Saving the American Family from Further Destruction
Written: Nov 16 '07 (Updated Nov 18 '07)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Respectful dialogue; Raises valid concerns, backed with statistics
Cons: Goes a little overboard at times; Doesn't examine deeply enough
The Bottom Line: This book attempts to solve an important social issue. It succeeds in some ways, fails in others.
|
|
|
| Bryan_Carey's Full Review: William J. Bennett - The Broken Hearth: Reversing ... |
Social scientists have voiced many concerns over the years, but one concern that seems to be very commonplace from the 1990’s to the present is the demise of the traditional nuclear family. Just a few decades ago, the majority of births in America were to married people; divorce was uncommon; and cohabitation was a frowned upon practice. But starting in the late 1960’s social norms began to change; some feel for the better; others, for the worse. One book that takes the latter position is The Broken Hearth: Reversing the Moral Collapse of the American Family, a book by social conservative William Bennett.
Basic Contents of This Book:
This 199- page political book is divided into the following chapters:
Preface
1. The State of Marriage and the Family
2. The Family in History
3. Cohabitation, Illegitimacy, Fatherlessness
4. Homosexual Unions
5. Divorce
6. A Few Home Truths
Index
Bennett opens his book with an examination of the present condition of the family unit in America. The numbers are not pretty, and Bennett quickly points out the drastic changes in family composition and the trends that continue to this day. Divorce is way up, families with a mother and father present are on the decline, and the rate of births to unmarried women has seen a sharp increase.
The book then back up in chapter two and presents a history of the family and how social attitudes have changed over the years. These first two chapters serve as the warm- to the rest of the book, which takes some issues Bennett feels are most important to the preservation of the family and breaks them apart, exposing them for what he feels are the damaging aspects of each and their contributions to the breakdown of the traditional family.
Starting in chapter three, Bennett discusses cohabitation, illegitimate births, and the absence of fathers in a greater and greater number of homes. Bennett feels that the first practice- cohabitation- has swiftly led to the problems of the other two. With more and more people living together and not getting married, the chances for illegitimate birth has naturally increased. And without a marriage contract to hold them accountable, many men feel free to do whatever they want to this arrangement, including abandoning the family altogether.
In chapters four and five, Bennett continues his criticisms, this time toward homosexual marriage, homosexual adoption, and the rising rates of divorce. Bennett feels that marriage should be an institution that remains solely the domain of one man and one woman. Not only does he reject the notion that homosexuals should be allowed to marry and adopt children, he is against legal recognition and adoption by any other sexual arrangement, like polygamy and others. He also has much to say about the present rate of divorce and what needs to be done to reduce it. He ends the book with a chapter on love and marriage and what he feels are the important steps that need to be taken to prevent the further erosion of this sacred institution.
Final Thoughts:
William Bennett is a social critic and political activist who has served time in Washington and also served plenty of time behind the camera as a guest speaker on various news programs and talk shows. Always ready to offer his opinion, the former Secretary of Education is an outspoken critic of social change, and he lays out the problems he feels have led to the breakdown of the family in this book, published in 2001.
Bennett’s position on the family unit isn’t anything new. Basically, he feels that a strong family is the foundation of a strong America. He feels that marriage between a man and a woman is an important social arrangement that should never be changed. And he feels there is no better way to raise children than to have both a mother and a father present, living under the sanctity of marriage. He feels that many social forces have led to the collapse of this traditional arrangement and it is up to us, the American people, to stop the transition and return the family to its nuclear form.
Many other social conservatives have voiced concern about the meltdown of the family and how it has had devastating effects on the American culture. Many of these concerns are valid, and the statistics are present to back them up. It is true, for example, that a child raised in a one- parent home is more likely to end up underachieving in life, due to lack of sufficient finances and other factors. It is also true that many of societies other woes can be traced to this breakdown. Some may disagree with the precise factors and who/what should be blamed, but the statistics do, indeed, point to a rise in social and economic problems stemming from the rising rate of divorce and the fragmentation of families.
While these problems pose a valid concern, what many will not agree with and not appreciate are Bennett’s list of culprits and what needs to be done to rectify the situation. Among his more controversial claims are those against homosexuals being fit to take care of children and his feeling that homosexual marriages are bad for society and bad for families in general. While the verdict might still be out on the first point, I don’t see how allowing homosexuals to marry is a sign of the end of the world as we know it. Just because homosexuals want to marry should not affect the decision of heterosexual couples to get married and raise a family. I don’t see the connection here, even though Bennett argues that society is best of marriage laws remain the way they are.
In other areas, Bennett is also opinionated and he feels the statistics are on his side. For example, he is against cohabitation both on moral grounds and for practical reasons. Since cohabitation leads to more out of wedlock births and a greater percentage of abandoned children, then cohabitation should be discouraged. He is also against divorce when children are involved. He feels the “no fault” divorce option should be curtailed or even eliminated. This, in Bennett’s mind, would lessen the chances that couples would call it quits and thus save the children from a life of turmoil.
I don’t mind that Bennett wants to share his opinions, but on this last point, I think he takes things a little too far. Most offensive is his proposal that the “no fault” divorce concept be outlawed; forcing couples to remain married unless a compelling reason (physical violence, adultery, etc.) dictates that the union be dissolved. I must disagree with Bennett on this point for several reasons. First, I don’t think governments should have the authority to decide whether or not couples should remain in an unhappy marriage. Second, I don’t see how this would stop divorce because an individual determined to end his/her marriage would simply have an affair or commit one of the other acts required to make the divorce legal. Third, I don’t see how the children would win in a situation like this. They would be forced to live with two parents who could very well harbor hostilities toward each other. This, in many instances, would be far worse than having the children live separately with one parent.
One good thing about this book is that Bennett, while usually strongly opinionated, is respectful throughout. Even when he is criticizing those with whom he disagrees, he is still respectful and he even points out that regardless of how he feels about homosexual marriage and homosexual adoption, all humans should be treated with respect regardless of sexual preference. This might be of little consolation to some readers, but it is still an improvement compared to the vile, hateful writing often associated with other social conservative writers as a whole.
Overall, The Broken Hearth is an okay book that attempts to tackle a difficult subject in less than 200 pages. It doesn’t cross examine the causes of family meltdown as much as it should and its conclusions will certainly be met with disapproval from certain people. But at the same time, its core concerns are valid and it does approach the subject with a certain degree of respect, earning this book a 2.5 star rating, which I will round to three stars and give a modest recommendation. It is no classic piece of non- fiction and many other authors have stated the arguments more effectively. But it has enough good points to make it worthy of a quick read.
This is my third entry in Msmorvay’s “Resurrecting the Oldies” Write- off. To find out more, click the following link:
Resurrecting the Oldies Write- Off
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.