This year’s British Social Attitudes report revealed that just 38 per cent of young adults think marriage is the best kind of relationship (compared with 84 per cent of over-65s who think so) and only 22 per cent think married couples make better parents than unmarried ones. This begs a simple question: Why are they not being presented with the evidence that would help them reach a better informed opinion?

Perhaps part of the answer is that the Government itself fails to understand the advantages of marriage and traditional family structures. For, new evidence published today by CARE makes clear that one-earner couples on an average and somewhat below average wage bear a bigger and increasing share of the tax burden than other taxpayers – a situation unmatched in other comparable countries.

The study, The Taxation of Families 2007/08, by fiscal policy consultants Don Draper and Leonard Beighton, concluded that these British families are much worse off compared with others overseas, that they lose out to UK families where both parents earn, and that this discrepancy became significantly worse in the past year: ‘In 2006/07 the tax burden on a one-earner married couple with two children on average income was 37% greater than the OECD average. In 2007/08 that figure rose to 44%’ - a comparable family in the USA would have paid almost £3000 less tax.

It would be simple to rectify this injustice. Instead, as the report concludes, ‘the failure of tax credits to take account of the financial needs of a second parent is making it difficult to reduce child poverty. It is also damaging family life by discouraging couples with children from marrying or openly living together.’

Research consistently and increasingly shows the importance of family life to our personal well-being, with studies indicating that marriage can add up to five years to a person’s life. For instance, one extensive eight-year study looking at over 67,000 adults concluded that, after taking into account age, state of health, and several other factors likely to influence the findings, people who had been divorced or separated were 27 percent more likely to have died, those who had been widowed were almost 40 per cent more likely to have died, but those who had never been married were 58 percent more likely to have died than their peers who were married and still living with their spouse.  Thus, even among 20-40 year-olds, never having been married is a better predictor of poor health outcomes than either divorce or widowhood.

Other research shows that, on average, married people also earn more and have greater wealth, enjoy greater sexual satisfaction more often, and are less likely to suffer from mental health problems. Marriages break up less often and last much longer than cohabitations (and couples who cohabit before marriage are more likely to break up). Children born into marriages are happier, more likely to do better at school, and to live above the poverty line. And marriage is good for society. Stable relationships mean less poverty and fewer welfare payments, which means lower taxes. Fewer breakups – the leading cause of bankruptcy – and better job performance means greater financial stability, fewer repossessions, and a stronger economy. Indeed, it has been estimated that the direct costs to the UK taxpayer of educational underachievement, crime, and benefits payments associated with family breakdown are around £37 billion per year† – that is, around £1,200 per taxpayer, more than the entire defence budget, half the education budget or a third of the NHS budget!

Until the Government comes to understand the impact of its fiscal decisions on society, it seems there is little chance of the next generation understanding why its elders valued marriage so highly…

† Lynas, P. (2009) When Relationships Go Wrong: Counting the Cost of Family Failure, Relationships Foundation

• 
• Share