What is so difficult or revolutionary about making the simple argument that children are generally better-served by being brought up by both biological parents. Credit: Getty
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Embery-100x100.jpg)
It is a sad feature of our age that so many of our policymakers are imbued with a moral cowardice that prevents them from speaking openly and candidly about issues central to the well-being of the nation. Usually it’s because such issues are deemed too politically sensitive, and to tackle them would generate a torrent of opprobrium from other parts of the establishment. Reputations and careers are easily destroyed if the wrong people are offended in our increasingly intolerant society.
The consequence is that opinions that are mainstream out there in the provinces of the United Kingdom are seen as taboo by the political class, thereby exacerbating the already-profound divergence between the priorities of the governors and the governed.
Nowhere is this more apparent than on the subject of the family. No institution is more pivotal to our lives, nor has such an acute influence over whether we succeed or prosper as individuals. Yet, beyond the usual platitudes about the need to ‘support hardworking families’, the merits of the institution itself, and in particular how it can operate most effectively, barely features in political discourse these days.
This is all the more inexcusable given the scale of family breakdown, with all its deeply deleterious effects, over the last 40 or so years.
We know from research carried out earlier this decade by the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) that the UK has one of the highest percentages of lone parents in Europe. Over a million children have no meaningful contact with their fathers, and almost half of 15-year-olds do not live with both parents.
It is, of course, the young who pay the highest price for this disintegration of family life, with children from fractured families being twice as likely to develop behavioural problems and more liable to suffer from depression, turn to drugs or alcohol, or perform worse at school. There is also an increased chance of their living in income poverty in the future.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThank you, Douglas, for a splendid article. My anger and rage at the abominable creature Gopal – racist, insulting, disgusting – and at the appalling hypocrisy and bigotry of CU prevent me from writing a full comment because it would not pass Unherd’s Comment Policy.
Both Gopal and CU occupy the miasma of depravity of thought and deed and the stench arising is truly nauseating.
[…] Why won’t our spineless politicians stand up for the family? […]
[…] Why won’t our spineless politicians stand up for the family? […]