Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  > Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm rel      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 51
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?Page 3 of 4    (1, 2, 3, 4)

I'll still have to disagree.
Worse than a single mother home....
A home where alcoholism or domestic violence prevail.
A home where going on welfare is considered the best option in life.
A home where reading, intelligence, and ambition are scorned.
A home where secrets are kept, where sexual molestation occurs, where there is no concern or love for anyone else.
A home where the roles are reversed and the child takes care of the parent/s.

As for having children with someone I wouldn't have a longterm relationship with...
I guess I did.

ETA: Maybe I can't teach my boy to be a 'man'. But I can teach him how to be human.


The problem is that your opinion doesn't beat facts. Sure, there are always exceptions to the rule. A home where everyone is on heroin and there are needles everywhere might be worse, but that's not an average household. And it's not really a valid argument because those things you listed can all take place in a single mother household. We can't base things off of exceptions. Some people fall out of a 10 story building and survive, but in general that doesn't happen.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 52
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/30/2018 1:01:04 PM
My opinion may not beat facts, but McLanahan thesis is not a fact... it is statistical correlation (so far as I could find in my short search)
However, I appreciate you bring her to my notice. I enjoy books on political-social analysis.

I think the important thing is to consider the 'why' and other questions of the situation. Why are there more single parent - currently, usually mother-led - homes? Is there a difference between homes where the single-parent situation was thought out and decided on and homes where it was something that occurred like unplanned/unexpected pregnancy, divorce, desertion, death. What is the education level of the parents? What is the extended family (if any) situation. What is the geographic mobility of the family? Socio-economic level? What is the health situation of the parent? The work situation (there's a painfully silly question)? How much assistance (financial and otherwise) does the single-parent get from the other parent, family, religious institutions, the government, society at large? What about single-parents of adoptees?

There was only one qualifier in your original quotation - a single-parent home is worse.(#44).
Looking ONLY at a single qualifier is simplistic.
Making a judgment on a single qualifier is idiotic.

From the Amazon blurb of "Growing Up with a Single Parent"...
In a concluding chapter, McLanahan and Sandefur offer clear recommendations for rethinking our current policies. Single parents are here to stay, and their worsening situation is tearing at the fabric of our society. It is imperative, the authors show, that we shift more of the costs of raising children from mothers to fathers and from parents to society at large]/b]. Likewise, we must develop universal assistance programs that benefit low-income two-parent families as well as single mothers.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 53
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/30/2018 1:50:48 PM

I think the important thing is to consider the 'why' and other questions of the situation. Why are there more single parent - currently, usually mother-led - homes? Is there a difference between homes where the single-parent situation was thought out and decided on and homes where it was something that occurred like unplanned/unexpected pregnancy, divorce, desertion, death. What is the education level of the parents? What is the extended family (if any) situation. What is the geographic mobility of the family? Socio-economic level? What is the health situation of the parent? The work situation (there's a painfully silly question)? How much assistance (financial and otherwise) does the single-parent get from the other parent, family, religious institutions, the government, society at large? What about single-parents of adoptees?

There was only one qualifier in your original quotation - a single-parent home is worse.(#44).
Looking ONLY at a single qualifier is simplistic.
Making a judgment on a single qualifier is idiotic.


Those things are irrelevant because they can apply to single mothers, single fathers or two parent households. At the end of the day, the single mother environment is still the worst for children. Any health, education, financial, whatever question you can pose to a traditional family, you can pose to a single mother situation too. It doesn't change anything.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 54
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/30/2018 2:14:42 PM
They are only irrelevant if you aren't concerned about the child/ren in a home and are only concerned about being 'right'.

All other things being equal, I would have loved to have been in a loving, dual-parent, multiple-children, upper-class, high-educational level, low-crime, low-pollution, next to the ocean and museums (y'know, while I'm wishing...).
However, all other things weren't equal and I had to make choices.

You can say that a single parent household is worse but are you living in one?
Did you have to make decisions like that?
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 55
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/30/2018 2:26:58 PM

They are only irrelevant if you aren't concerned about the child/ren in a home and are only concerned about being 'right'.

All other things being equal, I would have loved to have been in a loving, dual-parent, multiple-children, upper-class, high-educational level, low-crime, low-pollution, next to the ocean and museums (y'know, while I'm wishing...).
However, all other things weren't equal and I had to make choices.

You can say that a single parent household is worse but are you living in one?
Did you have to make decisions like that?


Why would you say I'm not concerned about the children? Accepting the facts and accepting that single mother households are the worst for kids is showing concern and putting them first. It's not about being right, it's about accepting the evidence. There's no evidence that proves single mother households are just as good for kids as dual parent or single father households. I'm not sure what you mean by making a decision. It comes down to poor decision making by the parents if their children live in a single parent household (with the exception of widows).
 oldwxman
Joined: 7/22/2018
Msg: 56
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/30/2018 4:50:03 PM
* It comes down to poor decision making by the parents if their children live in a single parent household (with the exception of widows).

Always have been curious about this. By the numbers, the children of widows do better than the children of other single mothers. There shouldn't be any difference. The economics and life circumstances are identical. Yet, widow's children do better.

Speculation anyone?
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 57
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/30/2018 4:58:15 PM

Accepting the facts and accepting that single mother households are the worst for kids is showing concern and putting them first.

Really?
What are you doing to show your concern? How are you putting child/ren first?

As I said, those 'facts' are actually correlation rather than causative (so far, I haven't read the book yet).
For instance, there's the effect of poverty which mostly hits single-parent homes because there's no financial safety net. A single parent is usually responsible for everything - having a job, keeping the house clean, paying rent, taking the child to school and discussing everything with teachers, making sure the child is fed nutritiously, clothed properly, appropriately socialized, and taught everything that school doesn't teach. Comfort, hold, tell bedtime stories. Don't ever, ever, ever get sick.
What's the cost of a wife - an auxillary partner to take care of everything else in a family? Something along the lines of $70,000?


I'm not sure what you mean by making a decision. It comes down to poor decision making by the parents if their children live in a single parent household (with the exception of widows).

Let's see...
Decision 1 - marry, no wait... earlier.
Decision 1 - have sex
Decision 1.5 - abortion or not
Decision 2 - get married
Decision 2.5 - even though I think this marriage is a mistake
Decision 3 - which job do we follow, his or mine
Decision 4 - deal with a sulking husband who won't make any contributions to the family
Decision 5 - common money, so his child support for his first 2 boys came from my paycheck
Decision 6 - pay for a housekeeper/nanny since he refused to take care of our son, do any house work, cook, change a diaper,
Decision 7 - keep working or move back and let his paycheck (about 1/2 of mine) take care of everything
Decision 7.5 - go into debt
Decision 8 - undergo counseling except he refuses
Decision 9 - would it be better to divorce or can this marriage limp along with only one wheel?
Decision 10 - yes, it would be better to divorce

You know, those kind of decisions.
You're essentially saying that every decision I made that led to me being a single mother was a poor decision because 'single mothers are the worse'. Yet most of those decisions were made with my son (and my two stepsons) foremost in mind. I suspect that the worse decision of the above was #2 - getting married. You (generic) would probably say it was the best - since it gave my son a dual-parent household.

Even if it isn't a 'poor decision' on her part, a widow would also be a single-parent household.
So, why isn't that just as 'worse' as a non-widow?
The reason they (presumably) do 'better' -- probably money. Social support for the 'poor widow' rather than the scorn for a single/divorced woman.

Also, I suspect it is the disapproval and lack of social support of a single-parent household rather than the single-parent household itself that is 'worse'. Otherwise, Norway and Sweden wouldn't have such a healthy family life.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 58
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/30/2018 6:25:54 PM

Let's see...
Decision 1 - marry, no wait... earlier.
Decision 1 - have sex
Decision 1.5 - abortion or not
Decision 2 - get married
Decision 2.5 - even though I think this marriage is a mistake
Decision 3 - which job do we follow, his or mine
Decision 4 - deal with a sulking husband who won't make any contributions to the family
Decision 5 - common money, so his child support for his first 2 boys came from my paycheck
Decision 6 - pay for a housekeeper/nanny since he refused to take care of our son, do any house work, cook, change a diaper,
Decision 7 - keep working or move back and let his paycheck (about 1/2 of mine) take care of everything
Decision 7.5 - go into debt
Decision 8 - undergo counseling except he refuses
Decision 9 - would it be better to divorce or can this marriage limp along with only one wheel?
Decision 10 - yes, it would be better to divorce

You know, those kind of decisions.
You're essentially saying that every decision I made that led to me being a single mother was a poor decision because 'single mothers are the worse'. Yet most of those decisions were made with my son (and my two stepsons) foremost in mind. I suspect that the worse decision of the above was #2 - getting married. You (generic) would probably say it was the best - since it gave my son a dual-parent household.

Even if it isn't a 'poor decision' on her part, a widow would also be a single-parent household.
So, why isn't that just as 'worse' as a non-widow?
The reason they (presumably) do 'better' -- probably money. Social support for the 'poor widow' rather than the scorn for a single/divorced woman.

Also, I suspect it is the disapproval and lack of social support of a single-parent household rather than the single-parent household itself that is 'worse'. Otherwise, Norway and Sweden wouldn't have such a healthy family life.


The only decision that really counts is the decision to have a child before you met the person you married. How long were you with the father of your child? Children of widows also do better because they don't have abandonment issues.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 59
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/31/2018 12:21:55 PM

The only decision that really counts is the decision to have a child before you met the person you married. How long were you with the father of your child? Children of widows also do better because they don't have abandonment issues.

I met the person I married before I got pregnant and had a child. In my case, it would have been impossible to do the reverse.

Too long.

I just asked my son if he had abandonment issue. He looked at me like I was squirrelly and said 'no'.

ETA: Perhaps each situation should be looked at individually instead of given a blanket judgment,
 Clytemnestra
Joined: 6/6/2018
Msg: 60
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/31/2018 1:57:44 PM
msg#62:
Children of widows also do better because they don't have abandonment issues.


Why ever would you think that a child whose mother or father had died did NOT have abandonment issues?
Death is pretty much the ULTIMATE abandonment.
SMH
 SS4544Spd
Joined: 8/31/2016
Msg: 61
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 7/31/2018 2:49:45 PM
I agree with those who believe it's optimal to have 2 parents. I think most of the data says that 2 parent children flourish compared with kids from single parent homes. Even when you exclude income considerations. Of course, the assumption is the 2 parents are reasonably functional as parents and providers, and get along OK.

Personally I believe it's better to have the parents together for the duration of the children's' rearing - excluding truly dysfunctional or dangerous circumstances - whether they remain "in love" with each other or not. It's a copout to leave a marriage because the "romance is gone," or any myriad of other self serving reasons people get divorced. Many reasons are given but most of the time it's because one or both of the partners want to f*ck someone else. It's a fairy tale to believe the passion in a marriage is gonna last more than a few years, especially in a child rearing environment. I think that's part/parcel of a marriage. If one wants "passion," stay single.

If both partners approach parenting with that practical outlook, ie, "staying together for the good of the kids," I don't see anything wrong with that. IF the parents are reasonably civil and friendly with each other. Sure, it's a "loveless" household, but the parents can show respect, not love, for each other, yet still show love for the kids, and that may be better than a single parent household - which is usually a household with a revolving door of lovers/dating and/or financial distress with the associated emotional upheaval and stress for the household. And if the single parent doesn't have the lovers, and sacrifices that for the kids, it's still a "loveless" household, so may as well stay with the partner in the loveless or passionless household you had in the first place, and both parents are still there for the kids, and finances are better.

As long as the parents can stick it out til the kids are out of the house, then they can go their separate ways and live lives for themselves, their job is done. I think that's the new model, really, and it makes sense to me. Actually marriage really makes no sense in modern times, other than providing a practical, stable, framework for raising a family. That's why so many divorce after the kids are gone. It's human nature not to be forced to be with a mate for your entire life, especially now when we live so long.

People point to their parents, grandparents, or other old couples and talk about how nice that was, a great example, and give us sappy, teary eyed sentiments such as "way it used to be, the romance." Nope. They were, for the most part, forced to stay together. That's why they were together for 50 years, not that there was more "romance" way back when.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 62
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/1/2018 9:49:40 AM

I agree with those who believe it's optimal to have 2 parents.

I would have to amend that to...
I agree with those who believe it's optimal to have 2 loving parents who know how to disagree like... well, I was about to say adults but we all know how 'childish' some adults can be so I'll say... maturely.


...may be better than a single parent household - which is usually a household with a revolving door of lovers/dating and/or financial distress with the associated emotional upheaval and stress for the household. And if the single parent doesn't have the lovers, and sacrifices that for the kids, …

Again, I will point out that it isn't so much the 'singleness' of the parent but the stress of poverty, divorce + poverty, job + probably not enough money, or a job at work and the work at home combined with little/no good sleep which contribute to the thought that 'single parents are the worse'.

However, I don't think a household of disinterest or acrimony is a good basis for raising loving children. I'll also say that a revolving door of sex partners probably isn't that great either - mostly because the children pick up on the guilt that people inflect on single mothers and, to some extent, to single fathers.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 63
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/1/2018 11:39:08 AM

Why ever would you think that a child whose mother or father had died did NOT have abandonment issues?
Death is pretty much the ULTIMATE abandonment.
SMH


I thought that was super obvious. If someone dies, they're not making a choice to leave you. A parent dying is different than a parent telling their child they want nothing to do with them and disappearing.


Again, I will point out that it isn't so much the 'singleness' of the parent but the stress of poverty, divorce + poverty, job + probably not enough money, or a job at work and the work at home combined with little/no good sleep which contribute to the thought that 'single parents are the worse'.


It's both. Men need to stop being dead beat dads and women need to stop having kids with dead beats. The poverty plays a part but not having a father figure also plays a part.
 oldwxman
Joined: 7/22/2018
Msg: 64
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/1/2018 12:26:27 PM
*It's both. Men need to stop being dead beat dads and women need to stop having kids with dead beats. The poverty plays a part but not having a father figure also plays a part.

CW, you lost that debate. You let her off the hook. She was grasping at straws to trying to justify why she deliberately hosed her own children. You said "it's both" to be PC. It's not both. It is women handicapping their children for their own selfish purposes. You know this. You also know how vacant the deadbeat dad crap and poverty excuse are. Yet, you gave her the fig leaf.

Granted, this is just an internet message board. It is expected that a culpable woman will be as dishonest as it takes in order to dodge responsibility. We all get that. Still, being complicit in her excuse making is a bridge too far.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 65
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/1/2018 1:12:47 PM

CW, you lost that debate. You let her off the hook. She was grasping at straws to trying to justify why she deliberately hosed her own children. You said "it's both" to be PC. It's not both. It is women handicapping their children for their own selfish purposes. You know this. You also know how vacant the deadbeat dad crap and poverty excuse are. Yet, you gave her the fig leaf.

Granted, this is just an internet message board. It is expected that a culpable woman will be as dishonest as it takes in order to dodge responsibility. We all get that. Still, being complicit in her excuse making is a bridge too far.


I'm not letting anyone off the hook for making bad decisions. But at the same time I can acknowledge that having less money is worse for the kids than having a surplus of money. The kids won't be happy if they can't play in a hockey league with their friends or go on trips like their friends do. I'm not trying to be PC, I fully admit there would be less dead beat dads if women stopped having kids with dead beats.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 66
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/2/2018 10:55:50 AM

I fully admit there would be less dead beat dads if women stopped having kids with dead beats.

Kind of a self-referencal and circular argument.
Then it follows that there would also be fewer single moms if women stopped having kids with dead beats... except it probably isn't true.
On the other hand, if a man (shall we say a 'nice guy' LOL) who isn't a dead beat has sex with a woman and she has a child then d0es he automatically become a dead beat if he doesn't marry/support her?


I've read something brings up they question of how to define becoming an adult. What's the definition? A driver's license? A job, any job? A job paying over the poverty limit? Moving out of one's parent/s' home? Attaining physical maturity?
In some places - where people are too poor to afford a driver's license, a car, an apartment for themselves - then having children is the determination of being an adult and it is often a conscious choice. Single mothers who have children don't care what the social classes above them say about them. In their culture/subculture, they are adults and continuing their parents' lives. It is their culture which matters to them. They're too busy taking care of children and trying to scrounge enough money to survive on to care what others think.


CW, you lost that debate.

Was this a formal contest? Do I get a prize?
I thought it was just a discussion involving opposing viewpoints in the hopes that both sides would learn something about the facts and feelings of others.


It is expected that a culpable woman will be as dishonest as it takes in order to dodge responsibility.

Wow! The women in your life must have been humdinger examples of all sorts of ignorant, incompetent and really just plain bad.
 oldwxman
Joined: 7/22/2018
Msg: 67
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/2/2018 12:50:14 PM
*On the other hand, if a man (shall we say a 'nice guy' LOL) who isn't a dead beat has sex with a woman and she has a child then d0es he automatically become a dead beat if he doesn't marry/support her?

Her body. Her choice. Her bill.

And they say that gender is a social construct. Good Lord! Deadbeat Dad is the most overworked and entirely false social construct in history.

*Was this a formal contest? Do I get a prize?
I thought it was just a discussion involving opposing viewpoints in the hopes that both sides would learn something about the facts and feelings of others.

You didn't actually win. CW was slapping you silly with his facts. He could have finished you off but he showed you mercy and he didn't. I criticized him for letting you off the mat. Not only is he very intelligent. He is a bigger and better man than I.

*Wow! The women in your life must have been humdinger examples of all sorts of ignorant, incompetent and really just plain bad.

Not really worse or different than any other man. Since I am childless, I was spared the real horror story that too many men live.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 68
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/3/2018 10:55:08 AM


*On the other hand, if a man (shall we say a 'nice guy' LOL) who isn't a dead beat has sex with a woman and she has a child then d0es he automatically become a dead beat if he doesn't marry/support her?

Her body. Her choice. Her bill.
And they say that gender is a social construct. Good Lord! Deadbeat Dad is the most overworked and entirely false social construct in history.

Hmm, obviously I will need to use smaller concepts because social constructs was what I was trying to get across.
What makes a man a 'dead beat'? Some people were going on that single women should date deadbeats, but the question becomes how to define a deadbeat. A man with a child who isn't married to the mother? A man with multiple children? Multiple previous partners with children? Paying less than minimum support because that's all he can manage? A man paying nothing because he doesn't believe the child/ren are his but everyone says he's the father? A man who has no clue that any of his previous partners have children because he scampered out the first time anything went wrong or he met a cuter lay?

Is it everyone's responsibility to make sure that the future and future children are secure? I think so but I also believe schooling should be free. up to the 4-year degree. I also believe that everyone should undergo mandatory weapons training and have that marked on their driver's license/id card. But if raising children is the responsibility of many (pay school and local taxes lately?), then many people are skirting the issue. Maybe I should note that you, Tech30, and ComaWhite - who say 'single parents are the worse' - are all three childless and obviously need to buy a great many clues about a life as a single parent. And dating one doesn't count because you aren't there 24/7.


You didn't actually win. CW was slapping you silly with his facts. He could have finished you off but he showed you mercy and he didn't. I criticized him for letting you off the mat. Not only is he very intelligent. He is a bigger and better man than I.

I count it as a win. He is intelligent and I usually enjoy debating him because he rarely (maybe never) makes personally derogatory comments.
I won't enjoy debating you which is kind of sad because, behind your blind arrogance, you seem like an intelligent man who would be interesting to talk with.
Not to mention, I love your taste in cats.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 69
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/3/2018 1:10:39 PM

Hmm, obviously I will need to use smaller concepts because social constructs was what I was trying to get across.
What makes a man a 'dead beat'? Some people were going on that single women should date deadbeats, but the question becomes how to define a deadbeat. A man with a child who isn't married to the mother? A man with multiple children? Multiple previous partners with children? Paying less than minimum support because that's all he can manage? A man paying nothing because he doesn't believe the child/ren are his but everyone says he's the father? A man who has no clue that any of his previous partners have children because he scampered out the first time anything went wrong or he met a cuter lay?


I think all those things are valid. A man or a woman shouldn't be having kids if they can't afford to give them a good life. Ultimately, women choose whether they have kids or not. It's the woman's choice whether she has an abortion or goes through with the pregnancy. That's why it's important to select a good partner that will be responsible. I don't think anyone should have kids unless they're living together and married. All too often, we see women having children with men they've only known for a few months, and surprise surprise, the guy takes off and leaves them alone with the kids.


Is it everyone's responsibility to make sure that the future and future children are secure? I think so but I also believe schooling should be free. up to the 4-year degree. I also believe that everyone should undergo mandatory weapons training and have that marked on their driver's license/id card. But if raising children is the responsibility of many (pay school and local taxes lately?), then many people are skirting the issue. Maybe I should note that you, Tech30, and ComaWhite - who say 'single parents are the worse' - are all three childless and obviously need to buy a great many clues about a life as a single parent. And dating one doesn't count because you aren't there 24/7.


Most weapons are more of a liability than helpful. Unless you train with them often, there's a good chance your weapon will be used against you in an altercation. Single mother environments are worst for children because it's been proven with facts. I get that it's difficult to raise kids on your own, but it comes down to making good choices.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 70
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/3/2018 2:37:17 PM
I still doubt whether they're 'facts' or 'opinion' or 'correlation rather than causation'.
However, I haven't yet received the book you referenced. It may be a few weeks since I had to interlibrary loan request it and a few others.

I agree most weapons are a liability but I also posit that most of them are in untrained hands and unready minds.
I know people who have been shot as well as men who have shot friends accidentally.
The cause was always (so far) the untrained person handling the gun or the gun being 'unloaded' (yeah, right).
 oldwxman
Joined: 7/22/2018
Msg: 71
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/4/2018 2:43:54 AM
*Is it everyone's responsibility to make sure that the future and future children are secure? I think so but I also believe schooling should be free. up to the 4-year degree. I also believe that everyone should undergo mandatory weapons training and have that marked on their driver's license/id card. But if raising children is the responsibility of many (pay school and local taxes lately?), then many people are skirting the issue.

It might surprise you that I agree with most of what you are saying. (The one exception being weapons. I am in favor of confiscation and imprisonment for possession of them.) I am probably even more radical than you are and would carry things much further. Hell, I don't even condemn single mothers especially. Where we part company is that my positions are based upon evaluating tangible evidence though others may evaluate it differently. I can and do change my positions when new facts are discovered. You don't. Your opinions are based solely on your feelings as a single mother. When it comes to forming responsible opinions, 2+2 = 4 but feelings + feelings still only equals feelings.

I don't know but I suspect that what got me to land on you was that you presented your side ( or dare I say, our side) so poorly. If our positions are indeed correct then we have to be able to defend them without appeals to bare emotion.

*I count it as a win. He is intelligent and I usually enjoy debating him because he rarely (maybe never) makes personally derogatory comments.

Yes, intelligent for sure and I have never seen a disparaging comment from him. He was beating you though and convincingly. Though I am in more sympathy with your conclusions, his command of the facts was far better and no detached observer could honestly say that you made a single valid point.

*I love your taste in cats.

Thank you and I do mean it kindly.
 2ufo
Joined: 12/25/2017
Msg: 72
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/4/2018 12:12:03 PM

...his command of the facts was far better ...

And what facts did he bring to the table?

1. the assertion that single mothers are the worse
and
2. Sara McLanahan and Bruce Ellis - presenting correlative statistical reviews attempting to separate the results of single parentness from a slew of other factors that are usually in attendance with single parentness - and probably not separated out in the original study. I am assuming it is Prof. Bruce Ellis of Uof U. - love his childhood stress in high risk environments abstract and I'm going to check out his DASH study further.


I am probably even more radical than you are...

Only in different directions, I'm sure. :-)


Your opinions are based solely on your feelings as a single mother. When it comes to forming responsible opinions, 2+2 = 4 but feelings + feelings still only equals feelings. ... I don't know but I suspect that what got me to land on you was that you presented your side ( or dare I say, our side) so poorly. If our positions are indeed correct then we have to be able to defend them without appeals to bare emotion.

Nope, my opinions are based more on facts rather than feelings as a single mother; probably because I am not the typical single mother in most of those studies. I'm older (60 this month!), have one child, was married and initiated the divorce, and (most importantly to my consideration of the effects of single parenthood) have never been in a situation of poverty.

I might get angry at someone denigrating me personally for 'bad decisions' but my opinions on single mothers are not controlled by my feelings.
My opinions are somewhat merged from study and experience and if I present them poorly - well, this is not a scientific venue where I need to have citations and speak with no emotional overtones. Believe it or not, I come here to relax.

Published fact may control policy to some small extent, but it is emotion which moves the world.
 SiennaBear2
Joined: 12/2/2017
Msg: 73
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/8/2018 8:23:22 AM
I would never have kids with someone I was not serious with.
Sounds like a terrible idea to do it on purpose.
 SS4544Spd
Joined: 8/31/2016
Msg: 74
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/9/2018 8:33:06 AM
2ufo wrote:
I would have to amend that to...
I agree with those who believe it's optimal to have 2 loving parents who know how to disagree like... well, I was about to say adults but we all know how 'childish' some adults can be so I'll say... maturely.
I agree, kinda. I don't think the parents have to love each other, but they do need to love the kids. And as far as disageeing "maturely," well, that's fine, but everyone has arguments, sometimes severe arguments. IMO those are fine too, as long as they're not in front of the kids. Yes, a fake front. Many will disagree. But in many cases still probably better than single parenthood. I guess my point is that the kids' happiness needs to come first, not the parents. But I believe that's considered "old fashioned" thinking.

2ufo:
Again, I will point out that it isn't so much the 'singleness' of the parent but the stress of poverty, divorce + poverty, job + probably not enough money, or a job at work and the work at home combined with little/no good sleep which contribute to the thought that 'single parents are the worse'.
Excluding the fact that I believe many of these studies say that 2 parent kids do better irrespective of income, income (or lack thereof) is a primary drawback of single parent families. Many divorced parents replace one kind of stress (don't get along with, or no longer feel that little "pitter patter" in their heart for their spouse) with another type of stress (raising kids alone/financial distress). Which kind of stress is the lesser evil?

Again...I don't mean this to be an attack on ALL single mothers because it is obvious that many single Moms perform well in their Herculean effort to raise productive kids against the odds. And disparaging single Moms is unfairly deflecting the blame from dead beat Dads, of course, and they share blame too. Someone here posted deadbeat dads have nothing do to with this issue, but that is BS.

2ufo:
Nope, my opinions are based more on facts rather than feelings as a single mother; probably because I am not the typical single mother in most of those studies. I'm older (60 this month!), have one child, was married and initiated the divorce, and (most importantly to my consideration of the effects of single parenthood) have never been in a situation of poverty.
But that's partially the point from those who don't support single motherhood.....You are the exception! Should we, as a culture, promote single motherhood for the benefit of those women who are capable - both emotionally and financially - to raise a kid alone, when the risks are so apparent to many, many more single women who DON'T have the emotional and financial wherewithal??

My position..is that it happens, may as well not ignore it, and put in place some programs to help them. But at the same time, don't, as a culture, promote, encourage, or celebrate it.

This debate may be a quaint notion these daze though.
 oldwxman
Joined: 7/22/2018
Msg: 75
view profile
History
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 8/9/2018 11:49:28 AM
*And disparaging single Moms is unfairly deflecting the blame from dead beat Dads, of course, and they share blame too. Someone here posted deadbeat dads have nothing do to with this issue, but that is BS.

They don't share the blame because there is no such thing as a deadbeat dad. The very notion came about through shameless political grandstanding to pander to an entitled female electorate. These so-called deadbeats are in reality deadbolted. They should not be shaken down for children who are not even theirs in any meaningful way.

*Should we, as a culture, promote single motherhood for the benefit of those women who are capable - both emotionally and financially - to raise a kid alone, when the risks are so apparent to many, many more single women who DON'T have the emotional and financial wherewithal??

Yes! The worm has turned. If we accept the fact rather than yearning for the past, we can get down to cases and do something helpful for these children. Single motherhood is nowhere near the problem in some countries that it is in the USA even though they have higher rates of single motherhood. These countries have an effective social infrastructure. Yet, America prefers cruelty and dysfunction.
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  > Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?