mother, is surprised with what her own extensive research data suggests. The authors write: "If we were asked to design a system for making sure that children's basic needs were met, we would probably come up with something quite similar to the two-parent family ideal . . . The fact that both adults have a biological connection to the child would increase the likelihood that the parents would identify with the child and be willing to sacrifice for that child, and it would reduce the likelihood that either parent would abuse the child".
This may seem perilously close to yet again pointing the finger at lone parents. It goes without saying that a devoted lone parent will do a better job than two indifferent parents.
But if we turn our attention from blaming those who are already in a tough situation to looking at the needs of children, I believe that few will argue that having the support and involvement of two parents is not best for children. So any policy on lone parents should be focused on two fronts: firstly, adequately supporting those who find themselves alone, and secondly, doing everything possible to prevent others ending up in a situation which is difficult for both the adult and the child.
That is why it is scandalous that, under our current tax and social welfare system, many couples will be significantly financially worse off if they decide to marry or cohabit.
Here's a concrete example from research initially done by financial journalist Colm Rapple. A cohabiting couple with one child, where one earns £230 a week gross and the other is in receipt of the OFP, will be at a loss of £76 a week should they choose to marry. This is a huge loss for couples already on low incomes. So our State is administering a system which makes it much more difficult for parents of a child to marry. This is intolerable. But the "Review of the One-Parent Family Payment" has no positive suggestions to offer.
BECAUSE of the way the OFP is structured, many people who are actually cohabiting have to pretend that they are not. This leads sometimes to humiliating and invasive investigations by social welfare, such as searching for Lynx deodorant in the bathroom to prove that a man is living there. There is a strong argument based on the rights of children that the State should provide incentives for couples to marry, since cohabitation is less stable than marriage. However, this should not extend to punitive and heavy-handed measures against those who choose not to marry.
The idea that all lone parents are young girls pushing buggies in urban wastelands is a myth, but there are areas where there are disproportionate numbers of lone mothers who are very young. Not surprisingly, it is in these places that there are also large numbers of young men adrift and disconnected from the wider society.
As many as 47 per cent of lone parents have no educational qualification. Young girls living in areas of deprivation often have no role models other than sisters and friends who are already lone parents. Massive State investment in smaller classes and career guidance is vital. If we want to reduce teen pregnancies, the best sex education is education itself. Where young people's personal hopes for their lives are raised by educational opportunity, they are far less likely to engage in sexual activity which will jeopardise this. Imagine if the resources which have to be poured into retaining young girls in - or enticing them back to - education had instead been poured into their education in order to help to prevent them getting pregnant in the first place.
Likewise, the emphasis should be on providing young men with wider horizons.
There is no focus on the needs of children in this review. There is a trend towards encouraging parents into the paid workforce, regardless of the fact that, where a parent is genuinely alone, this deprives the child or children of the presence of even that parent. Of course, having a parent at work decreases economic poverty, but what about emotional poverty?
Instead of a tunnel-vision focus of getting parents out to work, we should consider imitating the French, who give a payment of over £300 a month to parents who leave paid work in order to look after a child.
If such a substantial payment were introduced for all parents who have the primary care of children, the disincentive to marry inherent in the OFP would disappear, as this new parental payment would not be contingent on being a lone parent. It could be initially introduced as a taxable payment until the child is five, and payments tapered thereafter.
The review of the One-Parent Family Payment is far too timid to suggest such a route, as it does not fit with the Thatcherite policies of the current Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevy. Sadly, in many ways this review is a wasted opportunity.
bobrien@irish-times.ie