shape
carat
color
clarity

Out-of-wedlock child birth is the new norm

packrat

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
10,614
sometimes I wish people really would think of the children. there are a disgusting number of unwanted children in this world, not just in orphanages, foster care, etc, but kids in homes w/"parents" who don't give two **please keep it clean** about them. they didn't all come from stable and loving parents or magically appear. I shouldn't be surprised tho, really...somewhere there's a meme of kids in cages and dogs walking by, shaking their heads. Or not..dogs probably wouldn't be so **please keep it clean** to their own kind. It's only humans who have the audacity to think they can do whatever/whenever/however and have the devil may care damn the torpedoes attitude that we do.
 

liaerfbv

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
1,348
packrat|1459358442|4013171 said:
sometimes I wish people really would think of the children. there are a disgusting number of unwanted children in this world, not just in orphanages, foster care, etc, but kids in homes w/"parents" who don't give two shits about them. they didn't all come from stable and loving parents or magically appear. I shouldn't be surprised tho, really...somewhere there's a meme of kids in cages and dogs walking by, shaking their heads. Or not..dogs probably wouldn't be so shitty to their own kind. It's only humans who have the audacity to think they can do whatever/whenever/however and have the devil may care damn the torpedoes attitude that we do.

I think everyone here IS thinking of the children. We all just think what might be best for the children is different. It's a pretty big leap from single parents to unwanted children in cages.
 

monarch64

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
19,224
liaerfbv|1459359139|4013181 said:
packrat|1459358442|4013171 said:
sometimes I wish people really would think of the children. there are a disgusting number of unwanted children in this world, not just in orphanages, foster care, etc, but kids in homes w/"parents" who don't give two shits about them. they didn't all come from stable and loving parents or magically appear. I shouldn't be surprised tho, really...somewhere there's a meme of kids in cages and dogs walking by, shaking their heads. Or not..dogs probably wouldn't be so shitty to their own kind. It's only humans who have the audacity to think they can do whatever/whenever/however and have the devil may care damn the torpedoes attitude that we do.

I think everyone here IS thinking of the children. We all just think what might be best for the children is different. It's a pretty big leap from single parents to unwanted children in cages.

Damn it Packie, quit getting all Margaret Sanger on us. :lol: My attitude is flippant in this thread because of the undertone of "look at us all married up and doin' it right while those shameless hussies are running around with no man in the house to raise their children up proper." But I agree with you, the shitheads of the world popping out babies with no intention of giving them any kind of hope or life can take a hike.
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,676
kenny|1459352225|4013114 said:
Laila619|1459350701|4013098 said:
Tacori E-ring|1459308668|4012961 said:
liaerfbv|1459303009|4012912 said:
I think everyone should live by the values they themselves find important. Some people think it's important to be married to have a child together. Others don't. That doesn't mean they don't have "family values" - it means their family values are different than yours, and that's okay.

ditto. Marriage does not always equal healthy social modeling.

Of course not. But *in general*, kids tend to do better in a stable, two-parent home (which often = marriage) than in a single parent home.

I agree that two parents are better than one.
Three would be better than two.
I'm not slipping into a 3-way marriage argument.
Rather, extended family households are groovy.

(Yeah yeah yeah, two parents who are child molesting ax murders are worse than a single parent with a degree from Yale and the most perfect personality and child rearing skills ... Duh! Why do people even bring these non-arguments up? :roll: )

My SO's brother, his wife and their 2 daughters live with my SO's parents.
Sharing of expenses and child-rearing is really really good for everyone if you can let go of the me me me I expect and must have everything mentality.
It gives retired gradma and grandpa deep meaning and purpose to be needed and to have a part in raising the girls.
It lets mom and dad work their jobs with child care they can trust and afford.
While not without sacrifices, everyone benefits emotionally, psychologically, and financially from this.

I've witnessed the other extreme too.
My sister was a single mom.
Now her daughter is a divorced single mom of two girls.
It's tough.

Kenny, I think this sounds nice, living with extended family. There are so many benefits to this arrangement!
 

D_

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Messages
245
ricezo|1459326751|4013017 said:
I'm shocked and disappointed that in today's day and age having children outside of wedlock is perceived by some (hopefully a minority) to be an issue and I quote, an issue to be 'sad' about.

I know many loving unmarried couples, in healthy, committed relationships, who are the best parents.

We are the product of our education and upbringing.
For example, if one is brought up with Christian/Catholic values (which last time I check is still the biggest religious group in the world), then it is no surprise they perceive it as an issue and an issue to be sad about.

Of course issue like this can be very polarizing, because even though Christian/Catholic is the biggest religious group in the world (and other cultural or any other group values that espouse married life as ideal), not everyone is brought up that way.

Hence, Newton's Law dictates that when people feel judged, they will judge back, as demonstrated above.

What I am wondering is can there be a more "correct" answer to this, ever?
Say, if research points out that it is better for a child to be raised in a stable, healthy marriage with two parents, like Laila said (all things equal), will those on the other side of the fence finally be able to get over their ego, pride and defensiveness and have a big enough heart to realize or admit that "yes, that would have been ideal, but life is not always ideal. That arrangement doesn't work for me and I'm going to make the most of what I've chosen to do," and move on, because hey, it's not like the other groups are perfect in every regard anyway.

Niel|1459353239|4013121 said:
I think the younger generation has a different view on commitment and marriage, but that doesn't mean they aren't doing what they feel is best for their children.

Not true.
There are s**theads who don't do what they feel is best for their children (it's "me, me, me" after all).
And there are also s**theads who want to do what they feel is best for their children but cannot get over the "me, me, me" mentality.
Wanting & knowing one has to do something are totally different from actually being able to do it.
And I don't think this is exclusive to the younger generation.
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
D_|1459366960|4013287 said:
ricezo|1459326751|4013017 said:
I'm shocked and disappointed that in today's day and age having children outside of wedlock is perceived by some (hopefully a minority) to be an issue and I quote, an issue to be 'sad' about.

I know many loving unmarried couples, in healthy, committed relationships, who are the best parents.

We are the product of our education and upbringing.
For example, if one is brought up with Christian/Catholic values (which last time I check is still the biggest religious group in the world), then it is no surprise they perceive it as an issue and an issue to be sad about.

Of course issue like this can be very polarizing, because even though Christian/Catholic is the biggest religious group in the world (and other cultural or any other group values that espouse married life as ideal), not everyone is brought up that way.

Hence, Newton's Law dictates that when people feel judged, they will judge back, as demonstrated above.

What I am wondering is can there be a more "correct" answer to this, ever?
Say, if research points out that it is better for a child to be raised in a stable, healthy marriage with two parents, like Laila said (all things equal), will those on the other side of the fence finally be able to get over their ego, pride and defensiveness and have a big enough heart to realize or admit that "yes, that would have been ideal, but life is not always ideal. That arrangement doesn't work for me and I'm going to make the most of what I've chosen to do," and move on, because hey, it's not like the other groups are perfect in every regard anyway.

Niel|1459353239|4013121 said:
I think the younger generation has a different view on commitment and marriage, but that doesn't mean they aren't doing what they feel is best for their children.

Not true.
There are s**theads who don't do what they feel is best for their children (it's "me, me, me" after all).
And there are also s**theads who want to do what they feel is best for their children but cannot get over the "me, me, me" mentality.
Wanting & knowing one has to do something are totally different from actually being able to do it.
And I don't think this is exclusive to the younger generation
.


I'm confused. Your statement is not supported by your following opinion.

You think there are "bad", selfish people out there. Ok.

How does that statement disprove my statement about millenials and their views on marriage?
 

lyra

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
5,249
Meh. I want grandchildren, and don't care much how I get them. :bigsmile:
 

D_

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Messages
245
@Niel

You're right.
I read it differently, after re-reading it I concur with your statement.
Sorry for the confusion.
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
D_|1459371598|4013311 said:
@Niel

You're right.
I read it differently, after re-reading it I concur with your statement.
Sorry for the confusion.


Well, then I agree with the fact there are selfish idiots out in the world!
 

Marquise_Madness

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
304
My friend is born from parents who were unmarried and broke up a little after she was born. Her mom didn't want to get married just because she had a baby, and it was a good decision because I've met both of them and they're fundamentally incompatible. Same with my cousin who got his ex pregnant a few weeks into college. Don't get married just because you're pregnant.

My boyfriend and I would get married if we had a surprise baby, but just for tax/custody/name reasons. His ex was a daughter of a single mom and she had her deadbeat dad's name so when she was 18 she was legally adopted by her stepdad and it was a huge deal.
 

aljdewey

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 25, 2002
Messages
9,170
I know many loving unmarried couples, in healthy, committed relationships, who are the best parents.


Well it's sad if they are having a baby without thinking things through or being 100% committed, and then they break up, and then the child is raised in a fatherless household. Why do we have to be PC and pretend that it's not better for a child to be raised in a stable, healthy marriage with two parents?


I hate to throw a wrench into this argument, but let's be realistic. There is no guarantee that children will be raised in stable, healthy two-parent homes *regardless* of the parents' marital status at the time of the child's birth. This isn't an either/or situation (stable, healthy married OR fatherless); there are so many other options in between.

A household being fatherless doesn't necessarily mean a child is fatherless; it merely means he doesn't live in the same dwelling. There are tons of fathers who are involved, present parents even as they do not live with the mothers of their children.

Given that so many marriages end in divorce, being married at the point of a child's birth is no guarantee the child will be raised within a stable, healthy marriage long-term.

As long as kids get two involved, engaged, amicable parents who put the kids' needs first, I'm less concerned about the legal nature of the relationship between those parents.
 

urseberry

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
516
Anyone making assumptions and judging unmarried parents can kiss my pregnant, unmarried a$$.
 

madelise

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
5,362
urseberry|1459377398|4013376 said:
Anyone making assumptions and judging unmarried parents can kiss my pregnant, unmarried a$$.


Ew, you pathetic welfare abuser!


Omg! Urse!!!!!! You're preggo!!!! Congratulations! Tell us more!
 

wildcat03

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
904
I see that this thread has become a little contentious. I guess what we should all take away is that families come in all shapes and sizes. Some two parent homes are loving, healthy, and stable. Some are tumultuous and unhappy. Some single family homes are loving, healthy, and stable. Some are not. I think I probably see the darker side of it. I work in the inner city and the majority of my patients who are pregnant or have children are unmarried. Some of them have been with their partners for years - longer than many marriages - but for any number of reasons (and financial reasons are certainly up there - being able to get the earned income tax credit makes a huge difference in a family's finances) have never tied the knot. This can create conflict and wreak havoc when acute medical issues arise, which is one reason it is important to me to be married before I have a child. Far be it from me to impose my wants on anybody, though.
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,041
Two parents are not better if one or both parents are unstable. Please remember that not all people are able to be good parents. Marriage license does not increase someone's parenting abilities. My POV is one of a single mother who was raised my two wonderful parents who have been married for 44 years. So I have seem marriages that work and experienced one that did not. My daughter has a very stable home life.
 

AdaBeta27

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 7, 2004
Messages
1,077
liaerfbv|1459342822|4013053 said:
AdaBeta27|1459336349|4013041 said:
ricezo|1459326751|4013017 said:
I'm shocked and disappointed that in today's day and age having children outside of wedlock is perceived by some (hopefully a minority) to be an issue and I quote, an issue to be 'sad' about.

I know many loving unmarried couples, in healthy, committed relationships, who are the best parents.

It's not sad if these are wellheeled people who are doing everything "right" except being married. But largely what is happening with out of wedlock births is due to USA becoming lower socioeconomic and more people gaming the system because welfare benefits pay better and offer better benefits package than working. There are a lot of bedhopping losers with too many kids in my town. Suburban and rural poverty everywhere. Wild living, and no money. But women have 3 or 4 kids, no more than 2 with the same daddy.

Yikes. Setting aside your extreme judgment for a minute... people love to complain about how much people get on welfare without actually doing any research about it. First of all, there is no program in the US called "welfare" - it's colloquially a collection of need-based programs. It's actually fairly rare for anyone to qualify for EVERY program. So those conservative blasts you see that claim "Oh, people on welfare make $20 an hour!" are absolute crap. Additionally, if you want to get extremely technical, the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit deductions that 8 million Americans take every year on their tax returns are a form of "welfare." If you take a tax deduction for your child (yes, including those born IN WEDLOCK), YOU ARE PARTICIPATING IN A WELFARE PROGRAM.

To break down the numbers, I'm using Rhode Island for example 1) because it's the most recent data I can find, and 2) typically NE states pay more in benefits than other areas of the country, and I want to use an example of the HIGHEST benefits you can receive.
A single mom with 2 kids in RI can qualify for:
- $6,648 cash subsidy
- $6,249 in food stamps (SNAP program)
- $12,702 in housing subsidies
- $11,302 for health care coverage
- $275 in heating assistance
- $300 from the Emergency Food Assistance program
- $1,156 from WIC
Total: $38,632 (or about $20 an hour, aka the conservative watch-dogs war cry)

HOWEVER. There are so many qualifications required for all these benefits. You only qualify for WIC if you have a child under 5. Housing subsidies aren't available to those who also receive the cash subsidy, if I'm reading the report correctly. Etc.

The average benefits that the majority of applicants qualify for are: food stamps and Medicaid programs, which are only about $17,000.
The federal poverty line for a family of 3 is $20,160 (in 2015). The average "welfare" recipient is still under the goddamn federal poverty line.

Returning to your judgment, whether or not someone is "well-heeled" or "poor as [censored]" - it's still their own choice whether or not to get married when they have children, and it has nothing to do with you, me, my family values or your family values, your life or my life, or incorrect assumptions about federal benefits.

Fine. You can do as you please. I'll happily kick their arses for being unmarried no-money fools having their kids on the public's coin. One reason I quit nursing is I tired of spending my whole day catering to, and trying to get money and social services for, various annoying fools who make foolish choices and are not my kind of people. Fortunately, we are all free to choose our friends and work environment(s) in addition to our opinions. I feel no shame whatsoever. Have a nice day. ;-D

Total: $38,632 (or about $20 an hour, aka the conservative watch-dogs war cry)
And is untaxed, isn't it?
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/welfare-better-deal-work

Allnurses had a story about an unwed mom of 4 who worked as a nurse aide while in RN school. After she finished her RN school an passed she NCLEX-RN, she got a job that grossed $50k or $56k or something as a new-hire nurse. And her disposable income was actually reduced when she got a good job, because now she has to pay healthcare,food, clothes, housing, etc. 100% by herself with no government aid.
 

madelise

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
5,362
madelise|1459385733|4013448 said:
urseberry|1459377398|4013376 said:
Anyone making assumptions and judging unmarried parents can kiss my pregnant, unmarried a$$.


Ew, you pathetic welfare abuser!


Omg! Urse!!!!!! You're preggo!!!! Congratulations! Tell us more!


Forgot to insert my sarcastic emoti between the comments, oops.
 

urseberry

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
516
madelise|1459394629|4013532 said:
madelise|1459385733|4013448 said:
urseberry|1459377398|4013376 said:
Anyone making assumptions and judging unmarried parents can kiss my pregnant, unmarried a$$.


Ew, you pathetic welfare abuser!


Omg! Urse!!!!!! You're preggo!!!! Congratulations! Tell us more!


Forgot to insert my sarcastic emoti between the comments, oops.

Oh, don't worry madelise, your meaning was clear even without the emoti. Thanks for the well wishes! I'm 22 weeks along, doing well, and both I and the baby girl are healthy so far. The father and I are in a committed relationship but are choosing not to get married for our own reasons. We are professionals in our thirties. Our situation is probably not the typical demographic of unwed parents, but some of the responses in this thread made me so angry that I had to say something. I very much appreciate all of the people who have posted pointing out the sweeping judgements and false generalizations that have been stated here.
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,676
Having a newborn is a very tiring, life-changing experience. I'm not sure some of these single women (note I said SOME) realize how hard it is when they decide to do it alone. I'm not talking about couples who live together but are unmarried, I'm talking about single women whose significant others do not live with them. It is FREAKIN' HARD when you have to be up for the day in two hours and the baby has slept for approximately 33 minutes all night, and dad is off at his place chilling and catching some sleep. And I'm sure someone will come along shortly and say "that could happen with a married couple if the dad doesn't help" etc. Not as likely. Having another person there to take turns and spell each other when things get hairy can be a real lifesaver. People can do whatever they want (as long as it's legal/ethical). I just don't understand why someone would want to do it alone. Not my choice, not my business, I get it. Just wanted to have a conversation about it.
 

sonnyjane

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
2,476
Laila619|1459399933|4013555 said:
Having a newborn is a very tiring, life-changing experience. I'm not sure some of these single women (note I said SOME) realize how hard it is when they decide to do it alone. I'm not talking about couples who live together but are unmarried, I'm talking about single women whose significant others do not live with them. It is FREAKIN' HARD when you have to be up for the day in two hours and the baby has slept for approximately 33 minutes all night, and dad is off at his place chilling and catching some sleep. And I'm sure someone will come along shortly and say "that could happen with a married couple if the dad doesn't help" etc. Not as likely. Having another person there to take turns and spell each other when things get hairy can be a real lifesaver. People can do whatever they want (as long as it's legal/ethical). I just don't understand why someone would want to do it alone. Not my choice, not my business, I get it. Just wanted to have a conversation about it.

And what about the hundreds of thousands of military wives who are married and have a child but their husbands are gone for a year at a time? Do you propose they not have kids since they can't both be there to raise the kid, even though they are married? Once again, your assumption that "wedlock" is the be all, end all is incorrect.
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
53,986
I agree with those who said what really matters is that children have a loving and supportive network and hopefully 2 parents that are there for them emotionally even if they are not together or don't live together.


Of course the general "ideal" (for many) is a loving and committed to each other married couple having children and if you had asked me 20 years ago I would have been surprised by out of wedlock being the norm and probably judgmental too. However now, after gaining some years and hopefully wisdom I realize what really matters is that children have people who love and take care of them no matter if they are married, together or single. I also realize the ideal is just what other people think is the norm and each individual family is different in what works best for them and in another 20 years possibly the "ideal" will be completely different.


Isn't it ironic that now that gay marriage is legal an more universally accepted marriage in general is less common overall?
“It may be that same-sex couples will save the institution of marriage.” The word institution never brought up good images for me anyway. :errrr:

What's that quote about gay marriage? “I support gay marriage. I believe they have a right to be as miserable as the rest of us.”
:lol: 8-)
 

liaerfbv

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
1,348
AdaBeta27|1459392173|4013518 said:
liaerfbv|1459342822|4013053 said:
AdaBeta27|1459336349|4013041 said:
ricezo|1459326751|4013017 said:
I'm shocked and disappointed that in today's day and age having children outside of wedlock is perceived by some (hopefully a minority) to be an issue and I quote, an issue to be 'sad' about.

I know many loving unmarried couples, in healthy, committed relationships, who are the best parents.

It's not sad if these are wellheeled people who are doing everything "right" except being married. But largely what is happening with out of wedlock births is due to USA becoming lower socioeconomic and more people gaming the system because welfare benefits pay better and offer better benefits package than working. There are a lot of bedhopping losers with too many kids in my town. Suburban and rural poverty everywhere. Wild living, and no money. But women have 3 or 4 kids, no more than 2 with the same daddy.

Yikes. Setting aside your extreme judgment for a minute... people love to complain about how much people get on welfare without actually doing any research about it. First of all, there is no program in the US called "welfare" - it's colloquially a collection of need-based programs. It's actually fairly rare for anyone to qualify for EVERY program. So those conservative blasts you see that claim "Oh, people on welfare make $20 an hour!" are absolute crap. Additionally, if you want to get extremely technical, the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit deductions that 8 million Americans take every year on their tax returns are a form of "welfare." If you take a tax deduction for your child (yes, including those born IN WEDLOCK), YOU ARE PARTICIPATING IN A WELFARE PROGRAM.

To break down the numbers, I'm using Rhode Island for example 1) because it's the most recent data I can find, and 2) typically NE states pay more in benefits than other areas of the country, and I want to use an example of the HIGHEST benefits you can receive.
A single mom with 2 kids in RI can qualify for:
- $6,648 cash subsidy
- $6,249 in food stamps (SNAP program)
- $12,702 in housing subsidies
- $11,302 for health care coverage
- $275 in heating assistance
- $300 from the Emergency Food Assistance program
- $1,156 from WIC
Total: $38,632 (or about $20 an hour, aka the conservative watch-dogs war cry)

HOWEVER. There are so many qualifications required for all these benefits. You only qualify for WIC if you have a child under 5. Housing subsidies aren't available to those who also receive the cash subsidy, if I'm reading the report correctly. Etc.

The average benefits that the majority of applicants qualify for are: food stamps and Medicaid programs, which are only about $17,000.
The federal poverty line for a family of 3 is $20,160 (in 2015). The average "welfare" recipient is still under the goddamn federal poverty line.

Returning to your judgment, whether or not someone is "well-heeled" or "poor as [censored]" - it's still their own choice whether or not to get married when they have children, and it has nothing to do with you, me, my family values or your family values, your life or my life, or incorrect assumptions about federal benefits.

Fine. You can do as you please. I'll happily kick their arses for being unmarried no-money fools having their kids on the public's coin. One reason I quit nursing is I tired of spending my whole day catering to, and trying to get money and social services for, various annoying fools who make foolish choices and are not my kind of people. Fortunately, we are all free to choose our friends and work environment(s) in addition to our opinions. I feel no shame whatsoever. Have a nice day. ;-D

Total: $38,632 (or about $20 an hour, aka the conservative watch-dogs war cry)
And is untaxed, isn't it?
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/welfare-better-deal-work

Allnurses had a story about an unwed mom of 4 who worked as a nurse aide while in RN school. After she finished her RN school an passed she NCLEX-RN, she got a job that grossed $50k or $56k or something as a new-hire nurse. And her disposable income was actually reduced when she got a good job, because now she has to pay healthcare,food, clothes, housing, etc. 100% by herself with no government aid.

I'm not really sure the point you were trying to make here, other than offering a repeat of your blatantly uninformed opinion. I am not on government assistance, my friends aren't on government assistance, I do not work in a field related to government assistance - I merely hold the (informed) opinion that the majority of people on welfare programs are not in fact receiving a living wage that replaces income they would earn at a job. Claiming otherwise really just makes it look like you don't know how to Google something.

There will always be exceptions to a rule, and there will always be situations where someone might lose or gain disposable income related to benefits they qualify for, but again, I'm talking about the majority of people receiving benefits. As to paying taxes on subsidies received (unrelated to government benefits received), if you are living at or below the federal poverty limit for your family size, you are eligible for deductions and credits. Do you take tax deductions? Why are your tax deductions somehow more "proper" than tax deductions taken by lower income families?
 

OreoRosies86

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
3,463
Wow.
 

monarch64

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
19,224
Elliot86|1459428336|4013624 said:

What? You're not enjoying this little lesson in classism and elitism?
 

packrat

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
10,614
I don't care if you're married or in a three some or doing it on your own, I just care if you're an **please keep it clean**. Is it b/c I don't live in an affluent area? I dunno.
 

OreoRosies86

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
3,463
monarch64|1459429304|4013631 said:
Elliot86|1459428336|4013624 said:

What? You're not enjoying this little lesson in classism and elitism?

True f***ing story!
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,676
sonnyjane|1459400471|4013557 said:
Laila619|1459399933|4013555 said:
Having a newborn is a very tiring, life-changing experience. I'm not sure some of these single women (note I said SOME) realize how hard it is when they decide to do it alone. I'm not talking about couples who live together but are unmarried, I'm talking about single women whose significant others do not live with them. It is FREAKIN' HARD when you have to be up for the day in two hours and the baby has slept for approximately 33 minutes all night, and dad is off at his place chilling and catching some sleep. And I'm sure someone will come along shortly and say "that could happen with a married couple if the dad doesn't help" etc. Not as likely. Having another person there to take turns and spell each other when things get hairy can be a real lifesaver. People can do whatever they want (as long as it's legal/ethical). I just don't understand why someone would want to do it alone. Not my choice, not my business, I get it. Just wanted to have a conversation about it.

And what about the hundreds of thousands of military wives who are married and have a child but their husbands are gone for a year at a time? Do you propose they not have kids since they can't both be there to raise the kid, even though they are married? Once again, your assumption that "wedlock" is the be all, end all is incorrect.

Nope, totally different situation.
 

liaerfbv

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
1,348
Laila619|1459399933|4013555 said:
Having a newborn is a very tiring, life-changing experience. I'm not sure some of these single women (note I said SOME) realize how hard it is when they decide to do it alone. I'm not talking about couples who live together but are unmarried, I'm talking about single women whose significant others do not live with them. It is FREAKIN' HARD when you have to be up for the day in two hours and the baby has slept for approximately 33 minutes all night, and dad is off at his place chilling and catching some sleep. And I'm sure someone will come along shortly and say "that could happen with a married couple if the dad doesn't help" etc. Not as likely. Having another person there to take turns and spell each other when things get hairy can be a real lifesaver. People can do whatever they want (as long as it's legal/ethical). I just don't understand why someone would want to do it alone. Not my choice, not my business, I get it. Just wanted to have a conversation about it.

I get what you mean when you say why would someone want to do it alone. Personally, I would not want to be a single parent. Hell, I don't want to be a parent with my husband. But I don't think there's anything inherently wrong, sad, irresponsible, or detrimental to a child to be raised in a single parent household. Maybe some people who choose single parenthood don't know how difficult it may be to raise a child alone, but I don't think married couples expecting children fully realize how difficult it is to raise a child together either sometimes. I also agree with what someone said earlier, I think this article also fails to take into consideration that people are getting married later and that doesn't necessarily translate to "single parenthood."
 

maccers

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
1,167
What a weird, old-fashioned sounding article. The next step would have been to call the children 'bastards' for being born out of wedlock (I have a demography textbook from the 1960s that does this). And so odd that the proposed 'solution' is to revive the institution of marriage instead of addressing the other issues they barely mentioned like: millennials looking for jobs in a crappy economy, access to birth control, access to post secondary education etc....Yeah, more people getting married will solve the "problem" for kids being born out of wedlock :roll:
 

smitcompton

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Messages
3,254
Hi,

This has been discussed before. Seventy percent of ALL births in the U.S. are paid for by Medicaid. That means the taxpayer is paying for most of the babes born in the US. I very much like Niel, but would like to ask if she or her boyfriend had insurance so that they could pay for their decision. I doubt it.

I agree that a woman ought not to marry just because of the baby. It will take a lot more to raise that child.

The other statements that people are calling the moms of out of wedlock children sluts does not ring true to me. The only comments that I hear are how many different fathers some families have. And, to me, that means no stable man in their lives.

It seems to me that you young women ought to listen to how hard it is to raise a child by yourself. Single women are the poorest in our society. I suggest you listen and research and try hard to get the fantasy out of child raising. Its one hard job, let alone by yourself. Think hard.


Annette
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top