NYT Article on "Rise of Single-Parent Families is Not a Good Thing"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is stupid

I was raised in a Catholic area on Long Island. everyone had like 12 kids no divorces omg

Well my single mother of four .( Dad was a complete shit.)Raised four great kids pulled us out of Catholic school because abuse was rampant in ours.

Three doctors and a computer scientist. All well adjusted. No one in a cult.

Yeah single mothers rock.

Single mothers don't rock. You were an outlier.

or not, perhaps the OPINION piece is just confused between correlation and causation.

Do you really believe that?

If you read the actual research it says that it all comes down to resources. Women who have an education and resource have the same outcome as 2 parent homes. Also, it says if the woman has resources, but the husband does not bring resources to the marriage, the marriage privilege is erased.

The vast majority of the women raising kids alone don't have the resources. That's why the opinion holds.

Then say that, say poor women who are single parents are not a good thing, but if you have resources being a single mother has not affect on your children's outcome.

Also say being poor is not a good thing because being married and poor is "not a good thing".

Are you slow or something? Why does the obvious need to be pointed out to you?

So you don’t understand the science.

Being poor is bad not being a single parent.

So we should celebrate and encourage poor single parenting because it works out for rich single parents?

We should do research that is responsible.

Being poor is bad for children regardless of their parents marital status.

If women have resources then they should not be compelled to marry simply because they want a child.

Poor people should also not be compelled to have children they can’t afford.

Write an article/book telling poor married people to stop having children because it’s “not good”.

Sorry you don't like the message. People make bad choices, nobody is compelling them to make bad choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like the most obvious conclusion ever

except it's kids in homes with men that are most abused. I mean sure, they might have more money but they are more likely to be beaten or raped

“Men,” not DAD, as in the kid’s biological father. Huge difference.

Yes, mom's boyfriend is the biggest risk to the kids. Not just and man.

+1 Women need to choose their mates very carefully.

Family members are a bigger risk

Really? Which ones?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like the most obvious conclusion ever

except it's kids in homes with men that are most abused. I mean sure, they might have more money but they are more likely to be beaten or raped

“Men,” not DAD, as in the kid’s biological father. Huge difference.

Yes, mom's boyfriend is the biggest risk to the kids. Not just and man.

+1 Women need to choose their mates very carefully.

Of the male perpetrators, 51% were biological fathers. The second largest group of male perpetrators was nonparents (26%) who included male relatives (12%), male nonrelatives (13%), and those with a combination of nonparental relationships (1%). Boyfriends accounted for 10% and stepfathers for 8%.

So stop having babies with losers and then inviting more losers into your home.

[Anonymous]

There mere fact that people don't know the difference between an article and an opinion piece makes me despair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like the most obvious conclusion ever

except it's kids in homes with men that are most abused. I mean sure, they might have more money but they are more likely to be beaten or raped

“Men,” not DAD, as in the kid’s biological father. Huge difference.

Yes, mom's boyfriend is the biggest risk to the kids. Not just and man.

+1 Women need to choose their mates very carefully.

Of the male perpetrators, 51% were biological fathers. The second largest group of male perpetrators was nonparents (26%) who included male relatives (12%), male nonrelatives (13%), and those with a combination of nonparental relationships (1%). Boyfriends accounted for 10% and stepfathers for 8%.

Okay… but presumably, more kids love with their biological father than other men… what percentage of kids who live with their fathers were abused, compared with what percentage of kids who live with mom’s boyfriend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like the most obvious conclusion ever

except it's kids in homes with men that are most abused. I mean sure, they might have more money but they are more likely to be beaten or raped

“Men,” not DAD, as in the kid’s biological father. Huge difference.

Yes, mom's boyfriend is the biggest risk to the kids. Not just and man.

+1 Women need to choose their mates very carefully.

Of the male perpetrators, 51% were biological fathers. The second largest group of male perpetrators was nonparents (26%) who included male relatives (12%), male nonrelatives (13%), and those with a combination of nonparental relationships (1%). Boyfriends accounted for 10% and stepfathers for 8%.

So stop having babies with losers and then inviting more losers into your home.

This is such a moronic comment, poster.

I could literally spend the rest of the week posting stories about men who looked every bit an accomplished and wonderful husband/father prospect but ended up being a child beater, wife beater, child molester, family annihilator.

You think you’re special and smarter than other people, but you have no idea if there is a monster in the bed beside you - until the mask slips away and you find out the hard way.

[Anonymous]

I have read quite a bit about this and the research on divorce and kids is very mixed. In general, yes, it's not good in terms of impacts on kids. But if the divorce is amicable and children are shielded from the impacts, kids can do very well and it can be better for them than being in a situation with fighting.

There are many many things kids can and do experience that are worse than divorce. For example having a severely depressed parent or abusive sibling or bullying at school - these can all have more negative impacts on kids.

I was not at all surprised to read that the author is married with three kids. She no doubt brings her own bias into this. There are many college educated professional people who are terrified to get a divorce because they are afraid of stereotypes. So they stay in crap marriages and end up having unhappy kids, all to avoid the stigma of.divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need to adequately and accurately prepare people for marriage and the rigors of family life. You know - bring people down to reality. I think Americans have a very ambitious view of marriage and partnership that rarely aligns with reality - hence so many are absolutely miserable. We need to better prepare young people for being heads of household. Our current navel-gazing/everyone is special/take me as I am/fragile culture is doing nobody any favors.

+1 to the bolded. How much time in school is spent on learning about how to be married, raise kids, and run a household?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is stupid

I was raised in a Catholic area on Long Island. everyone had like 12 kids no divorces omg

Well my single mother of four .( Dad was a complete shit.)Raised four great kids pulled us out of Catholic school because abuse was rampant in ours.

Three doctors and a computer scientist. All well adjusted. No one in a cult.

Yeah single mothers rock.

Single mothers don't rock. You were an outlier.

DCUM is supposed to be full of intelligent people, yet this happens more often than not.

Poster: humans are born with 10 fingers and 10 toes. That the normal human anatomy.

Reply: You’re wrong! I have 11 toes so clearly 10 is not the norm!

Poster: humans with 2 parents in the home are born with 10 fingers and 10 toes. That the normal human anatomy.

Reply: humans with single mothers also have 10 fingers and 10 toes.

Poster: OUTLIER!

Um…no

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like the most obvious conclusion ever

except it's kids in homes with men that are most abused. I mean sure, they might have more money but they are more likely to be beaten or raped

“Men,” not DAD, as in the kid’s biological father. Huge difference.

Yes, mom's boyfriend is the biggest risk to the kids. Not just and man.

+1 Women need to choose their mates very carefully.

Of the male perpetrators, 51% were biological fathers. The second largest group of male perpetrators was nonparents (26%) who included male relatives (12%), male nonrelatives (13%), and those with a combination of nonparental relationships (1%). Boyfriends accounted for 10% and stepfathers for 8%.

So stop having babies with losers and then inviting more losers into your home.

This is such a moronic comment, poster.

I could literally spend the rest of the week posting stories about men who looked every bit an accomplished and wonderful husband/father prospect but ended up being a child beater, wife beater, child molester, family annihilator.

You think you’re special and smarter than other people, but you have no idea if there is a monster in the bed beside you - until the mask slips away and you find out the hard way.

Please. Many people have enormous blinders on and refuse to acknowledge red flags and warning signs. Stop being a gullible moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duh. This is something that conservatives already know and have known for years.

Highest rate of single mothers is in conservative states

And do you know why that high rate is true?

Conservative values

Nope

[Anonymous]

Society already overwhelmingly favors two-parent families in literally everything. That’s why it’s so hard to be a single parent, duh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is stupid

I was raised in a Catholic area on Long Island. everyone had like 12 kids no divorces omg

Well my single mother of four .( Dad was a complete shit.)Raised four great kids pulled us out of Catholic school because abuse was rampant in ours.

Three doctors and a computer scientist. All well adjusted. No one in a cult.

Yeah single mothers rock.

Single mothers don't rock. You were an outlier.

or not, perhaps the OPINION piece is just confused between correlation and causation.

Do you really believe that?

If you read the actual research it says that it all comes down to resources. Women who have an education and resource have the same outcome as 2 parent homes. Also, it says if the woman has resources, but the husband does not bring resources to the marriage, the marriage privilege is erased.

The vast majority of the women raising kids alone don't have the resources. That's why the opinion holds.

Then say that, say poor women who are single parents are not a good thing, but if you have resources being a single mother has not affect on your children's outcome.

Also say being poor is not a good thing because being married and poor is "not a good thing".

Are you slow or something? Why does the obvious need to be pointed out to you?

So you don’t understand the science.

Being poor is bad not being a single parent.

So we should celebrate and encourage poor single parenting because it works out for rich single parents?

We should do research that is responsible.

Being poor is bad for children regardless of their parents marital status.

If women have resources then they should not be compelled to marry simply because they want a child.

Poor people should also not be compelled to have children they can’t afford.

Write an article/book telling poor married people to stop having children because it’s “not good”.

Sorry you don't like the message. People make bad choices, nobody is compelling them to make bad choices.

Sorry you lack logical reasoning skills. Having a child on your own is not a bad decision.

Being poor is a bad decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like the most obvious conclusion ever

except it's kids in homes with men that are most abused. I mean sure, they might have more money but they are more likely to be beaten or raped

“Men,” not DAD, as in the kid’s biological father. Huge difference.

Yes, mom's boyfriend is the biggest risk to the kids. Not just and man.

+1 Women need to choose their mates very carefully.

Of the male perpetrators, 51% were biological fathers. The second largest group of male perpetrators was nonparents (26%) who included male relatives (12%), male nonrelatives (13%), and those with a combination of nonparental relationships (1%). Boyfriends accounted for 10% and stepfathers for 8%.

So stop having babies with losers and then inviting more losers into your home.

51% were biological fathers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like the most obvious conclusion ever

except it's kids in homes with men that are most abused. I mean sure, they might have more money but they are more likely to be beaten or raped

“Men,” not DAD, as in the kid’s biological father. Huge difference.

Yes, mom's boyfriend is the biggest risk to the kids. Not just and man.

+1 Women need to choose their mates very carefully.

Of the male perpetrators, 51% were biological fathers. The second largest group of male perpetrators was nonparents (26%) who included male relatives (12%), male nonrelatives (13%), and those with a combination of nonparental relationships (1%). Boyfriends accounted for 10% and stepfathers for 8%.

So stop having babies with losers and then inviting more losers into your home.

51% were biological fathers

And? Stop having sex with losers. Do better.