Having a Baby......?

by LouBelle 39 Replies latest jw friends

avishai

Layla, I agree!! I've worked in the same field and see the same problem. Also, I think that it's VERY important for girls to have a positive male role model. Just about every woman I've dated who has huge issues, it's due to dad not being there, dad being an a-hole, etc.
R.Crusoe

Anyone who is able to provide an enhanced life situation for an otherwise needy child is worthy of their goodwill being utilised in some way or another IMO.
Sometimes it may be advantageous to preserve the childs place and offer support within its own culture and community - which is why some mixed race relationships flounder despite the sincerest of intentions - though its fantastice to see so many successful and loving ones defy those limiters!
But since children in a society will be expected, once adult,, to function as mum or dad to any children they have, it is advantageous if they are part of a loving home with both roles helping nurture their whole psychology into that 'expected' responsible role awaiting them in adulthood!,
Failing that - a close knit community where both role models are well represented is a reasonable substitute - if regular quality time is a reality!
Maybe this is why tribes had less problems because everyone was everything to each other - in this respect?
The tragedy lies in how, when marriages break down, one parent is branded an a-- hole, due to all manner of societies regulations denying them their role no matter how willing they are to make amends or give of themselves - plus how many of them in the first place were the very children having been denied parents themselves in childhood!!
It's as if those being protected today may well be ones who are removed in some way from their own children in adulthood!
Now we all know society strives to put things right, but we also know, like in political situations we see, that it is far from perfect and that all manner of injustice gets steamrollered into private family lives due legislation and professional opinion (sorta elder style psychology and social care)
True - a system is required, but shunning family members completely as deserving of societies hell fire/apostates seems to me a duplication of WT ethics in some cases!
Anyhow I'm straying off topic here - but how to establish both roles in family is a key indicator to future generations dynamic!
So how to do this for single parents is an excellent consideration!
Now in kindergarten, there are often many female role models for girls to gather inspiratrion from!
Again - the male model is often absent the first years in education and so some children are never given quality time or social opportunities to relate to both sexes!
But I think the fundamental basis for all successful child rearing is regular communication, unconditional love and quality time with them introducing them to wider communities they can interact with in wholesome ways! Establishing a comfort in the home - a place to love to be and a sense of belonging and inner calm!
AGuest

How often we say things without any regard for the potential and/or subsequent damage it may do to others.
Dear ones, those who believe that both a mother and a father are ultimately important severely... and unlovingly... discount those people in this world, who, in spite of not having one or the other, or both, still became decent adults. They also overlook the many, many people who had both, and still turned out wacky.
A woman CAN teach a boy how to be a man... IF she bothers to learn about men... and a man CAN teach a girl how to be a woman... IF he bothers to learn about women. In FACT, when a boy turns out negatively, it is very often due to the mother (if he didn't respect her, he most probably won't respect ANY woman), and vice versa for the girl (if he wasn't respectable and respectful, she most probably will seek out disrespectful men). There are, of course, exceptions to every rule, but this is the most truthful. It is also truthful that while two respectful/ respectable parents ARE better than one parent of any ilk, ONE respectful/respectably parent is better than TWO disrespectful/unrespectable parents, or three or four... or more.
Again, the BOTTOM line is that regardless of how many parents there are or aren't, the child must KNOW it is loved. By ONE parent, TWO... or TWENTY. The number truly doesn't matter. If there are two and the child perceives it is NOT loved... he or she will almost certainly have problems.
And for those who refer to statistics that say the lack of a father is the foundation of most of such children's problems, I would argue that it was the present parent who, rather than filling the void allowed it to cause such damage... AND/ORsociety's unfounded position that UNLESS a child HAS two parents... something is "wrong" with it. As implied by some comments here. It is THIS kind of societal judgment that undermines a child's self-esteem, second only to a parent's own corroding of it. Because it says that, in the opinion of those who supposedly "matter" (but truly, they do NOT), such child's existence is, ultimately, "wrong"... and so the child is actually "unworthy."
THAT is the message that is sent and I would implore those who think in this way to STOP IT. It is evil and dark as it sends TO such children the message that they are INFERIOR, UNWORTHY, MISSING SOMETHING... and missing out on something. It is cruel and unloving. And if YOU believe it... and voice it... most assuredly YOUR children believe it... and voice it... to children they know in this position.
You have NO idea who is lurking here, reading this... and I have no doubt that some are from single-parent families, for whatever reason. If you had the privilege of having two good parents, great! If you are in a situation where you are one of two (hopefully, good) parents, excellent! Wonderful! However, you are in NO position to decry those who are not or who come from such a different situation.
And the fact that many of the children who "come through the system" have fatherlessness as a problem is not indicative of anything, for there are many, many more who never even enter "the system."
Forgive me, but I tend to get a little incensed when it comes to undermining the worth of a child... ANY child.
I bid you all peace.
SA, a slave of Christ
Satanus

Don't worry about orphans. A good person, like you should leave something of herself behind. And so, I think you should have yuor own. That way, you have a much better idea of what you're having, it's from your own body. Pick a father w whom you feel comfortable.

S
Layla33

How often we say things without any regard for the potential and/or subsequent damage it may do to others.
Dear ones, those who believe that both a mother and a father are ultimately important severely... and unlovingly... discount those people in this world, who, in spite of not having one or the other, or both, still became decent adults. They also overlook the many, many people who had both, and still turned out wacky.
A woman CAN teach a boy how to be a man... IF she bothers to learn about men... and a man CAN teach a girl how to be a woman... IF he bothers to learn about women. In FACT, when a boy turns out negatively, it is very often due to the mother (if he didn't respect her, he most probably won't respect ANY woman), and vice versa for the girl (if he wasn't respectable and respectful, she most probably will seek out disrespectful men). There are, of course, exceptions to every rule, but this is the most truthful. It is also truthful that while two respectful/ respectable parents ARE better than one parent of any ilk, ONE respectful/respectably parent is better than TWO disrespectful/unrespectable parents, or three or four... or more.
Again, the BOTTOM line is that regardless of how many parents there are or aren't, the child must KNOW it is loved. By ONE parent, TWO... or TWENTY. The number truly doesn't matter. If there are two and the child perceives it is NOT loved... he or she will almost certainly have problems.
And for those who refer to statistics that say the lack of a father is the foundation of most of such children's problems, I would argue that it was the present parent who, rather than filling the void allowed it to cause such damage... AND/ORsociety's unfounded position that UNLESS a child HAS two parents... something is "wrong" with it. As implied by some comments here. It is THIS kind of societal judgment that undermines a child's self-esteem, second only to a parent's own corroding of it. Because it says that, in the opinion of those who supposedly "matter" (but truly, they do NOT), such child's existence is, ultimately, "wrong"... and so the child is actually "unworthy."
THAT is the message that is sent and I would implore those who think in this way to STOP IT. It is evil and dark as it sends TO such children the message that they are INFERIOR, UNWORTHY, MISSING SOMETHING... and missing out on something. It is cruel and unloving. And if YOU believe it... and voice it... most assuredly YOUR children believe it... and voice it... to children they know in this position.
You have NO idea who is lurking here, reading this... and I have no doubt that some are from single-parent families, for whatever reason. If you had the privilege of having two good parents, great! If you are in a situation where you are one of two (hopefully, good) parents, excellent! Wonderful! However, you are in NO position to decry those who are not or who come from such a different situation.
And the fact that many of the children who "come through the system" have fatherlessness as a problem is not indicative of anything, for there are many, many more who never even enter "the system."
Forgive me, but I tend to get a little incensed when it comes to undermining the worth of a child... ANY child.
I bid you all peace.
SA, a slave of Christ
You are so incorrect about interpreting what other people are saying, I truly don't know where to begin. Okay, here's what I want to say; I will not apologize for my position, that's the first thing. Secondly, I have never ever treated another individual with disrespect nor inferred that they were less than because of who their parents were, don't you get on a sermon and imply otherwise, you don't know me. But let me help you out, I have given the clothes out of my closest, the last dollars in my pocket, worked until midnight, hugged children and their parents, watched babies, went to battle so many times for others I have the scars to show for it and I mean that more than figuratively. I have the right to believe that when someone brings a child in this world that they need to start with the a great foundation. I mentored young females, I went in on my days off and spoke to them, they touched me right to the inner part of my soul, I shed their tears with them, I heard their thoughts because no one gives a damn about them because they are poor, are whatever blah blah society thinks or feels. But when I gave my presentations, when I spoke to them about womanhood, I took the time to encourage PROACTIVE parenting, I took the time to talk to them about BEST OPTIONS.
I so disagree with the assertion that a woman can teach a man to be a man. I will explain: There are fundamental things that any human being can give to another human being, but when it comes to certain types of bonding, certain types of situations and growing pains, there are some things only another man can understand because HE EXPERIENCED IT. My father couldn't tell me about facing the world as a woman, he could give me love yes, he could teach me strength yes, he could teach me fundamental human things, but gender specific, he was on the outside and I needed my mother to step in and guide me.
I don't just give the lip service, if you had any idea how many grown big behind men have collapsed in my arms, eyes get all hallow talking about missing their father or having one there in their lives to take them fishing or shoot a ball with them or listening to such anger and resentment and a type of detachment about their own manhood because a father wasn't there, you wouldn't even begin a sermon like this. Did I tell them they were less than because of it, no! Did I treat them any differently, absolutely not! And you are completely and I want to emphasize COMPLETELY incorrect about the world making children from one parent households feel less than, it's not the 1960's, the majority of children born today in the US are born to single parents. I won't even begin to talk about the status of children today in schools all over the country, inner city as well as suburbs. I have had my former clients tell me it is the "in thing", they want to have a baby, much like they are talking about getting another doll to have, hold and cuddle at night. As if that is all it is to have a child! Of course when the "cuddle baby" is too old for that, the parents gets resentful (I have seen that too many times) and generations of mothers in social services of every kind, still stuck in the flux of life because the one and only thing they know how to do is get pregnant and have babies.
Now if someone thinks I am attacking single parents, sorry I am not. I am saying that the best option for a child is to have a father and a mother in their life. If not, two parents giving them the support and love they need. Every study I have read confirms that. Of course in the real world, things happen and you adjust, but why start of saying, "I don't think a father or father figure (someone committed to being in that child's life) is important", I have a problem with that. And that is the crux of my entire criticism. Not that she shouldn't do it, because she's grown and can do what she wants, but I have seen way too many "statistics" and just wanted to highlight the importance of having a father in a child's life. And sorry they statistics are very high.
- 80% of all adolescents in psychiatric hospitals come from fatherless homes.
· 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
· 85% of all youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home.
· 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes.
· 72% of adolescent murderers grew up without fathers.
· 71% of all pregnant teenagers lack a father.
· 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes.
(US Statistics)
An analogy: If you went in a situation and say, HEY I think I am going to just off this cliff without a parachute then I will not feel bad for saying, I think you need to plan to have a parachute before you jump, now sure some people can survive the jump, but I can guarantee that you are going to be at an advantage for having a parachute on your back.
Now, I remember one client I had when I first started, a young man that had gotten into a life of drugs, crime, etc. I helped him get into college, which was difficult, I helped him find a job and another counselor (male) and I, talked to him, encouraged him, he was very bitter about not having a father in his life, very bitter and he would say to me, "I am not going to do that to my kids". Right before I moved away, I ran into him, married, had a child and another on the way. Was in graduate school and had a great job, I swear I remembering driving home crying to myself because I had seen him scruffy, angry, scared, no money. I could go on but I won't. My point is sure there are good, no make it great examples of people that came from single parent homes that actually had a good life, I see him as an example of that, but even from his own words, if you are coming to a situation with a choice, why would you willingly choose to not have a father for your child, when a father is JUST AS IMPORTANT as having a mother.
Anyway, I am not going to go back and forth debating this, but because some things were insinuated that I felt were totally and completely incorrect from my perspective, I wanted to set it straight.
AGuest

I have the right to believe that when someone brings a child in this world that they need to start with a great foundation.
Indeed. However, it appears that you also assume that a “great foundation” can be had ONLY with a mother/father parenting situation. What about mother/mother? Father/father? Single mother? Single father? Grandparent(s)? Who says THESE are not "great" foundations?
There are fundamental things that any human being can give to another human being, but when it comes to certain types of bonding, certain types of situations and growing pains, there are some things only another man can understand because HE EXPERIENCED IT.
This is totally true. However, that a man has experienced a certain thing will not make him less of a man, nor an indecent man. I couldn’t tell my son what it felt like to go through male puberty, of course not. I could tell him, however, that what he was “experiencing” was quite normal, that pretty much ALL men experience it, and that if he NEEDED to speak to a man about it, I would go to the ends of the earth to find one for him where he could. I didn’t need to BE a man to do that.
My father couldn't tell me about facing the world as a woman…
Entirely, no. And some adoptive parents can’t tell a child what it’s like to be a birth parent. That does not mean their foundation is not “great.”
he could give me love yes, he could teach me strength yes, he could teach me fundamental human things, but gender specific, he was on the outside and I needed my mother to step in and guide me.
So, if by some reason your mother had passed away and left only your father to raise you, somehow that “foundation” would not have been “great”? What if your father was a "great" father?
I don't just give the lip service, if you had any idea how many grown big behind men have collapsed in my arms, eyes get all hallow talking about missing their father or having one there in their lives to take them fishing or shoot a ball with them or listening to such anger and resentment and a type of detachment about their own manhood because a father wasn't there, you wouldn't even begin a sermon like this.
I am not disregarding the VOID; I am saying that OTHERS, including the lone parent, can FILL that void. Mothers fish; uncles fish; grandfather’s fish. Neighbor's fish. Coaches fish. Home Ec teachers fish. Father "figures" are everywhere.
And you are completely and I want to emphasize COMPLETELY incorrect about the world making children from one parent households feel less than
I think a poll of such children would show you to be in error. I think that if SINGLE parenting were an accepted standard, perhaps THE standard, such children would have LESS "problems."
It's not the 1960's
And that was my point: “Ward and June” don’t exist for everyone… and so what?
the majority of children born today in the US are born to single parents
I have to disagree; they are the minority, based on the STATISTIC that while it is the lowest figure in the western world, “63% of American children grow up with both biological parents.”
I won't even begin to talk about the status of children today in schools all over the country, inner city as well as suburbs.
The status is not due to primarily absent fathers, as many would like you to believe. The status is due PRIMARILY to poor, inadequate, inexperienced, disinterested, absent and negligent parenting by whatever parent is (supposed to be) present. Again, there are exceptions to every rule, but "present" but abusive, negligent, disinterested, and sometimes uneducated (as to parenting) parents are just as responsible
I have had my former clients tell me it is the "in thing", they want to have a baby, much like they are talking about getting another doll to have, hold and cuddle at night. As if that is all it is to have a child! Of course when the "cuddle baby" is too old for that, the parents gets resentful (I have seen that too many times) and generations of mothers in social services of every kind, still stuck in the flux of life because the one and only thing they know how to do is get pregnant and have babies.
I’m sorry but this illusion is not had just by single women; MOST (and particularly young) women have this “dream.” I hear that from ALL kinds of potential parents (“We want a 'baby'”). And those very same folks come back later, during the toddler, late elementary and teen years to go, “What the heck happened?” What “happened” is that it didn’t stay a 'baby'.
I am saying that the best option for a child is to have a father and a mother in their life.
And I disagree. Unfortunately, however, very many agree with you (and as a result, often choose inappropriately). Maybe this woman did, too:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24026486/?GT1=43001
If not, two parents giving them the support and love they need.
TWO… if GOOD… is always better than one, dear Layla. I said that. I also said, however, that ONE… if GOOD… is better than two, even twenty, who are NOT good.
Every study I have read confirms that. Of course in the real world, things happen and you adjust, but why start of saying, "I don't think a father or father figure (someone committed to being in that child's life) is important", I have a problem with that.
Whoa! I NEVER said I thought a “father figure” wasn’t important. You misquote me and misunderstand me. I fact, I SAID that in the absence of a father, a mother must fill that role.
And that is the crux of my entire criticism. Not that she shouldn't do it, because she's grown and can do what she wants, but I have seen way too many "statistics" and just wanted to highlight the importance of having a father in a child's life.
Well, again, I disagree. Having a father is good... only if the FATHER is good. And very often that is not the case. I am totally sure that there are men here who would have no problem saying that their life would have been just fine without a father, given the one they had. Does that mean I am against fathers? NO. I am no more against fathers than I am against mothers. What I AM against is folks saying that it is NECESSARY to have TWO parents in order for a child to have a “great” foundation. Again, one, two, twenty… doesn’t matter… if the child does not know it is loved.
And sorry they statistics are very high.
- 80% of all adolescents in psychiatric hospitals come from fatherless homes.
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
• 85% of all youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home.
• 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes.
• 72% of adolescent murderers grew up without fathers.
• 71% of all pregnant teenagers lack a father.
• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes.
Here’s what your statistics say, dear Layla – that OF the adolescents in psychiatric hospitals, 80% come from fatherless homes; NOT 80% of adolescents from fatherless homes are in psychiatric hospitals. That OF all homeless and runaway children, 90% come from fatherless homes. NOT 90% of fatherless children are homeless and/or runaways. That OF all youths in prisons, 85% grew up in fatherless homes; not 85% of the children who grew up in fatherless homes are in prison. And so on. What’s missing is what percentage of ALL one-parent children make up those in psychiatric hospitals, those that are homeless or runways, or in prison? And, I am not limiting this to the fatherless (because you seem to forget that my point has to do with two parents, regardless of whether it’s a lack of a father OR a mother).
My point is sure there are good, no make it great examples of people that came from single parent homes that actually had a good life,
But you state this as the exception, which is my POINT: if you and others consider it an “exception,” then the MESSAGE is that it is also inferior. Less than. The "minority." No one WANTS to be of the minority, dear Layla, if the connotation is that such is undesirable.
I see him as an example of that, but even from his own words, if you are coming to a situation with a choice, why would you willingly choose to not have a father for your child, when a father is JUST AS IMPORTANT as having a mother.
Again, you misunderstand and misquote me. My position is NOT simply with regard to fathers or a lack thereof. My position is with regard to two parents being necessarily better than one. I do NOT agree. I do agree that IF both parents are GOOD, then yes, two ARE better than one; however, if only ONE is good… or NEITHER… then only one… or neither… is better than two… or MORE… BAD parents.
I bid you peace.
A slave of Christ,
SA
Layla33

AGuest,
Again, I don't agree with you on many aspects of what you are trying to imply and honestly, however, you are more than welcome to think what you wish. You can say "good", which was not the point, you can discuss whatever you like, having two parents, a mother and a father in a child's life is the best foundation. You saying it is INAPPROPRIATE is insane to me. We are not talking about abusive situations or horrible situations, we are talking about starting, planning, considering and how you should go about it. You are bringing in other aspects of this that is not the point. Of course, when you plan you should consider having two loving parents. Just like you shouldn't sleep with a stranger and not use protection, or maybe you should, I mean maybe you will get an STD or AIDS or maybe you won't? Again, that's how your logic and deduction reads to me.
I plan my life according to the idea I have about what is best for me. I don't want to live on the street, I could panhandle, but I choose to work, that's the BEST OPTION to take care of myself. Honestly, when you tried to imply that two parents, which is exactly how we were created and what the majority, no make the ENTIRE WORLD lives by, but somehow this is inappropriate? I can't even continue responding because obviously you are either completely looking at this from the back end up or you are clearly missing my point and there is no point in continuing. Back end, taking a simply statement about parenting and bringing in worst case scenarios to validate a point you refuse to accept, no matter what other documentation is readily available. There is nothing that you can tell me about statistics, I put them there, I completely understand what they say, but obviously you will find a way to tapdance around this issue.
If you are planning to have a child, and you are in the stage where you are considering bringing a child in this world, consider giving your child the very best options. And I don't need to quote you, give other statistics, blah blah blah. At the end of the day, whenever I volunteer and mentor young women, I will continue to speak exactly as I have and there is nothing you can write that is going to disminish that or ever imply that I am somehow talking down to people, which is insane to me, but whatever you think, more power to you.
My remark is simple, two parents is the best environment to raise a child. Take any qualifier that a reasonable person would imply. I don't agree with devaluing the importance of a father in a child's life.
However, I will say I need to verify the statistics I read where it said that the majority of children today are being raised in single parent households. I couldn't verify your data and I couldn't verify mine, so there's a chance it is incorrect, but I know there are approximately 13.6 million single parents in the United States today, and those parents are responsible for raising 21.2 million children.
That is all.
LouBelle

To Satanus - that is one of the most sweetist/kind things someone can say - THANK YOU!!!
The last long post I read was AGuest , there-after all the requoting and posting becomes a little much.
I came from a single parent home. My mother raised me. I only got to see my father when I was about 8. It wasn't because he didn't want to be there or because my mother didn't want him part of my life. My parents had to seperate becaue of racial issues back then. My mother did a fantastic job raising me. She was strict, I couldn't have everything I wanted but I had what I needed and I had her love. I was never denied access to my father but it was only when I was about 14 that I started getting to know him. We initially went through some major teething problems, culminating in him telling me to get out when I was 17 ( my mother and father remarried when I was 14) However today him and I are close and share a unique bond.
I do not feel that I was or am in any way disadvantaged because my father wasn't in my life from an early age.
This is just a post about me wanting to be a mum either to my own child or an adopted one because I want to be a loving mother, nuturing a child. There is no reason to complicate it people.
AGuest

Sorry, LouBee... truly - .
I'm only passionate about a couple/few things and the well-being of children is one of them. I believe that it is the undermining of their self esteem that leads to the problems they/we have, whether such are intended or not, and regardless of the subtleties used. I also know that most of the folks who do it have absolutely no idea they are... and I am sure they don't intend to... but it does happen. And the results can be devastating: for the child and for society in general. I have no doubt from your posts that you'll do the "right" thing, whatever that may be for YOU... and the child. Again, my sincere apologies and the greatest of peace to you!
Layla, peace to you, as well - we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
A slave of Christ,
SA, who also apologies, again, for her verbosity.
LouBelle

No need to apologise at all. Like you said it's the childs' well being that is most important - and I actually agree with you.
Layla - honestly didn't read all of your posts but I know you had some valid points.
I think we can all agree that as long as one can give a child a loving, nuturing enviroment to grow and flourish I'll be on the right path.

Having a Baby......?

Share this