Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, I personally know a few sibling groups who were raised by the same foster family since they were young. But I admit I don't know the actual percentages we're discussing here. Stability is obviously very important for all children, so I understand where your concern is coming from. I'll try my best to find these statistics & I'll post them here if I find any.
I think in foster care children are usually removed from homes when there are problems, or when they are able to be reunited with their families. So I guess the next question then becomes -- is it best for adoptees to remain in their adoptive families even when there are problems? Because unlike foster children, there is no one checking up on them once those adoption papers are finalized.
I'd appreciate it if you find any stats.
Frankly I think all families should be checked up on via public health services (child clinics which monitor health and development with regular check ups and can report any concerns to child welfare) but I know that would not be a popular way of doing things, at least in the US anyway.
Do you think its selfish for a man or woman to intentionally choose to have children and be single parents while intentionally choosing to deprive the kid of a mother/father. Before I didn't think much about it but then I realized if my mom or dad had me and chose not to let me have a mother/father in my life, I would resent them for doing that.
Yes, but so is parenting with two parents. Having kids is the single most selfish and narcissisitic (sp?) thing we do in our lives.
Frankly I think all families should be checked up on via public health services (child clinics which monitor health and development with regular check ups and can report any concerns to child welfare) but I know that would not be a popular way of doing things, at least in the US anyway.
True, but they give a better idea than just guessing.
But, to rely on something which can be misleading doesn't make sense.
For instance: families with greater income appear to have less troubles with the law than lower income. Is it because higher income families encounter less problems? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps higher income people are able to afford better lawyers(while lower income people get a public defender)and go to "rehab" rather than the alternative for lower income people: jail.
Isn't having a baby somewhat selfish no matter what the circumstances? I mean, do we all think we are such fantastic parents that we are doing a child a favor to parent them? I hope not! We have kids because WE want them, not because we think the kid wants us as parents. So no, becoming a single parent is no more selfish than that.
But, to rely on something which can be misleading doesn't make sense.
For instance: families with greater income appear to have less troubles with the law than lower income. Is it because higher income families encounter less problems? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps higher income people are able to afford better lawyers(while lower income people get a public defender)and go to "rehab" rather than the alternative for lower income people: jail.
But there aren't many variables to be misleading in a statistic on the number of foster children who remain in the same foster home throughout their childhood, they either stay in the same home or not.
But, to rely on something which can be misleading doesn't make sense.
For instance: families with greater income appear to have less troubles with the law than lower income. Is it because higher income families encounter less problems? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps higher income people are able to afford better lawyers(while lower income people get a public defender)and go to "rehab" rather than the alternative for lower income people: jail.
You really are just guessing here. There's quite a bit of data available, so that's not necessary. Children from higher income families have more stability in the home, attend better schools, have better nutrition, tend to have higher emotional and social intelligence. The data for this is collected prior to adult related criminal events. With that said, of course there are outliers , but on average the advantages are clear.
Isn't having a baby somewhat selfish no matter what the circumstances? I mean, do we all think we are such fantastic parents that we are doing a child a favor to parent them? I hope not! We have kids because WE want them, not because we think the kid wants us as parents. So no, becoming a single parent is no more selfish than that.
Agreed 100%. While a parent may not be selfish when it comes to the needs of her/his child, having a child is a selfish decision as are many decisions.
Anyhow, a former colleague of mine decision to move back to Canada to raise her two sons with her family. She decided to have these children purposely on her own (twins). She's an educated 6-figure earner, but thought it best to be around her parents and siblings and they wanted her there. I think her two kids will be far better off than the vast majority of children born into poverty in the US and abroad. The question can really be asked of anyone.
There are two types of choosing. Adoption and natural stuff. In adoption, the adoptive parent is intentionally trying to give the child a better home than the child would have - the alternative is presumably a worse situation than what the single parent can provide. Accordingly, that scenario seems generous as opposed to selfish.
With the natural stuff, when the parent chooses to be a single parent from day one and never intends to allow the other into the child's life, that's a bit different. For example, the man or woman that secretly becomes pregnant or gets another pregnant with the intention of not allowing the child to be a part of the other's life. Or the woman who intentionally does the in vitro with a sperm donor with no intention of having a father for the child. In these cases, the alternative is the child knowing both sides of where he/she comes from. Yes, the parent that intentionally deprives a child of that knowledge about themselves and experience with his/her other parent seems selfish. I think that there may be a reason that it takes TWO people to conceive a child in the first place. I'm not sure that it's just happenstance biology. I'm one of those weird people that can see that my husband brings something different to my child than what I bring. The child benefits from both. So, yes, intentionally depriving a child of that seems selfish but people do lots of things that are selfish in so many facets of life that I'm not sure that this is as huge a deal as it probably was at one time.
ETA: The comments that a two parent household that sucks is bad too is really outside of the scope of the question asked by the OP but I thought that the post re parents that work all the time are selfish was very interesting. I agree. Interesting point (albeit unrelated to the OP's question but interesting point). I think that this is a value judgment however on what is of value to a child. To say that a parent that works all the time is selfish (which I happen to agree with) places value on a parent spending time with a child. You never know that parent may place value in being able to provide a big house and fancy schooling and top notch clothes for the child. That may be where the parents have placed value and therefore may not be intentionally trying to be selfish but, rather, see themselves as quite loving and generous albeit never at home.
Quote:
Originally Posted by capitol
Do you think its selfish for a man or woman to intentionally choose to have children and be single parents while intentionally choosing to deprive the kid of a mother/father. Before I didn't think much about it but then I realized if my mom or dad had me and chose not to let me have a mother/father in my life, I would resent them for doing that.
Last edited by LovelySummer; 05-07-2013 at 09:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In adoption, the adoptive parent is intentionally trying to give the child a better home than the child would have - the alternative is presumably a worse situation than what the single parent can provide. Accordingly, that scenario seems generous as opposed to selfish.
