What bothers me is that the author of this article is too busy demonizing single mothers for not spending enough time with their kids to make the point that single mothers HAVE to work, you know, for their kids. So they can eat and have clothes and a place to live--you know, frivolities like that.
And check out the construction of this sentence:
Single mothers spend less time with children, on average because as a group they are less educated than married mothers -- and more highly educated mothers spend more time with children, the researchers said.
That's kind of like saying people who eat ice cream are more likely to drown. (You know, that whole misrepresenting statistics thing you learned about in college? How the third factor is that it's summer, therefore more people eat ice cream and swim? Good.)
Can we admit that it might be possible that the age at which one has children can contribute to education experience, and that women who have their children younger might ostensibly be forced into the workforce at a younger age to care for said children?