Redefining a Problem Out of Existence

There's one sure way to get rid of a nagging problem. Change its definition and, voila, away it goes.

For example, our nation's families have faced a growing crisis of children being born out of wedlock, being raised by a single parent—usually the mom—and of fathers not hanging around to raise the multiple children they have sired with multiple women. The results are not hard to see: entrenched poverty, rampant crime and drug abuse, and fatherless boys with no positive male role models growing into predators, perpetuating the cycle.

As with so many unfortunate demographic trends in our society, this first manifested itself in the African-American community and then gradually spread to the rest of the culture, something the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned about as early as 1965.

That's why when I read this story in The New York Times, I thought there might be reason to hope that we as a nation had finally come to our senses. According to the story, the number of two-parent families in the black community is on the rise, reversing a decades-long trend. And indeed there is some good news embedded in the report. But this bit of info first made my heart sink, then made me shake my head in rueful laughter:

The Census Bureau attributed an indeterminate amount of the increase to revised definitions adopted in 2007, which identify as parents any man and woman living together, whether or not they are married or the child's biological parents.

See, there's an easy way out: just redefine parent and you've solved a big part of the problem.

Why, no, officer, I wasn't speeding. I was maximizing my efficiency by cutting the time it takes to get from point A to point B! Are you anti-efficiency?

No, your honor, I wasn't dealing drugs. I’m an entrepreneur helping my clients experience varying alternate realities. Are you anti-entrepreneur?

Yes, I realize that some of these families are capable of providing loving, stable homes for children. But many of them perpetuate the worst problems of broken families, sometimes including physical and sexual abuse. It also communicates a lax standard that marriage doesn't matter to a healthy society.

The wise Sen. Moynihan warned about this unfortunate tendency to redefine problems. He called it "defining deviancy down." Change the standard or change the definition and you can make any problem "disappear." Unfortunately, the consequences of those problems are immune to our word games.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

1. Mike said the following at 10:05 AM on Dec 19:

This is especially amusing (or depressing?), considering that boilerplate divorce decrees in my home state contain this phrase:

"Neither party shall have any person of the opposite sex not related by blood or marriage around the children overnight."

2. Amir Larijani said the following at 10:44 AM on Dec 19:

Tom: Unfortunately, the same Moynihan who warned about the tendency to "define deviancy down", helped perpetuate that very problem during his service as a Senator.

3. Ultraviolet said the following at 12:35 PM on Dec 19:

"As with so many unfortunate demographic trends in our society, this first manifested itself in the African-American community"

This is a bit unnecessary...it seems to be implying that a lot of things start in the black community and slowly seep its way into the majority community, without looking at the very legitimate reasons why this might be so (and reasons that the majority might be at fault for). In regard to single-parenthood, it is a product of poverty, not the other way around. And there are legitimate reasons for the fact that there may be more poorer African-American families, or whatever other "demographic trends" which this comment doesn't seem to take into account.

4. Brent1776 said the following at 4:25 PM on Dec 19:

.... without looking at the very legitimate reasons why this might be so (and reasons that the majority might be at fault for).

Thomas Sowell, a national treasure, has some thoughts to consider on this issue:

Crippled by Their Culture

5. Loris said the following at 9:29 AM on Dec 22:

Ultraviolet, the worst poverty is very easy to escape in the United States. Simply complete high school.
And I would argue that single parenthood makes poverty worse, not that poverty causes single parenthood. Birth control is extremely cheap, after all, and self-control is free.
What is needed among the poor is the idea that education is a ticket to honorable work, which leads to wealth-building and self-respect.

6. Lisa said the following at 1:22 PM on Dec 22:

Loris (#5)
Although what you say is true, it oversimplifies. Picture a somewhat lonely, hormonal, girl of 15-ish who has not been taught that abstinence is an option. Being "loved" by a young guy who looks handsome and treats you like you are special...looks inviting.
Truth is truth, but Jesus always added in understanding and compassion.

7. IMO said the following at 1:47 PM on Dec 22:

In regard to the following comment,
"Truth is truth, but Jesus always added in understanding "

Understanding of what?

Please provide Scriptural references.

This is as close as I can find for you...

Written by Paul, in 2 Corin 6:
3We put no stumbling block in anyone's path, so that our ministry will not be discredited. 4Rather, as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distresses; 5in beatings, imprisonments and riots; in hard work, sleepless nights and hunger; 6in purity, understanding, patience and kindness; in the Holy Spirit and in sincere love; 7in truthful speech and in the power of God; with weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left; 8through glory and dishonor, bad report and good report; genuine, yet regarded as impostors; 9known, yet regarded as unknown; dying, and yet we live on; beaten, and yet not killed; 10sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything. "

Sorry but my pet peeve strikes again.

It is very vague to say that Jesus added or subtracted from something....and it does injustice to the Word of God....

8. Loris said the following at 9:11 AM on Dec 23:

I do understand, Lisa. That hypothetical 15 year old girl isn't thinking about the consequences of her actions, no matter what her socio-economic status is. She's hungry for attention and thinks sex is love. But it was my understanding that public school health classes put a good deal of emphasis on explaining contraceptive use. Maybe the teachers aren't making the connection to the kids that if a kid has a baby in high school, it is likely she won't be able to finish school and it is very likely she will be poor. I guess it's not politically correct to tell people that actions have consequences.

9. Daniel B said the following at 8:12 AM on Dec 29:

"Why, no, officer, I wasn't speeding. I was maximizing my efficiency by cutting the time it takes to get from point A to point B! Are you anti-efficiency?"

That's not redefining a problem away, that's defining something correctly and setting things straight.