should one be married before children?

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

It's not the same category at all. The former did NOT involve a conscious choice. The latter did indeed involve a conscious choice. When we bring another human being into the world, we should make every effort to give them the best start in life. Having 2 parents who care about and are active in the care of the child is best. The best scenario for that happening is in a committed, married relationship.

Like I said in my opinion it falls in the same category. Especially in the sense that 1 person alone has to raise the child / children.

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

I think you're rationalizing here. It takes two parents to make a child. It should take two to raise them. Sure, extended family and commuity also play a role. But it starts with the 2 parents who made the child. It's really not rocket science.

I disagree.

1. It does not take 2 persons anymore to make a child. A woman and a spermbank will go along just fine.
2. 1 person very involved and caring is better than 2 person not involved and not caring or even only one of the 2 involved and caring
3. It´s not rocket science, but judging by the number of people who screw up, maybe it should be...

In my opinion children need Love, Care, Protection and the "normal" things such as food and clothing. I see no reason why this has to come from 2 person instead of one.
Or why it cannot come from 4 persons instead of 2...

[James81]

Originally Posted by ssandra

1. It does not take 2 persons anymore to make a child. A woman and a spermbank will go along just fine.

I just spit my drink on the computer. lol

Men no longer required to make babies. All you need is a spermbank where the magical sperm fairies drop sperm from the heavens like manna.

[aelle]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

By the way, a lot of the research is backing up this point of view. Read the following editorial from Slate magazine to see what I'm saying. (To the best of my knowledge Slate could not be characterized as a conservative mag....but some things you just can't get away from):



Forget Juno. Out-of-wedlock births are a national catastrophe. - By Emily Yoffe - Slate Magazine

This article is quite intellectually dishonest. The studies quoted all refer to children of single parents, which the author strictly equates to out of wedlock children. The anectodal testimonies also refer to unstable as well as unmarried relationships, like those of people who do want to get married, just not to the parent of their child... which isn't really what we've been talking about in this thread.

[aggie]

i think what i was feeling from the op, was when did this all happen....

when did people start thinking: i want a child, or i'll have a child, or if i have a child that is unplanned at a bad time, oh well. i don't need a mom or i don't need a dad. i don't need a family. i don't even want to TRY to do it conventionally.

i would think people would like to enter into a marriage with the hope that it would last. not that it would be perfect all the time, and that there will be problems to work out. and if we have a child, we'll really, really think about it on a long term basis and what it entails...like about 18 years. and we would hope that we might actually remain a family during the life of my child.

it doesn't always work out like that...but i think it is a reasonable goal for the stability of children.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

The whole idea that it's two people raising a child is a flawed paradigm. Children have a lot of different influences. It's imperative that a child has strong role models, including a mother figure and a father figure, but it doesn't matter whether it's their actual mother and father that they're looking up to. I come from a situation where my father was not a respectable man but I found a strong father figure in a friend of the family and I found more male role models in history books, fiction, movies, and so on. While it would have been great if my father had been up to the task of raising me right, I had plenty of other influences to make up for it. Ultimately a child is raised by the world at large rather than a couple of people. As long as they have good, strong role models to help them filter their perceptions and think critically they'll turn out okay.

So with that said, if a couple wants to have a child they should think it through and be committed to one another beforehand. However, I consider it equally valid if one of them says, "you want a kid, fine, but you're the one taking care of it" and the other agrees. There's no right or wrong way to do this. Marriage is a social norm, more a government institution than a sacred bond, and it's hardly necessary to ensure the well-being of a child.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

Originally Posted by aggie

when did people start thinking: i want a child, or i'll have a child, or if i have a child that is unplanned at a bad time, oh well. i don't need a mom or i don't need a dad. i don't need a family. i don't even want to TRY to do it conventionally.

Why would you want to do it conventionally? Convention isn't always as stable as it would like to be. But you know that, and I know there's a lot of messed up stuff going on in society where a baby daddy doesn't even want to acknowledge the existence of his kid, and the mama won't go out and get a job so she can actually support the child she wanted so badly. (But didn't give a damn about until she got preggers.)

Marriage isn't the solvent which holds a household together and gives a kid a good start in life. Responsibility is. When people are pumping out children so they can take in bigger welfare checks, and you've got people that won't wear condoms or get abortions, you wind up with a lot of unwanted kids that get treated like **** and grow up to be ****. Some make it out of that okay, the rest live troubled lives. Marriage can't fix that, but looking at the place you're coming from you're hitting on something that would. I take it you look at marriage as something which requires thought and commitment. IE, marriage requires you to act like an adult. It doesn't, but it's true that people acting like adults would eliminate a lot of the problems society has.

[rei]

Originally Posted by aggie

i think what i was feeling from the op, was when did this all happen....

when did people start thinking: i want a child, or i'll have a child, or if i have a child that is unplanned at a bad time, oh well. i don't need a mom or i don't need a dad. i don't need a family. i don't even want to TRY to do it conventionally.

i would think people would like to enter into a marriage with the hope that it would last. not that it would be perfect all the time, and that there will be problems to work out. and if we have a child, we'll really, really think about it on a long term basis and what it entails...like about 18 years. and we would hope that we might actually remain a family during the life of my child.

it doesn't always work out like that...but i think it is a reasonable goal for the stability of children.

aggie, the nuclear family is an ideal that very rarely works out in daily living. even in the 1950s, the Cleaver family model was largely fiction (see Amazon.com: The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap (9780465090976): Stephanie Coontz: Books). as others have said, my opinion is that children need a sense of safety, a sense of being loved, and a sense of being wanted - along with meeting basic needs and continuing up Maslow's hierarchy. marriage is not a requirement for any of these.

if a girl gets knocked up by a guy who is not ready to be a father, but the girl decides she wants the child, i think the child would actually be better off being raised by a biological mother who genuinely wants the child to be, with community sources for a father figure, instead of the woman forcing the man into an unwanted marriage and forcing him to raise a child he doesn't want. children are sensitive, they know if one parent doesn't really want to be there or want the child to exist. this knowledge can lead to significant emotional wounding.

children can be raised alone or in committed partnerships (i don't agree with those who say marriage is steadier - i think many marriages are running on fumes, but they don't end it because of the fantasy notion of married life - ok, so maybe that creates an outward appearance of stability, but there's great inner turmoil in those situations, which, again, children can sense). there are situations where an unplanned pregnancy occurs and both parties actually decide to get married, but i don't see why marriage is meant to be a requirement beyond the personal choice of the people involved. i have never agreed with the notion of an 'illegitimate' child - if the child is conceived, he or she is legitimate. it's as simple as that. if a woman becomes pregnant in a rural area with these more traditional views, an area where there is massive judgment for not conforming, the mother-to-be can simply relocate to a more accepting place.

oh, the story you found about the grown kids moving back with their parents, and they didn't have jobs - was there any way to know whether they were trying to find employment? maybe they got laid off after years of work or maybe medical expenses put them into bankruptcy - did you have enough details to accurately determine it was a matter of responsibility? i dunno about you, but i find the context will often influence how i perceive things.

@YourHumbleNarrator: very nice (<--your first post. i found the latest one to be a bit insensitive, even though - i am rather liberal, i also am not generally cool with people having more kids *just* to get more public assistance, but again this is a complex issue and without knowing a detailed history, going back at least 7 generations, it is not very skillful, for me at least, to make a value judgment since i don't have all the context), especially the first paragraph about the flawed paradigm.

[aggie]

well, i didn't say it was the only way, or that it was always going to work...but even if it is the ideal....is it wrong to try for it, at least if you believe in it or would like it to be that way.


i am not sure i always agree with it takes a village to raise child stuff.


yes, we all must be concerned and intervene when needed...but i believe part of our problem is we have relinquished too much of the raising to others...teachers, society, law enforcement, neigbors, strangers. some people just set their children free on society and do not monitor or disipline and blame others for their shortcomings and failures. we blame crimes, inappropriate behavior, sociopathic behavior on lack of family values and guidance and not enough love. which is it?


and i again i say, regardless of one's feelings on marriage or a traditional mom and dad family....the main issue is the lack of thought process, maturity and preparation and readiness for a lot of people who have become parents.