Two married people can decide to divorce each other and end their relationship,
BUT they must never "divorce their children". After all they are
accountable for bringing their children into the world; They must never be
allowed to shun their responsiblities of being parents to their own children, no
matter the social hardships or financial costs, etc. Hence, the
divorce laws must be made precise and stronger to insure divorsees continue to
be effective parents. Make it harder to "divorce children" at will by
Cougar Blue, I don't think this is a sad commentary. Why do you look at this as
degradation of society and it's values? I look at it as people (single parents)
stepping up and taking care of business. Perhaps this needs further research to
see why. Yes, it's sad if these single parents are single for the purpose of
benefitting from it by being supported by society. My thinking is that there are
things that were buried in the closet because of stigma attached and single
parents are now standing up for their rights. These include spousal abuse, child
abuse, sexual abuse, infidelity, etc. Because of programs, and yes, even media,
these things are being addressed, and the victims are not feeling they are alone
to have to just put up with it and have no other choices. These things are alot
of reasons there are now single parents. I applaud these people who leave these
situations, there is so much harm done not only to the victims, but the kids,
and would it really be better to leave these families intact, just for the sake
of having a "typical family with a mother and father"?
What a sad commentary on the degradation of our society and it's values we so
I was a married "single parent". My husband was never around thanks to
his religious beliefs. Though the religion pushed families, his priority was
giving everything to the church, anyone who said they needed money, charities,
basically who said they're poor - not his family. I worked full time, took care
of the kids, put them through school, etc. They're doing great now. My youngest was married, and two kids into the marriage found out her husband
was a sexual predator. She got rid of him before any damage was done to the
kids, but he was court ordered to stay away from them and pay minimal child
support. The oldest is 12 - she has yet to see a penny of support. I'm helping
with bills, school and kids, or she couldn't do it. She hates the thought of
public assistance, but can't afford insurance on the kids, so has to have help.
She's struggling to get through school, so she can totally support for them, and
isn't looking to replace the loser she was married to just for the sake of
having a "typical" family. Sometimes there's no choice.
Since the DN decided it wise to allow God into the discussion, they should not
have a problem with a dissenting point of view, in that there is no such thing
as God, we all live and then die, and that's the end of it; people and all
living things come and go. However, is the best scenario two parents? Yes.
But the article only mentions some of the factors - none of which included
divorce, so we must assume that was not included in the equation. And there's
still that little hint at all this being the mother's fault for getting pregnant
in the first place, and not emphasis put upon the father who fathered the child.
I'll repeat from an earlier montra from another post: When/until we put
greater responsibility upon the father for being in a child's life, abortion,
single parenting, etc. will continue to rise. And yes, you are
being old-fashioned. Why can't the mother work and the father stay home? I
would dare say that from the beginning of time, mothers have worked at various
tasks apart from taking care of the home and child-rearing.
You know, if you allowed all parents to get married the number of children being
raised by single parents would drop...Just sayin'...
I certainly believe that children who have two loving, supportive, committed
parents residing in the same home is usually the ideal. But divorce occurs in
almost half of marriages technically rendering each a "single parent".
Fortunately, we all know divorced couples who as single parents still love and
provide for their children in every way necessary - sometimes even more than
when married."Single parent" does not necessarily mean
"one parent". In reality some children have two "single
parents" who continue to love and care for them as much as they did when
Wasn't it Hiliary Clinton that made the infamous "it takes a village"
statement regarding the raising of children? The truth is that is takes a father
and a mother. It is a fact that more and more children are being rasied by a
single parent and I give loads of credit to those single parents (mostly women)
that take on this task. However, the best senerio is for a father and mother to
do the job - how God intended it.
Come on people, we ALL know the reason why America has the highest percentage of
single parents. And it has little to do with affordability of daycare.It's what's happening in the inner-city among our poorer minorities who are
paid for having babies. The culture inside these societies doesn't even see a
two-parent system as a viable option.Obviously, we see single
parenting at all social levels and in all neighborhoods but the disparity in
percentages is what needs to be studied.
This research is pathetic. Since when does parental-paid-leave have anything to
do with whether or not a child is raised by a single parents? That's social
agenda stuff... and should've been left out of the report...IMO, a
lot of single parenting occurs unnecessarily now because single mothers are put
on a pedastal by the teenage entertainment industry, and it's become this
"heartless" taboo for those who have children out of wedlock to give
up their babies for adoption. An abnormally large percentage of heroes in
popular media romanticize the orphan's quest for his "true" parents,
and their bad behavior is swept under the carpet by our sympathies for their sad
underprivileged lives. That combines with the fact that in America
there's still a fight over abortion. People still have a conscience about
slaying their unborn children (which is a good thing). But because they are
keeping their children, there's cognitive disonance. There's a lot of sad social
pressure for singles to have children, to care for them when they should be
learning to become adults, and in the end the children become trophies to their
noble exhibitions of martydom...
'MIAMI One in four children in the United States is being raised by a single
parent a percentage that has been on the rise and is higher than other
developed countries, according to a report released Wednesday.' - Article Wow. That's LOWER than the numbers from the Center for Disease Control.
(CDC) They reported almost 40% of all children in America being raised by single
parents. The 'traditional' family is the ideal. But let's not
pretend it is common enough to be used as a reliable goal. Example?
Bristol Palin. Another Example? John and Kate plus 8. We need
to be able to provide better support networks to raise children BESIDES
something that has a 50% divorce rate. That is why I support same
sex marriage, if anything for the estimated 9 million children being raised by
same sex couples. Source? American Academy of Pediatrics.
Some people function as married couples in regards to their children while on
paper they are not married. In one case I know of, it is to protect the business
assets of one parent from the old debts of the other. In another case I
know of, one spouse abandoned the other with three kids under the age of 4 for a
hotter, less encumbered new woman. Not excusing it, just saying it isn't all
people intentionally setting it up that way, and some are functioning as
"traditional" families even though it looks different on paper.
Single parents face a great deal of opposition in trying to find the best things
for themselves and their families. Sometimes single parent families could be
prevented if abortion/adoption were explored. Sometimes single parent families
could be avoided if marriage was postponed until two people got to know one
another better. None of this matters though when talking about the services
available to single parents. We do a very poor job, even though we are getting
better, at supporting and helping single parents. Child support enforcement has
gotten better but custodial parents still don't get child support. I went an
entire year without getting my support and was told the only thing I could do
was wait and know that the non-payments were being assessed interest at a rate
of 6% a year. Credit cards charge a higher rate in some cases than this. I
would like to suggest non payment of support be placed on a credit report just
as any other creditor does when a debt isn't paid.
The problem isn't that so many single women and children are having babies out
of wedlock, the problem is that we aren't PAYING them to do so by giving them a
year or two of "National-Paid-Time-Off" every time they have another
young'un! Sounds like a sinister conspiracy to remove all women from
the workplace and keep them home, barefoot and pregnant!
And I'm not saying Dad shouldn't change diapers or do dishes!!! I am
completely aware that my Wife's job (stay at home mom) is often times more
stressful than mine!
Wow I am going to sound old fashioned...The traditional family is
the way to go. Dad works, Mom stays at home with the kids. Mom & Dad wait
until they are married to procreate!!! My point is not to be
judgmental. I understand that there are circumstances where this is not
possible... things happen! I understand that. But, maybe our Grandparents got
this one right!