Blacks struggle with 72% unwed mothers rate

[Ymra]

As a single mother to a son myself, I completely agree with this. Although we went to court for child support & visitation, my son's "dad" has made the choice not to be a part of my son's life. I can't understand this at all because nothing but death would keep me from my own child. All children need both parents involved in their lives, but boys especially need a father in their lives to teach them how to be a man. My son is mixed & this society sees him as a young black man which I believe will bring more challenges into his life, and it upsets me that his "dad" has left him hanging by setting such a poor example of what manhood is. God knows I've done the best I can, but I know as a woman I can only do so much in this area. I pray every day that my son can be a good, strong & successful man.

And I certainly don't think that single mother's should be vilified for doing the best that they can. We also need to stop pretending not having a father is but a bump in the road or that "having a good man in the child's life" is a replacement for his father. And here is something that is going to get your goat............even a fucked up father is better than no father at all.

In the absence of how TO be sometimes how NOT to be is sufficient.

but I also believe that pregnancy is NOT a basis for marriage. If I had my way, I'd have been married before I had a child.

And this I disagree with. One makes choices that have the greatest chance of success...and by success I mean for their children. There is NO guarantee but not trying is all but a gurantee for failure. And in the end, NOT TRYING is selfish to say the least.

An ATTEMPT is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS,

...better than not trying at all.

 

[Tamstrong]

And I certainly don't think that single mother's should be vilified for doing the best that they can.


And this I disagree with. One makes choices that have the greatest chance of success...and by success I mean for their children. There is NO guarantee but not trying is all but a gurantee for failure. And in the end, NOT TRYING is selfish to say the least.

An ATTEMPT is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS,

...better than not trying at all.

Ideally, yes, BUT it depends on the situation. A marriage based on the wrong reasons is an unsuccessful marriage from the get-go. I knew I had no business marrying my son's dad, because it wouldn't have worked. As a matter of convenience for himself (to not have to pay child support & still get sex), he suggested at one point that we shack up, but living as someone's in-house pussy wasn't excatly an appealing option to me. It didn't matter anyway because he ended up running like hell. That's not the type of person I want to marry. Even though he wasn't willing to, I stepped up & took care of shit, & I did my best to do my job & his. In some respects he did my son a favor by staying away, because he's not man enough to teach a child how to be a man.

As the child of parents with a bad marriage, I can tell you that they didn't do me or my younger siblings any favors by being together. They would've been much better parents apart. I know they loved us, but by setting a bad example of marriage, they did more harm than good. I'd rather my son see the beauty of a healthy, normal marriage or no marriage at all than to ruin his chances at happiness by teaching him that a bad marriage is what's normal.

 

[Kushton Slater]

My dad (I call him my sperm donor), wasnt around for me at all. He always made promises he never kept and he was just a bitch in my book. Thank God I had my great grandma, great grandpa, (he was technically my step great grandpa because he was white and my great grandmas 3rd husband but I never looked at him like that as far as Im concerned he was blood. I mean he was there for me from birth until the day he died.) and my grandpa. They helped fill in the gap of not having a father. They instilled alot of things in me that make the person I am today. My grandparents are honestly the only people I can say I honestly trusted 100%, and it hurts to know that here not around anymore.

I have a lil bro who is 4 (I dont call him my half brother even though he is), and his dad (who was a piece of shit mid level drug dealer who has around 8 kids) is never around so I have to step in and be a father figure for him and I dont have any problems doing it. I never understood how the male ego could be so big to think that just by having a kid makes that person a man. A real man stays around and takes care of his seed. If the only thing you feel validifies your existence as a man is what is in between your legs and how many girls you can knock up, YOU'RE A BITCH.

Having said that, I will also say its the girls fault too. I have plenty female friends and family members who will get with a man that has multiple kids with multiple women and then act all shocked and shit when he knocks them up and dips on to the next piece of ass. Some girls Ive met that this happens to, act as if they got this magic coochie thats gonna lock the man down and shit. And thats far from the truth, and if anything its ignorance, arrogance, and naivety on their part. Then Ive met alot of women who get with men like this, because they are looking for a male figure in their life or because they want attention (no matter how negative that attention maybe).

People like to complain about shit and complain about shit, and the irony is they had/have full control over the situation, but choose to piss it away on a whim or just out of plain stupidity. You can only be bullshitted if you give the bullshit the time of day. It really says something about society when you have people getting daps and props for doing shit that their SUPPOSSED TO DO , such as: taking care of their kid, being a productive member of society, and the list goes on. I dont give men props for taking care of their kids because that is what they are suppossed to do from the get go. And in a sense, you give this bs (deadbeat behavior) the thumbs up because you acknowledge it as the status quo (like oh its ok,its normal).

If you arent in a position to take care of yourself, nonetheless a kid, then you should not be having sex (whether protected or not). Unless you understand what can be the consequences of the action itself (a kid). Condoms aint foolproof and neither is birth control. If you understand that and choose to engage in sex, then w/e happens is on you.

Men and women should both be held accountable for the behavior that takes place in todays society in general, but especially when it comes down to the attitude towards sex, marriage, and kids. People like to justify shit way too much and like to cut people way too much slack. If your dad is not in your life that is not an excuse for you to do the same when you have kids.

 

[Ymra]

Ideally,

Ideally women would make wiser choices.

Wiser choices in men, wiser choices in the use of birth control...wiser choices. So what we are talking about is "ideally" but again, one makes choices that will have the greatest chance of success....

...and an attempt is always better than not trying at all.

 

[Espy]

And I certainly don't think that single mother's should be vilified for doing the best that they can. We also need to stop pretending not having a father is but a bump in the road or that "having a good man in the child's life" is a replacement for his father. And here is something that is going to get your goat............even a fucked up father is better than no father at all.

In the absence of how TO be sometimes how NOT to be is sufficient.

I don't know why that would get anyone's goat, as it's categorically false. I've actually seen far to many cases in which no parent would have been vastly better than the parent that a particular child had, that goes for certain mothers and fathers. An abusive parent or a neglectful parent is not better than no parent, and the idea that being abused or neglected would be 'sufficient' to teach a child not to become an abuser or a neglectful parent themselves, is asinine at the very least.

Whether people like to acknowledge it or not, one parent can in fact be better than two under certain circumstances. Ideally all children would have the benefit of a loving mother and father, but that's sadly just not the reality for a lot of children. Even without having both as positive influences, a child can still thrive and become a great person, but when stuck with two negative influences, or one positive and one negative canceling each other out all the time, it's much harder to grow into a well adjusted person. I don't devalue the influence of a strong father or mother in a child's life, but a strong male or female influence that is not their biological parent is just as good, and certainly better than a worthless excuse for a parent. To say that another male cannot be a substitute for a child's biological father is ridiculous, because I've seen it work, and in fact know people who were a huge improvement over a child's actual parent(s).

Bottomline, children need unconditional love, who it comes from doesn't matter as long as it's there.

 

[Tamstrong]

My dad (I call him my sperm donor), wasnt around for me at all. He always made promises he never kept and he was just a bitch in my book. Thank God I had my great grandma, great grandpa, (he was technically my step great grandpa because he was white and my great grandmas 3rd husband but I never looked at him like that as far as Im concerned he was blood. I mean he was there for me from birth until the day he died.) and my grandpa. They helped fill in the gap of not having a father. They instilled alot of things in me that make the person I am today. My grandparents are honestly the only people I can say I honestly trusted 100%, and it hurts to know that here not around anymore.

I have a lil bro who is 4 (I dont call him my half brother even though he is), and his dad (who was a piece of shit mid level drug dealer who has around 8 kids) is never around so I have to step in and be a father figure for him and I dont have any problems doing it. I never understood how the male ego could be so big to think that just by having a kid makes that person a man. A real man stays around and takes care of his seed. If the only thing you feel validifies your existence as a man is what is in between your legs and how many girls you can knock up, YOU'RE A BITCH.

Having said that, I will also say its the girls fault too. I have plenty female friends and family members who will get with a man that has multiple kids with multiple women and then act all shocked in shit when he knocks them up and dips on to the next piece of ass. Some girls Ive met that this happens to, act as if they got this magic coochie thats gonna lock the man down and shit. And thats far from the truth, and if anything its ignorance, arrogance, and naivety on their part. Then Ive met alot of women who get with men like this, because they are looking for a male figure in their life or because they want attention (no matter how negative that attention maybe).

People like to complain about shit and complain about shit, and the irony is they had/have full control over the situation, but choose to piss it away on a whim or just out of plain stupidity. You can only be bullshitted if you give the bullshit the time of day. It really says something about society when you have people getting daps and props for doing shit that their SUPPOSSED TO DO , such as: taking care of their kid, being a productive member of society, and the list goes on. I dont give men props for taking care of their kids because that is what they are suppossed to do from the get go. And in a sense, you give this bs (deadbeat behavior) the thumbs up because you acknowledge it as the status quo (like oh its ok,its normal).

If you arent in a position to take care of yourself, nonetheless a kid, then you should not be having sex (whether protected or not). Unless you understand what can be the consequences of the action itself (a kid). Condoms aint foolproof and neither is birth control. If you understand that and choose to engage in sex, then w/e happens is on you.

Men and women should both be held accountable for the behavior that takes place in todays society in general, but especially when it comes down to the attitude of sex, marriage, and kids. People like to justify shit way too much and like to cut people way too much slack. If your dad is not in your life that is not an excuse for you to do the same when you have kids.

Excellent post.

Ideally women would make wiser choices.

Wiser choices in men, wiser choices in the use of birth control...wiser choices. So what we are talking about is "ideally" but again, one makes choices that will have the greatest chance of success....

...and an attempt is always better than not trying at all.

It sounds like what is "ideal" to you is to put the onus all on the woman & that's bs. The responsibility goes both ways. I chose to step up & be an adult when shit happened & he did not. To have married that asshole because I was pregnant would have been irresponsible & my son would've been the one to suffer for it. As I said before, it depends on the situation.

I don't know why that would get anyone's goat, as it's categorically false. I've actually seen far to many cases in which no parent would have been vastly better than the parent that a particular child had, that goes for certain mothers and fathers. An abusive parent or a neglectful parent is not better than no parent, and the idea that being abused or neglected would be 'sufficient' to teach a child not to become an abuser or a neglectful parent themselves, is asinine at the very least.

Whether people like to acknowledge it or not, one parent can in fact be better than two under certain circumstances. Ideally all children would have the benefit of a loving mother and father, but that's sadly just not the reality for a lot of children. Even without having both as positive influences, a child can still thrive and become a great person, but when stuck with two negative influences, or one positive and one negative canceling each other out all the time, it's much harder to grow into a well adjusted person. I don't devalue the influence of a strong father or mother in a child's life, but a strong male or female influence that is not their biological parent is just as good, and certainly better than a worthless excuse for a parent. To say that another male cannot be a substitute for a child's biological father is ridiculous, because I've seen it work, and in fact know people who were a huge improvement over a child's actual parent(s).

Bottomline, children need unconditional love, who it comes from doesn't matter as long as it's there.

Very well said.

 

[Ymra]

You can't say.......

it's categorically false.

And then use as support......

I've actually seen

...that really put a cap on anything you had to say after that other than your opinion..

...and one's opinion can not be used to prove right or wrong......it is simply an opinion.

 

[Espy]

You can't say.......


And then use as support......


...that really put a cap on anything you had to say after that other than your opinion..

...and one's opinion can not be used to prove right or wrong......it is simply an opinion.

It's not merely my opinion, feel free to review the records of any social services department in any state and you'll find all the proof you need. Children who are abused and neglected by their worthless parents are not better off than children who are well cared for in single parent households, I would think that'd be pretty much obvious to anyone.

 

[Ymra]

It sounds like what is "ideal" to you is to put the onus all on the woman & that's bs. The responsibility goes both ways. I chose to step up & be an adult when shit happened & he did not. To have married that asshole because I was pregnant would have been irresponsible & my son would've been the one to suffer for it. As I said before, it depends on the situation.

"It depends" is (to me) almost as silly as "I've seen [...insert random reply...], so what you said must be wrong. When used as a proper reply or retort. Of course IT DEPENDS. IT DEPENDS can be used in veritably every question or situation the human mind can come up with...

killing a person is wrong...well IT DEPENDS
riding a motorcycle is dangerous....well....IT DEPENDS
Do you like sushi....well....IT DEPENDS
Its better to bring children up in a stable two parent home....well....IT DEPENDS
Children not raised by their father fair worse than children who are....well....IT DEPENDS

so umm.........yeah....well....IT DEPENDS. Of course it depends.

but NO....

I don't put ALL the onus on women, never suggested it. But before a child is born I believe YES the bulk of the responsibility lies with a woman and her ability to choose wisely.

It is the woman allows the man into her body to impregnate her.....so it is the woman in the end who made the wrong choice if the guy she allowed into her body turns out to be a worthless piece of dog dung.

To have a child by a man who the woman feels worthy enough to carry his sperm, but yet she does not feel worthy enough to make her husband is the ultimate in irresponsible choices.

 

[Espy]

To have a child by a man who the woman feels worthy enough to carry his sperm, but yet she does not feel worthy enough to make her husband is the ultimate in irresponsible choices.

Wow, it must be lovely to view things so black or white, shades of gray can be so distracting.

 

[Ymra]

It's not merely my opinion, feel free to review the records of any social services department in any state and you'll find all the proof you need. Children who are abused and neglected by their worthless parents are not better off than children who are well cared for in single parent households, I would think that'd be pretty much obvious to anyone.

ahh come on man...

If this is going to be an honest conversation I'm going to need you to make an honest reply. As far as the obvious, one would think it OBVIOUS that we are not talking about ABUSED and NEGLECTED children....

I will never use "I have seen" but for the past better part of 10 years I've been and advocate for abused and neglected children in Washington D.C., I am also a senior mentor for the National Guard Youth Challenge program in Aberdeen MD (well that's not really accurate cuz come thursday I'll be relocating to Fort Benning GA) I am certainly no expert, but I do know that I'm talking about...

...I also know that courts have for awhile not been pushing 'drug addicts" (who have not been violent to their children) and even prison inmates to be active and relevant in their children's lives. And these children show far better progress than children who simply din't have dad at all...

...there is a reason. A father's importance simply can not be overstated.

 

[Ymra]

Wow, it must be lovely to view things so black or white, shades of gray can be so distracting.

....well....IT DEPENDS. I'm sorry I couldn't resist. That was silly of me.

Wow, it must be lovely to view things so black or white, shades of gray can be so distracting.

the real reply. Of course there are "shade of grey" but I believe what I stated above is valid and true.

...if a woman deems a man unworthy to be her husband, why on earth would she deem him worthy enough to be father of her unborn child.

 

[Brittney]

I hate when people try to tell other people what they should have, what they should do, what they should be and then say if they don't then they more than likely won't be able to have/be/do some other thing because of something as statistically unreliable as statistics. :smt092

 

[Espy]

ahh come on man...

If this is going to be an honest conversation I'm going to need you to make an honest reply. As far as the obvious, one would think it OBVIOUS that we are not talking about ABUSED and NEGLECTED children....

If this is going to be an honest conversation, I'm gonna need you to say what you actually mean. The bolded portion below states that 'even a fucked up father is better than no father at all', and I certainly consider abusive and neglectful parents to be 'fucked up'. It further suggests that a bad example is better than no example at all... again I consider abusive and neglectful parents to be bad examples.

And I certainly don't think that single mother's should be vilified for doing the best that they can. We also need to stop pretending not having a father is but a bump in the road or that "having a good man in the child's life" is a replacement for his father. And here is something that is going to get your goat............even a fucked up father is better than no father at all.

In the absence of how TO be sometimes how NOT to be is sufficient.

Perhaps you should provide your definition of 'fucked up' if that's not how you meant it, for clarification purposes of course, so we can have an honest conversation. Clearly if we're operating off of different definitions of 'fucked up', that's completely counterproductive.

I will never use "I have seen" but for the past better part of 10 years I've been and advocate for abused and neglected children in Washington D.C., I am also a senior mentor for the National Guard Youth Challenge program in Aberdeen MD (well that's not really accurate cuz come thursday I'll be relocating to Fort Benning GA) I am certainly no expert, but I do know that I'm talking about...

...I also know that courts have for awhile not been pushing 'drug addicts" (who have not been violent to their children) and even prison inmates to be active and relevant in their children's lives. And these children show far better progress than children who simply din't have dad at all...

...there is a reason. A father's importance simply can not be overstated.

Regardless of whether you use 'I have seen', observation is an accepted scientific method. I can't imagine going through my life not applying the things I've observed in my attempt to understand human behavior, that would be a huge mistake. I keep an open mind, but when you observe a given action or result over and over again, it's stupid to ignore there's a pattern.

If a parent poses no danger to a child, I'm fully in favor of them having a relationship, this includes former drug addicts and inmates. I don't discount the importance of a good father, nor a good mother, but kid's are better off without the parent's who choose to be absent from their child's life when it's not convenient to them, as well as those who are not loving and supportive of their children. That's my opinion, based upon my personal observations, and nothing you've said is going to change that. I realize you could quote studies all day on the importance of two parents, that doesn't change the fact that some children do fine with one or none.

 

[Espy]

....well....IT DEPENDS. I'm sorry I couldn't resist. That was silly of me.



the real reply. Of course there are "shade of grey" but I believe what I stated above is valid and true.

...if a woman deems a man unworthy to be her husband, why on earth would she deem him worthy enough to be father of her unborn child.

So you think all children are conceived intentionally? Apparently you also think that people only have sex with people they consider spouse material? Or is it that you think any child conceived outside of marriage should be aborted if marriage isn't going to be attempted?

Not being combative, I'm just trying to understand how things work in your world.

 

[Tamstrong]

"It depends" is (to me) almost as silly as "I've seen [...insert random reply...], so what you said must be wrong. When used as a proper reply or retort. Of course IT DEPENDS. IT DEPENDS can be used in veritably every question or situation the human mind can come up with...

killing a person is wrong...well IT DEPENDS
riding a motorcycle is dangerous....well....IT DEPENDS
Do you like sushi....well....IT DEPENDS
Its better to bring children up in a stable two parent home....well....IT DEPENDS
Children not raised by their father fair worse than children who are....well....IT DEPENDS

so umm.........yeah....well....IT DEPENDS. Of course it depends.

but NO....

I don't put ALL the onus on women, never suggested it. But before a child is born I believe YES the bulk of the responsibility lies with a woman and her ability to choose wisely.

It is the woman allows the man into her body to impregnate her.....so it is the woman in the end who made the wrong choice if the guy she allowed into her body turns out to be a worthless piece of dog dung.

To have a child by a man who the woman feels worthy enough to carry his sperm, but yet she does not feel worthy enough to make her husband is the ultimate in irresponsible choices.

Your two sarcastic remarks don't exactly help your argument or refer to anything I was talking about

"Its better to bring children up in a stable two parent home....well....IT DEPENDS"

What idiot wouldn't want to raise children in a STABLE two parent home? But if both parents aren't stable, it is NOT beneficial for the child because it fosters instability.

"Children not raised by their father fair worse than children who are....well....IT DEPENDS"

Children raised by GOOD fathers always fare better than those who don't have a good father in their lives. But if he is not a good father (neglectful, irresponsible, abusive, etc.), the child is better off without them, because it teaches them to be a bad parent as well.

You make it sound like all single mothers are like the bitches that go out of their way to prevent their children from having a relationship with a good father. Those bitches are selfish & have a lack of love & concern for their children & don't care what's best for them.

It is true that our children pay for our mistakes regardless what those mistakes are. God's intention was for people to marry before they become sexually active & had children which is ideal, but we as humans tend to carry on like a bunch of horny idiots without thinking of the possible consequences. It would probably be best not to have sex without asking yourself if you'd be willing to have a child with that person, and if the answer is no, don't do it. If we're willing to have sex, we need to be prepared for the possibility of pregnacy (no matter how careful we are it can happen). I was a stupid, inexperienced teenager who got her stupid ass pregnant; there's no denying that. But when it happened I had sense enough to know that I had to do what was best for the child that God blessed me with, and what was best was not to marry the sperm donor because it would've been a huge mistake. I feel for the daughters with fathers whose attitude is if they get themselves pregnant out of wedlock that it's all their damn fault. This attitude perpetuates society's jacked up view that it's the woman who carries the burden because she carries the child. This is also why boys grow up thinking that getting a girl pregnant is not their problem, so they don't take their own responsibility seriously.

 

[archangel]

Actually, though millions of people live together without being married, 90% of them don't STAY together without being married. A better restatement would be....

Currently, depending on where you go and who you ask, the divorce rate in the United States is between 35 and 45% and if continued it will reach 50% before the end of the 2020. That is to say out of all the marriages in the United states, upwards of 40% will end in divorce. The rate of couples stating together WITHOUT being married is 90%....

....NOT getting married is all but a death sentence on a union, but everyone sets out thinking "It wont' be us"....the reality is if you do not get married, than hope in having a long union is all but removed.

So, by the raw data and offering no other explanation, YES....a union created outside of marriage and one in which a child is brought into the picture WILL END.........and the child will grow up with just one parent. But lets look at it even deeper.

Couples who were married tend to have greater input from both parents than couples who were not married.

Of the couples who were married, the custodial parents receive more monetary child support than couples who were not married.

Children of DIVORCED parents do better in school than children of parents who were never married

Children of DIVORCED parents have fewer behavioral and development problems than children of parents who were never married.

Children of DIVORCED parents...well you get the idea.

Society has shift and now is COOL NOT to get married......well.....cuz...."bring a child up in dysfunctional home is not healthy" well...that's the common sense version, the real version bases off reality shows this is simply not the case.

.................oh and please no one hit me with the "I know a person who [.....insert random reply.......]

most of these stats are supported by parents who had no business being parents in the first place. It wouldn't matter if they got married because close to the same results would happen.

 

[Ymra]

So you think all children are conceived intentionally?

woah.........did I say this some place? Did I even suggest it?

So, ummm....no, and simply because a woman got pregnant when she didn't intend it, doesn't lessen her responsibly to make...wise...choices is removed.

Apparently you also think that people only have sex with people they consider spouse material?

ummm...no

Or is it that you think any child conceived outside of marriage should be aborted if marriage isn't going to be attempted?

and umm no

That should give you an indication of "my" world.

 

[Ymra]

Your two sarcastic remarks don't exactly help your argument or refer to anything I was talking about.

It wasn't meant to...I was simply showing you that ANYTHING can be answered with

...IT DEPENDS

I was just throwing random shit out there.

 

[Ymra]

most of these stats are supported by parents who had no business being parents in the first place. It wouldn't matter if they got married because close to the same results would happen.

Please refer to post #39