should one be married before children?

[aggie]

i have been noticing that from celebrities on down to teens, at least in the usa...it is becoming more common place for people to have children without the benefit of marriage.

granted accidents happen and there are alternatives to marriage when necessary...but when people intentionally (or unplanned) happily have more than one....maybe two people don't need marriage for sex...but i am not sure about creating new life outside of its boundaries.

thoughts/opinions/experience?

[James81]

Children should come in a highly committed, long-term relationship.

Marriage would be one way of achieving this, but it's not the only way.

In other words, two people shouldn't have kids together unless they believe that their relationship can last, and should not have kids with anyone that they cannot see having in their life for the rest of their life.

[aggie]

i agree with what you say....but do you think there are any lingering social stigmas or legal ramifications that should be taken into consideration?

[aelle]

I believe a strong committed relationship is preferable before having children, but it does not need to be marriage.

Over 50% of the children born today in France are born of unmarried parents. People are figuring out relationship schemes not limited to marriage and that's a good thing.

[ssandra]

I believe that a child is much better off having 1 parent who has really thought it through, wants to have a child and will care for it to the best of it s abilities, than 2 parents in marriage who are just having children because "it is supposed to happen".

If a couple gets married and one of them dies as the childs is being born.. do we say that person will do a worse job raising the child? No, we applaud them for moving on and doing a good job.

For me, deciding to have a child alone is in the same category.

I would actually argue that children of a parent who decides to do this alone are better off because this parent has thought about it a lot more, and it is a consious decision.

(taking accidents and unresponsable parents who just get pregnant out of the equation. Just talking about consious choice here)

[aggie]

i take it there are no social/legal problems in france regarding this, then?

[James81]

Originally Posted by aggie

i agree with what you say....but do you think there are any lingering social stigmas or legal ramifications that should be taken into consideration?

Social stigmas are a non-issue. It's no one's business but the people involved whether they decide to have children or not. So, that's a no on that part.

Legal ramifications? Well, if you are a man, you need to be EXTRA SUPER cautious about it.

[aelle]

You're right, ssandra. In my ideal world children would be desired by however many adults are planning to raise them. Those adults should have their **** together beforehand, and that includes being clear in their relationship.

[aelle]

Originally Posted by aggie

i take it there are no social/legal problems in france regarding this, then?

Nope. As far as I know, the only difference for a child born within a marriage or outside is that for a married couple, the husband is automatically declared as the father unless proven otherwise, whereas if you're not married, he has to fill the paperwork when declaring the birth. But legal rights and social acceptance are exactly the same now.

[aggie]

i agree about the conscious choice to have a child and want it and love it and care for it even if alone being a better alternative than some. i also have no problem with gay couples/individual being parents. but i also think that the lack of what a family is/was/represents has obviously changed too.

sometimes i think people of celebrity and wealth and alternative life styles (and i don't mean sexual preference here) has somehow given an irresponsible message to youth. even it their ability and conscious choice makes it ok for them...it isn't for everyone else.

i read an article about grown children and their kids moving back in with grandma and grandpa....and they are young adults not married, with no jobs and new babies!...i am sorry...i just want say....STOP already!

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by aelle

Nope. As far as I know, the only difference for a child born within a marriage or outside is that for a married couple, the husband is automatically declared as the father unless proven otherwise, whereas if you're not married, he has to fill the paperwork when declaring the birth. But legal rights and social acceptance are exactly the same now.

Same in Netherlands and Belgium

[Coffeesmurf]

Originally Posted by aggie

i take it there are no social/legal problems in france regarding this, then?

Over 50% of babies are born outside marriage in Denmark is well. There's no social or legal differences and definitely no stigma associated with it. Maybe because religious people are the minority in Denmark.

Personally, I don't think there's any reason to get married before having children.

[aggie]

i don't think religion has anything to do with it.

again, this implies there is something wrong with people that MAY base their decisions on a particular faith.

[Coffeesmurf]

I just meant regarding the stigma. I have a hard time seeing why there would be a stigma associated with having children outside wedlock, that wasn't based on religion, when there's no legal differences.

[brendannz]

I know a couple that got married and had one kid together, and then the wife got pregnant with another man, and so the couple split up, I don't know if they got divorced, but the separated

and now they're getting back together again, so the guy is going to father a the child who he is not the biological father to in the family..

I'm not sure how that's going to work, that's their business though, I guess..

According to the book The Selfish Gene, though, (I think it was) 10% of babies in the world are born to a father who is not the real biological father.

I can see genetic resemblance in both my parents though..

I think parenting should be treated as a serious life-long commitment, more serious than marriage itself, I'd think.

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Coffeesmurf

I just meant regarding the stigma. I have a hard time seeing why there would be a stigma associated with having children outside wedlock, that wasn't based on religion, when there's no legal differences.

I think we're just saying that if you're going to have kids, you want to be a life-time parent, and not someone who disappears

[aggie]

not really. society has stigma, right or wrong, and maybe just in usa, which can be detrimental to a child.

legally i am talking more like the issue of name, and perhaps financial/support problems....as long as two people are together, even if married, maybe not so much....but if they breakup or one parent is left alone....this can be difficult.

again, unless one is financially independent and secure.

[Coffeesmurf]

Originally Posted by brendannz

I think we're just saying that if you're going to have kids, you want to be a life-time parent, and not someone who disappears

I agree - but I don't think that has anything to do with marriage.

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Coffeesmurf

I agree - but I don't think that has anything to do with marriage.

Yeah, I guess that's a subjective one, like I had the parents who were married and I always lived with them when I was growing up, so that seemed the norm to me.

But then it's like, at what age do you not need your parents to be around you all the time, and is it possible to have 2 great parents who don't live together? The answer is blowing in the wind, (I guess)

[Coffeesmurf]

Originally Posted by aggie

not really. society has stigma, right or wrong, and maybe just in usa, which can be detrimental to a child.

legally i am talking more like the issue of name, and perhaps financial/support problems....as long as two people are together, even if married, maybe not so much....but if they breakup or one parent is left alone....this can be difficult.

again, unless one is financially independent and secure.

I guess it's just the cultural differences. There's no stigma from society at all here in Denmark. Legally, there's no difference here from being married or not - for instance, the father still has to pay child support, even if they are not married. Actually, even if a guy "just" has a one night stand and makes a girl pregnant by accident, he's forced to pay child support.

[Coffeesmurf]

Originally Posted by brendannz

But then it's like, at what age do you not need your parents to be around you all the time, and is it possible to have 2 great parents who don't live together? The answer is blowing in the wind, (I guess)

Personally, I think it's way more healthy with two parents with split custody bringing up the child, than two parent living together "for the sake of the children" in a loveless relationship.

As for women consciously choosing to raise a child on their own, I'm not a big fan. Maybe because I know first hand how damaging it can be to grow up without a father/other male "role model".

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Coffeesmurf

Personally, I think it's way more healthy with two parents with split custody bringing up the child, than two parent living together "for the sake of the children" in a loveless relationship.

interesting, good call, I think. If you're right, you're saying that marriage is exclusive from parenting.

But I'd say the 2 go together well, but nothing is and nobody is perfect I guess.

[Coffeesmurf]

Originally Posted by brendannz

interesting, good call, I think. If you're right, you're saying that marriage is exclusive from parenting.

But I'd say the 2 go together well, but nothing is and nobody is perfect I guess.

Well, it's just that I don't see much difference between married parents in a committed, loving relationship raising a child - and parent doing the same, but without rings on their fingers

[aggie]

i think a key word to any scenario, in or out of marriage is RESPONSIBILITY.

to me, if unmarried kids with no jobs and 3 kids still in diapers are moving back in with mom and dad, and this is considered ok...something started off wrong at least one generation back.

if anyone has to be forced to pay child support...which, given the alternative is a good thing....but that is another example, in any country, the lack of a personal sense of responsibility.

i agree it has to be a well thought out, on long term basis decision....but, unfortunately some married people aren't even doing that.

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Coffeesmurf

Well, it's just that I don't see much difference between married parents in a committed, loving relationship raising a child - and parent doing the same, but without rings on their fingers

yeah, I just figured that if they have the rings on their fingers, they probably live together, and have more access to the kids, which you'd think would be healthier..

[chrisbelle]

I think that children need to know who they are, where their identity lies. Marriage provides this. Can 2 people who are not married be loving, loyal, and devoted to one another - sure. But think of it from the perspective of a young child. In my experience, children tend to think of things rather simply, but sometimes it seems they are wise beyond their years. Marriage sends the message to the children of that relationship that there is a permanency in that relationship. I know my girls love looking through our wedding album again and again. I'm not sure why. Perhaps it gives them a sense of identity, of beginning, of 2 people who committed to a relationship many years ago and who are still together today. At least that's the way I think it's supposed to work. What do you think?

[lifetimelearner]

Originally Posted by Coffeesmurf

Well, it's just that I don't see much difference between married parents in a committed, loving relationship raising a child - and parent doing the same, but without rings on their fingers

I am going to have to agree with you
there is too much emphasis on rings
and a piece of paper and not on loving each other

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by aggie

i have been noticing that from celebrities on down to teens, at least in the usa...it is becoming more common place for people to have children without the benefit of marriage.

granted accidents happen and there are alternatives to marriage when necessary...but when people intentionally (or unplanned) happily have more than one....maybe two people don't need marriage for sex...but i am not sure about creating new life outside of its boundaries.

thoughts/opinions/experience?

I agree with your thoughts. Usually live-in relationships are less stable than married relationships. So, in theory it's true that 2 people living together can be just as committed or more committed than 2 married people; in practice, it's usually the marriage relationship that is more stable.

Also, one can not ignore the legal/financial benefits of marriage. In general, there are benefits related to tax breaks, social security, property, etc. that you just won't get if you're living together unless you pay a lot of money to a lawyer to essentially draw up a similar contract that will still have less weight than the marriage contract. Maybe the government shouldn't recognize marriage in this way. But the reality is that it does.

In general, people who have kids out of wedlock are much more likely to experience financial and emotional distress. And their kids feel that distress, too.

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

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by ssandra

If a couple gets married and one of them dies as the childs is being born.. do we say that person will do a worse job raising the child? No, we applaud them for moving on and doing a good job.

Part of the reason why we applaud them is because we KNOW it's usually a lot more difficult to raise a child alone than it is as part of a couple.

Originally Posted by ssandra

For me, deciding to have a child alone is in the same category.

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.

Originally Posted by ssandra

I would actually argue that children of a parent who decides to do this alone are better off because this parent has thought about it a lot more, and it is a conscious decision.

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.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by aggie

i agree about the conscious choice to have a child and want it and love it and care for it even if alone being a better alternative than some. i also have no problem with gay couples/individual being parents. but i also think that the lack of what a family is/was/represents has obviously changed too.

sometimes i think people of celebrity and wealth and alternative life styles (and i don't mean sexual preference here) has somehow given an irresponsible message to youth. even it their ability and conscious choice makes it ok for them...it isn't for everyone else.

i read an article about grown children and their kids moving back in with grandma and grandpa....and they are young adults not married, with no jobs and new babies!...i am sorry...i just want say....STOP already!

Aggie, I am gay and while I pretty much think 2 loving parents, gay or not, is better than a loving single parent....I still think it is best for a child to be born to his/her married biological parents. In all the scenarios I am assuming the people involved love and care about the child (comparing like with like)

Men & women are just different and kids need to get the male/female "energy" or "vibe" from parents of both genders. The scenario where that's most likely to happen is the married biological parent scenario. Growing up is hard enough as it is. We shouldn't put more barriers/handicaps in children's way than already exist.