-
Aborting ‘Pro-Choice,’ Promoting ‘Nuance’
January 22, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Obama Comes Full Circle
May 11, 2012 | 261 comments
-
Fiscal Crisis At Tipping Point
July 11, 2011 | 102 comments
-
Obama Abandons Marriage
February 25, 2011 | 229 comments
-
He Won’t Be Moving to the Center
November 11, 2010 | 27 comments
The Nation's Pulse
Family Deformation
One in five American mothers have children from different men.
A recent eye-opening study put numbers to an issue that I have written about repeatedly: One in five of all American mothers have children from different men. When mothers of more than two children are isolated, the number jumps to 28 percent. When race is isolated, it gets extreme: 59 percent of African-American mothers and 35 percent of Hispanic mothers have children with more than one father. The mothers were overwhelmingly low income with little education; while they were “poorer than others to begin with,” their single-parent status virtually assured that “their whole lifetimes [would] continue to be disadvantaged.”
This is no small problem, as indicated by the fact that press coverage of the report ranged from Medical News Today to Forbes, from “Imperfect Parent” to “WebMD,” and from MSNBC to the Los Angeles Times. The negative consequences for both the mother and the child are so well documented they have almost ceased to register on the public’s radar. Yet, warnings about the outcomes — bleak as they are — are not getting through to the culture, and we continue to see the myth perpetuated that single motherhood is glamorous and the “baby daddy” culture as a substitute for husband/father continues to thrive, especially among the poor and uneducated in America. The number of young women who are cohabitating instead of getting married is increasing; the number who have children before getting married is increasing; and the number of children who live in blended households as a result of divorce or prior cohabitation is increasing, as my research and writing reveals.
Single moms of children from multiple fathers are far more likely to be “under-employed, to have lower incomes, and to be less educated.” The children in these households live with enormous stress: “Everyday decisions are more complex and family rules are more ambiguous.” Just figuring out logistics, such as “whose turn it is to spend time with the kids and who gets more attention,” and dividing up time, responsibilities, and finances — who lives with whom when, who is responsible for what when, and who pays for food, clothing, and incidentals, as well as who pays child support for what child — is daunting and sometimes impossible. Sadly, and most damaging to the children, is that the conflicts that lead the parents to separate in the first place tend to go on and on, with the kids often getting caught in the middle.
The study’s author, Cassandra Dorius, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, presented her findings at the Population Association of America. She studied data from up to 20 interviews with each of 4,000 women over a 27-year-period. The data for the study came from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Dorius called the trend an “intergeneratic transmission of disadvantage.” She said, “Juggling all the different needs and demands of fathers in at least two households, four or more pairs of grandparents, and two or more children creates a huge set of chronic stressors that families have to deal with for decades.”
Opposition to Dorius’s findings was immediate.
Black critics accused the author of focusing an “unfair spotlight” on black women’s “love lives,” “over-sensationalizing” and holding up “stereotypes” of black women for “ridicule.” One critic was concerned that “this will be another way that this country will put a negative label on black women.”
Other critics were afraid “people will point to this fact as an example of the decline in American morality and the cause of a good number of societal ills.” In fact, the critic accused society of wanting to “police the sexuality of women — especially women of color — and these troubles will be laid at our feet.”
There are those, too, who believe the situation is not “inherently bad or good” and, in a flight from reality, they argue that any group of people can successfully parent. They contend that the larger problem is whether the dad plays a role in his child’s life, whether married or not. Yet research is clear and unsurprising: When a mother finds a new man or has a child by another man, fathers typically become less involved financially and emotionally, and they are far less likely to be a physical presence in their children’s lives.
Some reports sought to debunk the “myth of the perfect family.” Such thinking, however, merely sets up a straw man and is erroneous. There is a voluminous body of research that is clear and unambiguous: The very best family for a child’s positive development and good outcome is a married mom and dad.
The critics can sidestep the issue with their victimhood opposition, but the facts are accumulating from highly respected universities and think tanks across the ideological spectrum, and the conclusion is unanimous: Those who are care about women and children must do something to change the pernicious “baby daddy” culture that is destroying the future of so many promising young women and precious children. As Time magazine put it: “Growing up in a home in which different men cycle in and out is not good for a child’s health or well being. Think of these families as having ‘domino dads,’ with each one’s departure putting pressure on the next.”
All the comments about victimhood do nothing but perpetuate the problem in minority communities. Only by facing facts and addressing problems realistically can we hope to see a brighter future and the inherent potential of the next generation realized.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (47) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Janice Shaw Crouse
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/04/08/family-deformation
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong
Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
aj| 4.8.11 @ 6:37AM
Diagnosis of this takes a doctorate? Please. The proscriptive Rx most rational Americans would prescribe for this repulsive phenomenon would be branded as 'draconian' by the same people at UM that rounded up the federal grant that funded Cassandra's study of this 'tragedy'.........and am I to actually believe that is her real name? Too rich.
Larry| 4.8.11 @ 6:39AM
This is the price that we pay for lib scum telling everyone that if it feels good do it. Women's lib scum- "spread your legs for every man that you meet girls. Empower yourselves." Lovely.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.8.11 @ 7:06AM
Is it not possible that government payments make this all happen? From welfare to unemployment the more kids you pop out the greater the reward.
Macwell| 4.8.11 @ 7:28AM
Ah yes, "the NEW Deal", "The GREAT Society", etc. blah, blah, blah. It would appear that the democrat playbook is loosing it's appeal. Being in my 60's, I've seen first hand 30 year old grandmothers, 40 year old great grandmothers, with children from as many men as possible. All of these (American Human beings), destined to a life of poverty, their children with a 70/30 chance of seeing the inside of a jail cell. It would seem that poverty is a big business in America. The democrat party, (the party of the little people), once again proving that their FAILED policies have kept a whole block of citizens captive for all these years. Vote for me and I'll make sure you get another $100.00 a month, while I make millions on your poverty. I have a stake in the high rise slum you're living in, I own the car dealer that allows you to buy a car you can't afford, at 29% interest, of course.
I just have one question for my black brothers and sisters here, "why the hell would any of you vote for a democrat, when they are the very people who have kept you down since the 50's?"
henry| 4.8.11 @ 7:41AM
A report just released in South Africa shows that:
Three percent of children in that country are brought up in a nuclear family.
Forty percent of children are raised by women,
The rest are on the street, in gangs or generally homeless.
The report also finds that fifty percent of teenagers in that country are illiterate.
We live in a new world, with skewed morality and massive feelings of entitlement. We are not allowed to moralize, but the results are there for all to see.
Bill Sundling| 4.8.11 @ 8:59AM
The real issue is that the majority of black children are born to women who've never been married. These children grow up without fathers. The girls are more likely to grow up to be single mothers. The boys are more likely to become criminals. Illegitimacy is the reason why the US has had a ten-fold increase in the prison population in the last 30 years. In time we won't be able to afford to lock up all the criminals that need to be.
PJ| 4.8.11 @ 9:08AM
Bill Hussein O'Stalin;
You hit the nose right on the head!It's a form of the Pavlov's dog experiment, conditioning behavior by rewarding it.
The Big E| 4.8.11 @ 9:53AM
The foundation has crumbled. We can spend trillions on policies designed to shore up the house, or to restore the house to its former glory, but the reality is that the foundation has crumbled, and nothing we do to the structure above can salvage it. The house can be razed, or it can be left to deteriorate further until it collapses in upon itself. Either way, it is doomed. The rot has been allowed to spread beyond all hope of simple repair, and inevitably, the house will fall. When that day comes, we need to be ready to lay a new foundation, to build upon that foundation from scratch, and to never again allow the putrescent corruption of liberalism, of statism, of socialism, of the culture of Death, to invade the foundation of the House of Freedom.
lg| 4.8.11 @ 11:33AM
Having children out of wedlock is a cottage industry these days. You can get a free apartment, sometimes in a great neighborhood, a check, food stamps, free healthcare, a cell phone, money to get to classes, free childcare and free schooling. Now you tell me what's not to like when you're young and on the go, so to speak. Is this a great country or what?!
Padoux| 4.8.11 @ 11:39AM
At age 65 I have seen the American family go to hell over the decades of my life. To me, the Sixties revolution started the dominoes falling. As a child, I was lucky to have a two parent family, no divorces, and all of my friends had the same. I can't imagine how children today handle a lifestyle of domestic chaos, with mothers and fathers having multiple partners in and out of the home and all the conflicts spawned by such a setting. Mothers are working, dating or living with different men, children not knowing their fathers, it is a colossal mess. With all its' faults, the nuclear family was and is the best way to insure we have a stable, civil society. After the sixties people now expect instant and unbridled satisfaction of sexual and material appetites and those who disagree are vilified as bigots and oppressors. I married my high school sweetheart, raised two children, stayed married for almost 41 years until I lost my dear wife in an accident recently. I have no regrets, and have wonderful memories.
sinanju| 4.8.11 @ 12:33PM
In addition to which, I wish there was more written about the final victims of the "Baby-daddy" culture--the Mac-daddies themselves. Siring multiple children out of wedlock may be a status symbol in the hood' but once these guys grow up and decide to make a real life, they find themselves under the child-support hammer, being pursued by the state on behalf of multiple women over the kids they leave behind. They are condemned to a life of poverty, homelessness, off-the-books employment and petty crime. The next time you see a thirty-something black dude on the street corner with all his possessions on his back--who is reasonably well-groomed and not having the look of a drunk, druggie or schizo--you may be looking at a former Mac-Daddy.
This should be played up, it might have a bracing affect on the young and foolish.
ncatty| 4.8.11 @ 1:03PM
Let's focus on the positive. We need an underclass and this behavior is supplying that need.
Strom| 4.8.11 @ 1:56PM
Ah yes... The great civil rights and feminist movements of four decades ago! Instead of producing the 'equality' they sought, they have created a permanent underclass. Perhaps this was goal all along. The modern Democrat Party is more than happy to perpetuate this underclass because that group votes overwhelmingly Democrat. The "compassionate facade" of always spending more on welfare, housing, medicaid, etc. does nothing more than ensure that the underclass continues in perpetuity.
Sadly, this way of thinking will be the utter destruction of our society.
Doctor Right| 4.8.11 @ 2:22PM
The best way to solve this problem is to throw money at it.
missbosslady| 4.8.11 @ 2:27PM
One critic was concerned that "this will be another way that this country will put a negative label on black women."
The country does not force the negative label, it is earned, that is the cold hard reality. Until the time that this reality is faced there can be no improvement in the condition.
It's time to grow up and accept that there is a right and a wrong way to do anything. I, for one, will not call a wrong a right no matter how many names you call me.
It's wrong to have multiple children, with multiple fathers. Period!
GW| 4.8.11 @ 3:27PM
Black critics accused the author of focusing an "unfair spotlight" on black women's "love lives," "over-sensationalizing" and holding up "stereotypes" of black women for "ridicule." One critic was concerned that "this will be another way that this country will put a negative label on black women."
--For many "victim" blacks, perception is more important than reality. The facts black kids grow up poorer, are more prone to crime, and are part of a vicious cycle of "single-mom-hood" is counterproductive to those wanting more government welfare checks; therefore blaming whitey for their own cultural ignominy is the ideal tactic--truth be damned.
--Second, I read too many AmSpec commenters looking to blame liberal politicians for the cultural decline in the US. Although liberal politicians are greedy, manipulative, deceitful, and selfish--they are a symptom, not the cause. Black illegitimacy, crime, and illiteracy should be blamed solely on blacks, not liberal whites.
ABNCP| 4.8.11 @ 3:37PM
Almost everything the Democrats have wrought in the past 40/50 years has produced chaos and undermined what this country should stand for.
The Black family for the most part has disapeared
The majority of our Black population cannot function without the handouts the government provides. The new Hispanics (illegal's) are going to become just like them in the short term future.
What very few in this country will say because of political correctness is that without Black and Hispanic violent crime the United States would have a violent crime rate about like Belgium. What the answer is, who knows, except that if we ever are going to change this country back into what most of us want to see, the Progressive element of the Democrat Party has to be gone. In a two party system both party's have to be dedicated to the core principals this country was founded upon.
Handy| 4.8.11 @ 3:52PM
The latest statistics out of New York say that nearly 60% of minority pregnancies are terminated. So the problem is much more serious than just the multiple father syndrome. Not sure what the rate is for non-minorities.
Women are totally responsible for this travesty, and it is time they were held accountable. They have proven they cannot be trusted with "reproductive choice" decisions.
Affordable, even free, birth control methods abound, yet these modern American women shun them. Five decades after the "pill" became available, they still don't get it. Diaphragms have been around for over 100 years. IUDs since the 1970s. How stupid are they? And the negative label doesn't just apply to black women. It applies to all who have unwanted or unwise pregnancies.
Too many of the wrong people are not only breeding, but also getting married. Parents never pay for what their children cost. From income tax exemptions through free education and health insurance, even affluent families are getting free rides on the backs of single people who might otherwise choose to form families if they could only accumulate the resources necessary to raise them responsibly.
It is long past the time to stop giving women a pass on this matter. And, it is long past the time when we stop punishing singles to reward families that should never have been created in the first place.
What sensible people would want to bring a child into the world today, anyway?
Strom| 4.8.11 @ 4:22PM
Handy - Just curious, but in your opinion who are the "right people" that should be breeding and getting married?
missbosslady| 4.8.11 @ 5:16PM
Strom,
Even though you asked a stupid question I will give you an intelligent (and obvious) answer: the right people are the ones who understand the responsiblity of being a parent and accept it.
Handy| 4.8.11 @ 5:27PM
Strom,
The right people who should get married and have children are those who realize just how much that costs. The wrong people are just being irresponsible.
When you subsidize something, you just get more of it. In this instance, more insanity.
Sheila| 4.8.11 @ 5:41PM
For a less PC and more honest discussion of this issue (particularly for you, missbosslady), see the following:
http://stuffblackpeopledontlik.....maury.html
beebop| 4.8.11 @ 6:44PM
My wonderful sister has children from multiple men -- adopted from different mothers from Guatemala. I couldn't be more proud.
missbosslady| 4.8.11 @ 6:53PM
Sheila,
I checked out the site and non-PC, honest discussion is an understatement.
Only good things can come from that kind of debate; no holds barred free speech.
Me likey!
missbosslady| 4.8.11 @ 7:07PM
A little off topic here, but was just watching Fox News Special Report and Kirsten Powers, the lefty on the panel, just let the cat out of the bag.
The money quote: "Pregnancy centers are the antithesis to Planned Parenthood."
Hilarious!
Thanks Kirsten! Lefty's are only honest accidentally!
scythe| 4.8.11 @ 7:17PM
"Black critics accused the author of focusing an "unfair spotlight" on black women's "love lives," "over-sensationalizing" and holding up "stereotypes" of black women for "ridicule." One critic was concerned that "this will be another way that this country will put a negative label on black women." Hey honey - you done put that label on yourself. And they call it a LOVE life? LMFAO. What was the first clue? When he said ho?
Occam's Tool| 4.8.11 @ 7:29PM
Dear GW,
it is the Liberal Welfare programs and The War on Poverty that destroyed the Black family. The fact is, many of those Liberals, like Jesse Jackson, are Black. It's not skin color, but ideology. And it is terrifying.
Occam's Tool| 4.8.11 @ 7:32PM
Dear Beebop---I'm the Daddy to my adoptive children from Guatemala---two separate women and two separate men were the biological parents.
But the point is, my kids are being raised in a stable one-daddy, one-mommy household, where mommy homeschools, to boot.
The point that Miss BossLady makes (correctly) is that kids need stability with the Men in their lives. Fathers are important.
Occam's Tool| 4.8.11 @ 7:34PM
Dear Handy,
if the West doesn't bring kids into this world, the world will belong to the head-chopping, child raping, woman stoners of the East. This world may not suit you, but you have no choice.
Handy| 4.8.11 @ 11:05PM
Dear Occam'sTool,
If we continue to encourage the dysfunctional barbarians of the West, I don't see how we are much better off. Bloods, Crips, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah; what's the difference?
Women have no right to get pregnant just to suit some biological "need" to go through the experience. We have no responsibility to feed that "need." They are completely irresponsible and are proving their incompetence more and more. How difficult is it to use a spermicide?
As with the non-existent "Moderate Muslims," where are the sensible women to decry their sisters? That's right: Absent, silent and cowardly.
There should be a direct tax on babies, collected at birth, or the parents don't get to take them home. Think that might mitigate the problem?
missbosslady| 4.9.11 @ 1:01AM
"As with the non-existent "Moderate Muslims," where are the sensible women to decry their sisters? That's right: Absent, silent and cowardly."
Handy,
The sensible women are right here under your upturned nose; we're called conservatives. We support our sisters by showing them, and the world, the way through actions and deeds. We are an ignored majority often drowned out by the hags that call themselves feminists.
Cowardly? Hardly. Try us.
Claypoole| 4.9.11 @ 9:38AM
So often, in cases of child abuse, the abuser is Mommy's boyfriend.
What we tolerate, we will get. What we tolerate and subsidize, we will get a lot of.
Oldefarte| 4.9.11 @ 11:37AM
Great article and commentary from most, but none have hit on the heart of the problem, which is a decline in this country of religious affiliation and support. Not only is the traditional family structure disappearing, but same's church attendance is dissolving also. Religion [non-radicalized, that is] provides moralistic structure to humans and their offsprings, whether financial affluence is involved or not. If religion is involved in one's history, the odds of criminal/social/mental etc problems become less and less evident. Liberals' successful attempts at religious destruction through governmental policies/restrictions/laws and aided/abetted by their Hollywood buddies producing TV programs and movies propagandizing this non-religious subversion effectively brainwashes our collective population hourly/daily. We're all being led to the Jonestown kool-aid final solution, and we don't seem to understand why. It ain't rocket science, folks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ENOUGH ROPE| 4.9.11 @ 1:59PM
When will 70% to 80% of Americans discover that most Democrats are fascists, socialists, or Marxists?
John II| 4.9.11 @ 2:54PM
Whoa. I had to read through this whole thread before I got to Oldefarte's precise summation.
Which I can only second with a selection from Isaiah (6:9-10), wherein the Lord gives the prophet his commission regarding a backsliding Israel, soon to be punished and brought low by the advancing Assyrians:
"Go, and say to this people: 'Hear and hear, but do not understand; see and see, but do not perceive.' Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."
Crouse's quotes from secular political and sociological types are moronic, yes--but moronic in the distinctive way that habitual immorality makes one stupid.
Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. The whole lefty thing is in freefall, and the reckoning is nigh!
And it's not celestial mechanics. . . . [Wait--that doesn't work well as a metaphor; I meant to agree with Oldefarte that it's not rocket science.]
And now back to "Jesus of Nazareth" (1977), the Zeffirelli miniseries in which Robert Powell (a fairly good Jesus, as the lead characters in Jesus-flicks go) holds forth against the rank stupidity that comes with habitual immorality.
Occam's Tool| 4.9.11 @ 7:19PM
The difference between the Bloods and Crips and the Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood is very simple---the Bloods and Crips are interested in financial gain. They wouldn't throw acid in a little girl's face or cut off a baby's head unless there was a financial incentive. Thus, they can be reasoned with. No reasoning with Hamas, Hezbollah, or the MB---only killing.
Oldefarte is also correct on the religious reasoning issue---it is the only advantage the Islamofascist scum have over us, and it may be enough. Secular Conservatives, like John Derbyshire, can't get it. Please look at Steyn's America Alone for a brilliant review of this topic.
Finally, Handy, no kids, no one to clean your decaying ass in the nursing home. That analogy can be extended. The problems of decline are MUCH WORSE than the problems of growth. Much worse.
Handy, unlike me, a man who has worked with Alabama Death Row Prisoners and members of the Chain Gang, you have no concept of the different gradations of evil.
Stuart Koehl| 4.9.11 @ 8:48PM
"One in five of all American mothers have children from different men. "
Anyone who has studied demography or simply done some genealogy would say this is not at all unusual. In the past, when people dropped like flies, it was not unusual for a woman to have several husbands in a lifetime, and children by each of them. Conversely, men were frequently widowed, and when they remarried they had children with the second (or third) wives, who in turn were frequently widows themselves, bringing children from their previous husbands into the marriage.
And let us not forget that our ancestors were not plaster saints, and that illegitimacy was not at all uncommon in the 19th and early 20th century.
Crouse, like many social commentators both left and right, seems not to have much historical perspective, but views the rather exception period of 1945-1965 as somehow normative for American society.
Pelligrino| 4.10.11 @ 1:33AM
Oldfte, thank you. You have it right:
Solid, real, sincere Christian faith. An understanding and life-long devotion to following the Bible.
That is a fail-safe prescription for all of us.
And...please...everyone here, matters not what skin, eye or hair color: Abstinence. Self Control (A Fruit of the Spirit). No sex until you are in Holy (ordained by God Almighty) matrimony. Doesn't everyone know that sexual intimacy is zippo worthless and plastic cheap without THE only genuine love -- the love that we learn from modeling our lives after Jesus.
See I Corinthians chapter 13 for what love is really to be. No woman should EVER settle for less before becoming close to a man. No man should ever think to become close to a woman without realizing that he must love her as Christ loves the church.
Reject all of the pop culture. All of it. Turn off the TV, ignore pop 40 music. Shun movie theatres. Be VERY selective; that's why you can afford a $45 DVD player.
Pop culture leads straight to Satan's Hell. (Men, we know this. Pop culture says it is okay to flirt, carouse a bit, and have an affair or two on the side, right?)
That is not old fashioned; that is the BEST foundation for all the joys and happiness of life this side of Heaven.
One man married to one woman and their kids -- together forever under one roof. That is what makes for a great life, a happy home, a super neighborhood, and a society that functions and is the envy of the world.
Basement Cat | 4.10.11 @ 1:37AM
"Love" lives?
What's "love" got to do with it?
Gordon W.| 4.10.11 @ 10:01AM
Pelligrino, John II and Oldefarte,
Do you guys belong to the Westborough Baptist Church by chance?
PattyMor| 4.10.11 @ 1:07PM
Want to focus people's minds on becoming productive citizens? Eliminate all the federal welfare programs: Welfare, food stamps, housing, WIC, and on and on. End them in place and let no one else in them. Build some orphanages and take care of the kids. If the adults can get their act together and get a job, they can get their kids back. Besides all this welfare does not help the kids or the parents in the long run as they lead lives of desperation. It only helps the venal politicans.
John II| 4.10.11 @ 7:30PM
Gordon W.: Isn't it spelled "Westboro"?
Anyhow--no, never touch the stuff myself. I prefer Grandpappy, and I don't think the Baptists are into expensive whiskey. But if you're offended, I'll just shake the dust from my feet and take my woe-indictments elsewhere.
And now back to "The Ten Commandments" (1956), in which Charlton Heston as a tolerable Moses denounces the backsliders for worshiping the golden calf.
What happened to the direct response button?
Tony in Central PA| 4.10.11 @ 10:14PM
A few times a year, there is a horrific crime involving the death or brutalization of a young child that makes headlines in my small community. The common denominator in these is almost always a live - in " boyfriend " of the mother who has no biological conection to the child.
Its like humans have sunk to the level of animals and now simply follow their instincts to eliminate the spawn of a competitor. Ugh.
albert constantine jr.| 4.10.11 @ 10:43PM
As Stuart Koehl notes, reproduction with serial partners was not uncommon in the past, I recall a biblical question where the question is asked wherein a widow marries her late husband's brothers, and it is asked to whom she would be betrothed in heaven. The modern version of this problem seems to be aggravated by the fact that so many of the unfit baby mamas and daddies haven't actually died, allowing for their continued dysfunctional involvement in the lives of their offspring. Of course, the stereotype of the evil stepmother perpetuated by the Brothers Grimm and others who authored fairy tales suggests that even death does not enhance the situation. While few plans survives contact, the best seems to be to have the children that you can afford to raise and stick around to do it, putting off your own selfish needs until the job is done.
KyMouse| 4.11.11 @ 10:31AM
For a fascinating look at this subject, read "Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage."
Many agencies encourage young women (and to some extent, men) to use contraceptives, but many poor young women actually want to have babies before they marry. Marriage is so special to these women, the book explains, the gals want to postpone it until they can do it just right. Having a baby is something they can do right away; and doing their best to dress the baby well, etc. improves their own self-image.
Concerning the historical perspective on illegitimacy, I would point out that in previous generations, widowed (or divorced, or never-married) mothers often had extended families to help them raise their children. We see this today especially in black families, where grandmothers take over for mothers who can't or won't raise the kids.
In say, the Victorian era, it was common for unmarried or widowed female relatives to move in and help look after their relatives' kids, in exchange for room and board.
Many young unmarried mothers today don't have that kind of support system. This reminds me of the fact that on "Supernanny" (okay, it's a silly example), the couples who have trouble with their kids almost never seem to have other relatives around to help them and share their child-raising wisdom. They seem to have no clue. Yes, I know that the producers look for such families, but I always want to ask, "Don't you people have any grandmothers?"
tono| 4.11.11 @ 1:57PM
Women (gullible creatures at best) have swallowed the lie (perpetrated by the sexual liberationists/predators of the sixties) that it is in their best interest to dress and act like whores. They have liberated themselves into a positon of sex on demand, with abortion and antibiotics ever ready to obliterate the effects of promiscuity. As many have noted, today's young (and not so young) women apparently believe that being a "free woman" means adopting the desperately degenerate lifestyle of male homosexuals.
Daily on the streets of this small Southern city, I see young girls in various states of undress whose clothing, or lack of it, would make a Victorian madame despair of fashion. And their mothers, one can only assume, have happily financed their daughters' descent into lasciviousness.
The answer is simple, if unpalatable to sensitive post-moderns: a return to traditional patterns of authoritarian, patriarchal family structure under the ameliorating influence of Christ and His Church.
The next time you see a half-dressed adolescent parading her wares, notice the emptiness in her eyes, and pray for her.
Creative Recreation | 8.10.11 @ 10:36PM
is good