You don’t have to have a Ph.D. to know that many poor parents have not signed up for the Mission.
From What’s Holding Black Kids Back? by Kay S. Hymovitz, a nice piece that looks at the differences between middle and lower class families with regards to child rearing.
I like the piece, but I take issues with a few of her assertions. I don't agree with the assertion that smaller family size is evidence of an increasing focus on The Mission. For some families yes, but for others, it's evidence of wanting to "be done" early and reture at 50.
Additionally, subscribing to The Mission doesn't necessarily make one a good parent. I'd rather raise good, happy children than four-sport all-stars who play 12 instruments and have wretched attitudes. Any family that is "training [children] to prosper in an individualistic, commercial, self-governing republic" at the expense of teaching a child how to live in relationship with God, nature and fellow man is not an enviroment for raising healthy children, it's a Young Capitalist factory.
Even though the article isn't concerned with that distinction, much of its critique of lower-class parenting can also be applied to the moral dimension. It's interesting at this time of assault on traditional views of the family to have a piece like this which makes the case for an intact family.
Cringe though you rightfully may at the capitalistic wording of that last sentence, the truth of the notion remains.
