By BOB ANEZ of the Associated Press
HELENA - Culture and economy have created an American Indian population
in Montana much younger than the rest of the
state, less prone to be married and living in larger households
more likely to be headed by a single parent, according to
experts and new findings by the U.S. Census Bureau.
The Indian emphasis on children and dependence on relatives
produce the bigger households, but the extensive poverty and
scarcity of jobs that dominate Montana reservations tear marriages
apart, they said.
The traits found among Montana's Indians, while a contrast
to the white population, are not unique, said Richard Sattler,
adjunct assistant professor of Native American studies at the
University of Montana. They can be found among
impoverished blacks in inner-city ghettos, Hispanic communities,
and white populations in Appalachia and the Ozarks, he
said.
"Poverty underlies many of the statistics," Sattler said.
The social factors that distinguish Indians from whites also can affect social services programs.
Although Indians account for just 7 percent of Montana's
population, they represent 42 percent of the state's welfare
caseload, said Hank Hudson, administrator of the Human and Community
Services Division in the state Department of
Public Health and Human Services.
The new figures from the 2000 census show the average Indian
household in Montana is 30 percent larger and 3 1/2 times
more likely to be run by a single mom than the typical non-Indian
home.
The median age of Montana's Indian population is 14 1/2 years
younger than that of whites, and half of Indians own their
homes compared with 70 percent among whites. Married couples
make up 54 percent of non-Indian households, but just 44
percent of Indian households.
Walter Fleming, an associate professor in Native American
studies at Montana State University-Bozeman, said the numbers
reflect Indians' view of family.
Indian households often include a broad array of relatives
including grandparents, parents, aunts, uncles and cousins, he
said. That, along with the Indian attitude about children, produce
the big households.
"Indian culture is that we invest our future in the
children," said Fleming, a member of the Kickapoo Tribe.
"The more
children we have ensures the future of the culture."
The abundance of children and an Indian life expectancy five
years less than the white population result in the median age
of
Indians being 24.1 years, he and Sattler said. That compares
with the median age for Montana's white population of 38.5
years.
Fleming said the notion of single-parent households among
Indians is not the same as among the non-Indian population
because of the strong support system created by the extended
Indian families.
"It may be that you have a single mother, but you also
have a strong male presence from an uncle or a brother,"
he said. "A
child can be considered a child of three or four different households.
They're not without any kind of parental guidance."
Sattler agreed the family structure among Indians makes comparisons to non-Indians difficult.
"There's shared parental responsibility among (Indian)
families," he said. "There's a greater reliance on relatives
for child
care, sharing assets in an extended family."
The philosophy among Indians is that "as long as anyone
in the family has something, no one will go without," Sattler
said.
"The ties between family members, even when they don't
live in the same house, is quite strong."
Loy Sprague, social work supervisor in the Wolf Point welfare
office that serves the Fort Peck Reservation, said that
far-reaching bond is an asset in helping Indian families. Caseworkers
encourage involvement of extended families to help a
parent find work or get an education, she said.
"Working with individuals alone isn't as beneficial
as working with the extended family as a whole," Sprague
said. "It
reduces dependence on the government agency."
As for fewer married Indian couples, Fleming said that may
be another cultural trait. As a government- and
church-sanctioned institution, marriage is not necessarily one
recognized by the Indian community, and that means less
pressure to marry, he said.
Also, history damaged the traditional sense of family, Fleming
said. A half-century of Indian children being educated in
boarding schools away from mom and dad during the late 1800s
and early 1900s left generations with no parents for role
models, he said.
Sattler said the economy of Montana's reservations can discourage
marriage, because low pay and sparse jobs make it
difficult for men to support a family, and that makes women
more reluctant to rely on men.
"Marriage is more fragile now," he said. "There's some social dysfunction because of the horrendous poverty."