Attitudes toward staying home.

[mercedesjin]

Originally Posted by Nyororin

I totally believe it can work, and that there are wonderful successes. But I don`t believe it is in the best interest of the child. That is different from saying it is impossible. There are great success stories out there. The thing is, having actual background in studying childhood development, it`s NOT in the best interest of the child. Can some children adjust and thrive? Of course. But it`s not the best situation, and never will be. For those single parents who ended up that way, I am entirely supportive of. I can`t say I feel the same for a single parent who knew ahead of time but still decides to have a child and have someone else raise it for them. If you do not have the time or ability to dedicate yourself to being the best possible parent to that child, it is selfish to choose to have one. That is the huge difference in my eyes. I don`t even think people with demanding jobs should choose to have pets who they have little time for, let alone children. It`s nothing wrong with their job, it`s that they are making the choice to bring a child into a situation that will never be in the best interest of that child.

Why isn't it in the child's best interest, then?

The way I see it, it isn't selfish. Parents hire babysitters and let family members take care of their children all of the time. When I said, "take to grandmas," I meant for a few hours. I didn't mean for the child's life. In my experience, everyone does that.

I guess this is just another difference in opinions, but to me, having a child doesn't mean that the parent's life completely stops. Yes, a parent needs to sacrifice a lot to raise a child properly, but parents are human beings with life goals and ambitions also. I'm not saying that a parent should lock their kid up in the house while they go off to Las Vegas to party their life away, but if they have a set career in mind, why shouldn't that parent go for it?

What if sacrificing absolutely everything for the child makes the parent unhappy? Do you think that an unhappy, depressed parent is more fit to raise a child?

[Yuusuke]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

lol don't let him make you think that you're negative thing, or some kind of special case. There are single-parent families across the USA and across the world, a lot of which are doing just as well or even better than families with two parents. It's not traditional, but single parents are becoming the norm these days.

Families with two parents can be pretty screwed up too, you know?

Trust me mercedes I don't >.>

[iPhantom]

I'd never eat something my dad would make. Moms FTW.

Anyway, I don't know but I have this feeling that women are generally cleaner than men. As in, keeping the place they live in a better shape. I think women are more capable of doing housework.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

MMM: I've said it again, and I'll continue to say it: CULTURAL value. Not financial value. Money is what makes the world go around these days and, unfortunately, for alimony a person needs to go to court. To win their case, a person needs a good lawyer. For a good lawyer, a person needs money. Painful catch 22, isn't it?

Sadly, millions of people go through this every year. The American court system places a HIGH FINANCIAL value on stay-at-home moms. I have never heard of a divorce proceeding where the stay-at-home mom did not receive alimony. Often the "bread winner" ends up paying for both lawyers. The divorce lawyer for the stay-at-home mom will only charge her if she receives a settlement and alimony. It's a business, and that's how it works. No catch-22 there. If the mother has a case there are thousands of lawyers who will take it at no cost until the settlement.

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

As for single parents, what are the roles that each father and mother must play in a child's life?

Did I say "must". I don't think there are any roles that a father and mother "must" take, but being raised by a father and mother statistically leads to the most success for a child. Yes there are screwed up kids who had a mother and father, and yes there are successful people from single family homes, but the statistics are staggering. The vast majority of men in prison came from single parent homes (mostly fatherless homes).

There are things a mother will teach a child and there are things a father will teach a child. These aren't necessarily the same things. The fact that so many men in prison didn't have fathers is testament to this.

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

And your question... I'm sorry, I don't understand it, I guess because it's out of context. I can't find where it was originally asked either. Explain it for me please?

Originally Posted by MMM

Some people think it is sexist if a man does one thing (makes money) and a woman does another (raises family). That seems a little silly to me, and this idea that everybody should do everything is a terrible model. Name a successful business where everybody does everything. There is nothing sexist about having roles. Especially if those roles are considered valuable.

--------------------

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

And what about abusive fathers? What about abusive mothers? Do you think it's better to have an abusive parent than to not have both?

Why would you ask a silly question like that? Let's stick to the topic.

[Nyororin]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

Why isn't it in the child's best interest, then?

The way I see it, it isn't selfish. Parents hire babysitters and let family members take care of their children all of the time. When I said, "take to grandmas," I meant for a few hours. I didn't mean for the child's life. In my experience, everyone does that.

A child typically sleeps 12+ hours a day until they are school aged.
Let us say that single parent here works ONLY 8 hours a day, on the dot, every day. That leaves 4 waking hours for the child. Maybe one in the morning, add another for the trip to work and back, and we have 2 hours left in the evening for "parenting".
75% of the child`s life is spent being cared for by someone else. 75% of the most important developmental periods in a child`s life is in the hands of someone OTHER than the parent. If this is a grandparent or steady caretaker, then it`s a *better* situation than the typical daycare - where people quit and new people come in all the time. Unfortunately, most of the time it is a typical daycare to which the child goes.
But in the end, normally people wouldn`t consider 2~3 hours with a babysitter or grandparent having them "raise" the child - but yet are happy to say they are raising the child when their time spent may be even less.
I have acquaintances in the US who are full time workers and single parents. They eat breakfast with their children, deliver them to daycare... Then come home and pay the babysitter for picking the kid up from daycare and watching them until they slept. Give their baby a kiss on the forehead, then repeat the next day.
How can this be considered a good and responsible parent? It baffles me. (ETA; And they are completely confused as to why the child doesn`t listen to them, has bonding issues, or speech delays.)

I guess this is just another difference in opinions, but to me, having a child doesn't mean that the parent's life completely stops. Yes, a parent needs to sacrifice a lot to raise a child properly, but parents are human beings with life goals and ambitions also. I'm not saying that a parent should lock their kid up in the house while they go off to Las Vegas to party their life away, but if they have a set career in mind, why shouldn't that parent go for it?

I don`t think my life has ended since having a child? Some things have become more inconvenient, but that is about it.
I don`t have a problem with a parent having a career. The thing is, why have a child if you`re not going to be the one raising it? When there is no choice - unexpected pregnancy, divorce, etc - I don`t have any problems with it. But choosing to have a child you`ll barely have any time for just seems incredibly selfish to me.

What if sacrificing absolutely everything for the child makes the parent unhappy? Do you think that an unhappy, depressed parent is more fit to raise a child?

They should THINK about this before choosing to have a child. I am against people CHOOSING to have a child when they cannot be a responsible parent. Sometimes you have to think about priorities. If you are a single woman, totally dedicated to your career - that career is your priority. No one is going to force you to have a child. It is a choice.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

lol don't let him make you think that you're negative thing, or some kind of special case. There are single-parent families across the USA and across the world, a lot of which are doing just as well or even better than families with two parents. It's not traditional, but single parents are becoming the norm these days.

Families with two parents can be pretty screwed up too, you know?

Please, do not put words in my mouth.

I have said more than once that there are successful single-parent family children and screwed-up kids from two-parent homes.

HOWEVER, statistically children from two-parent homes have more success and get in less trouble than children from single-parent homes. This is basic stuff, and I hope no one is going to deny this is true.

[Yuusuke]

Originally Posted by MMM

Please, do not put words in my mouth.

I have said more than once that there are successful single-parent family children and screwed-up kids from two-parent homes.

HOWEVER, statistically children from two-parent homes have more success and get in less trouble than children from single-parent homes. This is basic stuff, and I hope no one is going to deny this is true.

Originally Posted by MMM

I had and have both, and can't imagine being raised without both of them.

Statistically, children with two parents are more successful and get into less trouble than children with one. That doesn't mean there aren't success stories, and it sounds like you are one of them.

A father figure is not a negative thing.

Yes he did

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Yuusuke

Yes he did

You said you felt not having a father figure was a positive thing.

I said a father figure is a not a negative thing.

If you felt I was judging you or saying anything negative directed towards you please let me know. That was not my intention.

[Yuusuke]

Originally Posted by MMM

You said you felt not having a father figure was a positive thing.

I said a father figure is a not a negative thing.

If you felt I was judging you or saying anything negative directed towards you please let me know. That was not my intention.

lol, not I was showing Mercedes what you said X_X.

and no.

I should rephrase, IN MY LIFE not having a father figure was a positive outcome.

[iPhantom]

Originally Posted by MMM

Please, do not put words in my mouth.

I have said more than once that there are successful single-parent family children and screwed-up kids from two-parent homes.

mercedesjin does that all the time.