parenting

New Family Study Shows Importance of Married Parenting

It has long been established, since the deeply important 1966 Coleman Report on childhood education in America, that family form and parents’ levels of involvement in raising their children are paramount in boosting child well-being and thriving. As the Coleman Report found and explained, “Studies of school achievement have consistently shown that variations in family background account for far more variation in school achievement than do variations in school characteristics.”

More recently, scholars have found the same thing. William Jeynes, professor of education at California State University – Long Beach, explains from his own research that the educational achievement gap between white, African American and Latino students “totally disappeared” when minority students have a vibrant personal faith and come from a married home where the child is biologically related to mother and father. He explains this is true even after adjusting forindividual socioeconomic status.

Jeynes explains,

The family elements that were most strongly associated with a reduction in the achievement gap were coming from a two-biological-parent family and high levels of parental involvement. These are interrelated: when two parents are present, this maximizes the frequency and quality of parental involvement. 

He adds another important benefit: serious faith. He explains,

In addition to family structure, a student’s faith also has a significant impact on his or her academic performance. Regularly attending church, or another house of worship, and defining oneself as being a very religious person yielded the most significant reductions in the achievement gap.

He asserts, “Numerous research studies have concluded that family factors are far more salient than school factors in influencing achievement.” This was true in the 1960s, and remains true today.

New research on social mobility from a non-partisan research think-tank in Washington D.C., the Archbridge Institute, adds to the finding that family formation and close parental involvement boost child well-being. Archbridge defines social mobility as “the opportunity to better oneself and those around them,” evidenced in climbing the socio-economic ladder and earning more than one’s parents.

These scholars explain that there are artificial and natural barriers to one’s social mobility. “Artificial barriers are imposed by an external authority and usually affect a class of people.” Natural barriers are different. They “occur naturally without any external imposition and typically exist at the individual level” the report states.

The artificial barriers they highlight in a person’s youth are “educational quality, minimum wage” and any “marriage penalty [policy] hindering family formation.” The natural barriers are “out of wedlock births, lack of parental engagement [and], lack of unsupervised playtime.”

In a write-up of their report for the Institute for Family Studies, the Archbridge team clarifies, “While education, entrepreneurship, and the rule of law remain critical pillars of … mobility metrics, family factors constitute the first stage where opportunity can either take root or begin to wither.” They add, “The home sets the trajectory for developing cognitive skills, character traits, and the soft skills associated with long-term flourishing.”

They find it true that “healthy family structures shape a child’s potential for mobility, and at the same time, the surrounding public policy environment can either support or impede opportunities for parents to promote a bright future for their children.” These natural and artificial factors must work in tandem to make sure children have the best opportunities. Thus, these scholars remind us, “While mitigating natural barriers remains the responsibility of parents, the removal of artificial barriers to family stability are the responsibility of each citizen.” This is why knowledge of and engagement in public policy is everyone’s civic duty. Focus on the Family offers help to families.

This Archbridge report examined which states and regions in the United States provide the most ideal environments for social mobility. They found that Utah provided the best environment and Louisiana had the worst for social mobility. The South and Mid-Atlantic regions offered the worst opportunities, and the Western Mountain and Upper Mid-Plains states offered the best opportunities.

This is simply more research documenting the previously established essential role that marriage, family structure, and daily mother/father involvement in the lives of their children has on elevating important measures of child well-being. 

Related Articles and Resources

Are Men or Women More Likely to Be Married?

New Research Shows Married Families Matter More Than Ever

Why You Should Care About the Growing Positive Power of Marriage

Important New Research on How Married Parents Improve Child Well-Being

Research Shows Marriage Boosts Well Being

New Research Shows Marriage and Fatherhood Regulate Male Sexual Energy

New Research: Marriage Still Provides Major Happiness Premium

Cohabitation Still Harmful – Even as Stigma Disappears

Don’t Believe the Modern Myth. Marriage Remains Good for Women

Don’t Believe the Modern Myth. Marriage Remains Good for Men.

Yes, Married Mothers Really Are Happier Than Unmarried and Childless Women

Marriage and the Public Good: A New Manifesto of Policy Proposals

To Make Marriage and Children Great Again, We Must Make Hearts Whole Again

According to The New York Times, the Trump Administration’s efforts to increase marriage and birth rates are stalling 358 days into the president’s second term.

To buttress her case, reporter Caroline Kitchener cites the various proposals officials have talked about enacting but that have not yet happened, including legislative actions to expand tax credits, establish a “baby bonus,” and even implement something called a “honeymoon bonus” which would be geared toward extending federal benefits to low-income couples for a year following their marriage.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy has been mocked by some for calling the plummeting birthrate a “national security threat” — but that’s exactly what it is. A nation dropping below replacement level sets in motion a cascading series of devastating consequences ranging from its financial impact to social to even military and public safety concerns. 

Last year, Focus on the Family president Jim Daly observed, “People of faith have long championed the value of children because more children will benefit everyone.” He then warned, “It’s the declining birthrate that poses an existential threat, and it’s an issue we must address — or ignore at our peril.”

How we address that threat remains a hotly debated issue.

Ms. Kitchener quotes White House spokesperson Kush Desai as saying the White House is taking a “multifaceted approach” to the dilemma, a strategy that makes perfect sense but that also points to the limitations government and the bully pulpit have when it comes to encouraging marriage and having children.

There’s also the incredibly slow and inefficient grind of Big Brother. It’s curious that the Times is expecting so much in such a short amount of time — but also revealing they don’t disagree with the many concerns surrounding the collapsing birth rate.

Since Donald and Melania Trump took that famed golden escalator ride back in 2015, the 45th and now 47th president has repeatedly emphasized his goal of making “America Great Again.” Last month, Jim O’Neill, Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services said HHS was striving to “make America fertile again.”

Both pledges are aspirational and inspirational, but something else must happen if marriage and children are to be once more widely honored, revered and celebrated.

American hearts need to be made whole again.

Not cardiovascular health, but the spiritual and inner life of men, women and children.

It was King Solomon who taught, “Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life” (Proverbs 4:23). What’s in your heart is the most significant indication of the type of life you will lead.

Couples and parents deserve to hold onto as much of their hard-earned income as possible, but financial incentives will only go so far to encourage marriage and children. It was Dr. Adrian Rogers, a Focus on the Family board member and beloved pastor, who famously quipped:

“The heart of the human problem is the problem of the human heart.”

Men and women must recognize and come to appreciate that fulfillment in life comes from being “others” focused. Good marriages are selfless and sacrificial. They give and don’t keep score. They realize that true fulfillment comes from commitment and giving of oneself.

Good parents acknowledge that children aren’t always convenient, but they are beautiful and bring meaning to life. They also aren’t cheap — but they are priceless and invaluable. As Dr. John Trainer s wrote,

“Children are not a distraction from more important work. They are the most important work.”

The solution to America’s birth dearth is multifaceted, but its cause isn’t as complex. Broken hearts and broken homes lead to broken cultures — including a reluctance to marry and have children.

King David’s plea should be ours, too:

“Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me” (Psalm 51:10).

You Don’t Need ChatGPT to Raise a Child. You Need a Mom and Dad.

Sam Altman, an investor, entrepreneur and CEO of OpenAI, a research and development company, says he can’t imagine raising a child without the availability and accessibility of artificial intelligence.

Appearing on Jimmy Fallon earlier this week, the Tonight Show host asked the tech executive if he uses ChatGPT when raising his son. Altman is “married” to Oliver Mulherin, a software engineer. They contracted to purchase a baby via surrogacy. The boy was born this past February.

“I feel kind of bad about it, because we have this genius level at everything, intelligence, sitting there, waiting to unravel the mysteries of humanity,” replied Altman. “And I’m like, ‘Why does my kid [keep] dropping his pizza on the floor and laughing?’ And so I feel like I’m not asking a good enough question, but it is.”

Altman described having concerns about the baby not yet crawling – and asking ChatGPT if that was normal. The software assured him there was nothing to worry about.

“I cannot imagine having gone through it, figuring out how to raise a newborn without Chat GPT,” he told Fallon. “Clearly, people did it for a long time, no problem.”

After the clip was shared on X, Katy Faust, founder and president of “Them Before Us,” an organization committed to defending every child’s right to both a mother and a father, offered some pointed perspective.

“You know what helps a lot when it comes to intuiting what a baby needs?” she asked. “His mother.”

In the early days of same-sex “marriage,” activists favoring the redefinition of the God-gifted institution repeatedly and routinely stressed the fact that a homosexual union had no impact or bearing on anyone else but the two people entering into it. This wasn’t true. Same-sex marriage has upended all kinds of norms and impacted all kinds of people – but especially the children the relationship produces whether through donor eggs or sperm or surrogacy.

Children in a same-sex “marriage” are intentionally and unapologetically deprived of either a mother or a father. Moms and dads are not interchangeable. They complement each other. They’re distinct and unique. Mothers can’t be fathers, and fathers can’t be mothers. God deliberately designed children to enjoy the many unique features and contributions of both.

Even setting aside the issue of same-sex parenting, the rising use of ChatGPT or any artificial intelligence assets may not be inherently problematic when it comes to helping us with a wide range of issues, including providing parental advice. But it cannot take the place of the invaluable perspective that a mother and father bring to childrearing.

Mothers and fathers who rely on artificial intelligence for advice should be aware that the software pulling from various sources isn’t always very discerning. Not all the advice is good – and some of it can be downright dangerous.

Dr. Michael Glazier, chief medical officer of Bluebird Kids Health in Broward County, Florida, told USA Today that any moms or dads using AI software should maintain a “critical eye.”

“It’s a tool and it’s incredible and it’s getting more pervasive,” he said. “But don’t let it take the place of critical thinking … There’s a lot of benefit for us as parents to think things through and consult experts versus just plugging it into a computer.”  

Children are also at risk and vulnerable to the emerging technology. Horror stories and lawsuits are coming out now suggesting some AI platforms have served as “suicide coaches” for kids.

Of course, Katy Faust’s warning goes beyond the mere use of AI and instead strikes at the selfishness of same-sex couples who are depriving children of either a mother or a father. Moms and dads serve far more than a utilitarian purpose. With their unique blend of personalities and perspective, they provide something that artificial intelligence will never replace.

Many Parents Still Fail to Monitor Their Kids’ Online Activity, Survey Shows

Most Americans support restricting kids’ access to social media and pornography, this year’s American Family Survey shows. But many parents remain hesitant to monitor their children’s online activity.

Brigham Young University’s annual American Family Survey asks a representative group of 3,000 American adults about economic, cultural and social concerns affecting the family. This year, participants identified “social media, video games [and] other electronic resources” as one of the top five issues families must confront.

Respondents expressed the most concern about porn and social media’s effects on young people. American adults overwhelmingly support government regulations limiting minors’ access to these products.

Per the survey:

  • More than 75% of participants support requiring pornography websites to verify the ages of their consumers.
  • Nearly 80% support requiring social media companies to obtain parents’ consent before allowing a minor to create a social media account.
  • Three in four support holding social media companies legally liable for harm caused by content marketed to minors.

Parents with children under 18 years old living at home also support making technology restrictions part of parenting norms. More than 60% of respondents in this demographic wish other families would implement rules about technology, and half said it would make setting and enforcing their own restrictions easier.  

But the survey also shows many parents don’t limit their children’s access to technology at all — let alone discuss strategies with other parents.

Surveyors asked participants with children under 18 years old in the home whether they implement any of five common technological boundaries: limiting their children’s screen time, restricting the kinds of content they consume, requiring them to keep their online accounts private, restricting who they contact and limiting who they exchange private messages with.

One in five respondents (20%) implement none of these restrictions. Two in five respondents (40%) don’t limit their kids’ screen time. Another 40% don’t police the content their children consume.

Though most participants in this demographic claimed other parents’ rules about technology would help them create and enforce their own rules, only 17% said another parent had influenced them to change a screen time restriction.

One third of respondents said they never talk about managing kids and technology with another parent. Only 13% claim to discuss it frequently.

Ubiquitous technology and internet access make parenting harder. Enforcing technological boundaries can be confusing, thankless and overwhelming — particularly when tech companies frequently undermine parental controls with few consequences.

But these obstacles do not change parents’ duty to protect their children from harmful content and technologies.

Parents, you do not have to allow your children access to smartphones or the internet. If you choose to do so, you must be prepared to:

  • Police your child’s online activity.
  • Educate yourself about parental controls and implement them to the best of your ability.
  • Warn your child about online predation and other pitfalls.
  • Model healthy relationships with technology.

Joining forces with other parents to limit children’s access to social media and smartphones can help families create and maintain healthy boundaries with technology. Take it upon yourself to initiate these partnerships. Odds are, you will not be rebuffed.

For more tips and tricks, check out Plugged In’s Parent’s Guide to Today’s Technology. For more information about technology restrictions — or ditching smartphones altogether — read the articles below.

Additional Articles and Resources

Counseling Consultation & Referrals

More than Twenty States Limit Smartphone Use in Schools

Parent-Run Groups Help Stop Childhood Smartphone Use

‘The Tech Exit’ Helps Families Ditch Addictive Tech — For Good

Four Ways to Protect Your Kids from Bad Tech, from Social Psychologist Jonathan Haidt

Social Psychologist Finds Smartphones and Social Media Harm Kids in These Four Ways

‘Big Tech’ Device Designs Dangerous for Kids, Research Finds

Survey Finds Teens Use Social Media More Than Four Hours Per Day — Here’s What Parents Can Do

Video: Seven-Year-Old’s Confidence Soars After Ordering Chick-Fil-A By Himself

5 Most Important Things OpenAI Lawsuits Reveal About ChatGPT-4o

Louisiana Sues Roblox for Exposing Children to Predators, Explicit Content

Proposed ‘App Store Accountability’ Act Would Force Apps and App Stores to Uphold Basic Child Safety Protections

Teen Boys Fall Prey to Financial Sextortion — Here’s What Parents Can Do

Proposed SCREEN Act Could Protect Kids from Porn

Louisiana Sues Roblox for Exposing Children to Predators, Explicit Content

Warning: The following contains descriptions of child abuse. Please guard your hearts and read with caution.

Louisiana is suing the children’s gaming platform Roblox for ““knowingly and/or recklessly” failing to protect children from online predators.

“Roblox is overrun with harmful content and child predators because it prioritizes user growth, revenue and profits over child safety,” Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill wrote in a press release.

“Every parent should be aware of the clear and present danger poised to their children by Roblox so they can prevent the unthinkable from ever happening in their own home.”

Roblox hosts hundreds of online games on one interactive website. With a couple of clicks, users can create their own avatar, explore hundreds of games, or “experiences,” and chat with other users.

More than 80 million users visit Roblox every day. An estimated 40% are under 13 years old.

Louisiana’s lawsuit accuses Roblox of breaking state laws protecting consumers from unfair and deceptive business practices. The case rests on four key assertions.

  • Roblox’s platform is rife with child predators.
  • Roblox refuses to adopt meaningful safeguards to oust child predators.
  • Roblox deceptively markets its product to children and families.
  • Roblox has financial incentive to sacrifice child safety on its platform.

Let’s break it down.

‘X-Rated Pedophile Hellscape’

Louisiana sued Roblox one month after police executed a search warrant against a local man suspected of possessing child sexual abuse material. Officers reportedly found the suspect playing Roblox with a voice-altering microphone making him sound like a little girl.  

Louisiana’s lawsuit connects this disturbing incident to “systematic patterns of exploitation and abuse” on Roblox in which predators pretend to be children and befriend real kids using the platform’s chat features.

Roblox claims abuse primarily occurs when predators lure kids off Roblox and onto other platforms. But Louisiana’s complaint cites several examples of grievous exploitation occurring on Roblox itself.

In 2024, for instance, investigators at Hindenburg Research, a well-respected forensic financial research firm, “easily found” 38 Roblox groups with hundreds of thousands of members “openly trading child pornography and soliciting sexual acts from minors.”

The exhaustive report concluded:

Our in-game research into [Roblox] revealed an X-rated pedophile hellscape, exposing children to grooming, pornography, violent content and extremely abusive speech.

Since 2017, there have been at least ten documented cases of children between eight- and 14 years old being kidnapped or otherwise physically harmed by adults they met on Roblox.

In April, a ten-year-old from California was kidnapped by a man she met on the platform. Last month,  a Florida mom sued Roblox for facilitating the exploitation and eventual rape of her 11-year-old daughter.

Shallow Safety Features

Roblox introduced a suite of new child safety features in November 2024 mounting criticism about the platform’s safety. The roll-out changed the default settings on accounts for children under 13 to automatically:

  • Filter out age-inappropriate games.
  • Prevent adults from chatting with or friending kids.

But Louisiana’s lawsuit calls these updates “window dressing — too little, too late and woefully inadequate.”

The new default settings might prevent adults from messaging children outside of games, for instance, but adults can still message, friend and even voice-chat kids inside games.

Roblox’s so-called safety upgrades also assume:  

  • Games are rated accurately.
  • Players honestly report their ages.

But the platform doesn’t enforce either of these pre-requisites.

But Roblox doesn’t enforce either of these prerequisites. It does not verify the ages of players; children can easily bypass more stringent default account settings by signing up with a fake birthday.

Roblox also allows game developers to rate their own games. That’s why Louisiana notes the “vast majority” of “experiences” are rated “suitable for everyone,” including:

  • “Condo games”: “Predatory digital environments, including [digital] houses, where users can remove their avatars’ virtual clothing … and engage in disturbing simulated sexual activities with other Roblox users.”
  • Simulated strip clubs.
  • Hundreds of games like “Escape to Epstein Island,” which references the infamous Caribbean Island indicted child predator Jeffery Epstein allegedly abused children on.
Poor Policing

Louisiana’s complaint also cites evidence suggesting Roblox isn’t interested in policing its website.

Though Roblox professes to monitor explicit or threatening speech, its chat filters are easily fooled by basic ploys like replacing the letter “e” with the number “3.”

Roblox also allows users to adopt transparently pedophilic usernames, like @Igruum_minors and @RavpeTinyK1dsJE. The platform reportedly allowed Hindenburg investigators to sign up under the username @EarlBrianBradley — a reference to one of the most prolific pedophiles of all time.

Deceptive Marketing

Roblox’s claims about its “stringent safety systems and policies” don’t reflect reality, Louisiana argues.

The state’s case notes the following inflated claims from Roblox’s website:

  • Roblox “won’t allow language that is used to harass, discriminate, incite violence, threaten others, or used in a sexual context.”
  • Roblox employes an “expertly trained team with thousands of members dedicated to protecting our users and monitoring for inappropriate content.”
  • Roblox conducts a “safety review of every uploaded image, audio and video file, using a combination of review by a large team of human moderators and machine detection before they become available on the platform.”
  • Chat filters for inappropriate content are “even stricter” for children under 13 and screen for any “potentially identifiable personal information, slang, etc.”

Louisiana is not the only state to question the veracity of Roblox’s marketing. In April, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier subpoenaed documents from Roblox regarding its marketing and safety practices.

“There are concerning reports that this gaming platform, which is popular among children, is exposing them to harmful content and bad actors,” Uthmeier wrote in a statement.

“We are issuing a subpoena to Roblox to uncover how this platform is marketing to children and see what policies they are implementing — if any — to avoid interactions with predators.”

Profit Motive

Louisiana’s case endeavors to prove Roblox intentionally jettisons child safeguards to increase its profits.

The suit cites Hindenburg’s interview with a former Roblox senior product designer.

“You’re supposed to make sure that your users are safe, but then the downside is that, if you’re limiting users’ engagement, it’s hurting your metrics,” the former employee told investigators.

“It’s hurting the [daily] active users, the time spent on the platform, and in a lot of cases, leadership doesn’t want that.”

The same source claimed employees had proposed verifying users’ ages. Roblox leadership allegedly killed the initiative before it left the “experiment” phase.

Louisiana also highlights the predatory exchange of Roblox’s digital currency, Robux.

Players purchase Robux with real money and use it to buy items and extras in Roblox’s digital world. The more users join Roblox, the more Robux are exchanged.

The states’ filing argues Roblox directly benefits from the improper use of Robux to coerce children:

[Roblox] knowingly and/or recklessly permits predators to offer children Robux, often in exchange for explicit photos, or demand Robux to avoid releasing previously provided photos, directly tying [the company’s] profits to the sexual exploitation of children and child abuse material.
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

Shortly before Louisiana filed suit, Roblox banned predator hunter Michael Schelp from the platform.

Schelp grew a sizeable YouTube following by posting videos of himself ferreting out predators on Roblox. He, himself, was groomed and abused by a predator on Roblox between the ages of 12 and 15 — a years-long abusive relationship which eventually drove him to attempt suicide.

Now, he works to protect kids from the same fate. According to the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, his work has led to the arrest of six offenders — all of whom physically met up with Schelp after meeting his character on Roblox.

Apparently, Roblox isn’t interested in Schelp’s services. The company didn’t just ban him — it updated its Terms of Service to remove all “vigilantes” from the platform and threatened the YouTuber with legal action under the Computer Fraud Act, ostensibly for pretending to be a child while engaging with predators.

The move has generated mainstream media coverage and social media outrage.

The question on everyone’s mind: If Roblox really wanted to rid its platform of predators, why would it go after a person famous for catching them?

Why It Matters

The Daily Citizen applauds Louisiana for holding online corporations like Roblox to the same consumer protection standards as every other business.

Legal accountability is a critical part of enabling parents to keep their kids safe online and ensuring corporations don’t profit off pedophilia.  

Additional Articles and Resources:

National Center on Sexual Exploitation Targets Law Allowing Tech Companies to Profit from Online Sex Abuse

Danger in Their Pockets

Teen Boys Fall Prey to Financial Sextortion — Here’s What Parents Can Do

Proposed SCREEN Act Could Protect Kids from Porn

Proposed ‘App Store Accountability’ Act Would Force Apps and App Stores to Uphold Basic Child Safety Protections

‘The Tech Exit’ Helps Families Ditch Addictive Tech — For Good

Supreme Court Upholds Age-Verification Law

‘The Dirty Dozen List’ — Corporations Enable and Profit from Sexual Exploitation