[hfuyf65]

Anecdote incoming. Usual disclaimers apply. I genuinely am not sure what true numbers are.

Couple#1

They are married for a good while with three kids. He is a cop in Chicago; she has semi-random kid watching gigs. While it did not happen, they did openly discuss strategic divorce to ease their financial situation.

Couple#2

She works corpo job. He works a cash only contracting job. They are married in every sense, but legally. Two kids. She would not marry for fear of losing existing benefits.

###

There are some benefits to being married, but the 'benefits of kids while not married' outweigh those. And you can't argue against those cuz then you are taking food away from the hungry.

[em-bee]

what are those benefits you speak of? and why are they structured in such a way that it benefits those not legally married?

in austria/germany at least what matters is household income. if you live together you get supported together. being married has no disadvantage.

[hfuyf65]

Some of what I am about to say is state specific ( in my case IL ), so take this into consideration. Income is a consideration for any help. Married couple will have higher documented income, while unmarried cohabiting couple won't. In other words, single parent ( on paper ) will claim a child and with lower income have a better chance of being in the low enough income bracket.

I have zero idea how common that situation is though, but I know someone who structures their life around snap benefits ( or whatever they are called now ) and its kinda ridiculous, because her monthly benedit is on par with our family's grocery budget. I struggled not to report it as fraud ( the person in question is not poor; they are using - abusing?- the system ).