Psycho Economist

Yguy, this isn't about whether a two-parent family is epidemiologically or psychologically any better than a single-parent family. It's about whether it's somehow intrinsically moral or immoral. We can all argue that to no firm end all day.

On the other hand, I can't help but think that whatever trends may be reported in public health circles are outweighed by individual differences in people. Parents and children. Heck, I'd venture to guess the aggregate negative statistics about single-parent families are reflective of single parenthood being thrust upon people unwillingly or without preparation (e.g. unplanned pregnancies, escape of abusive relationships and deaths of spouses). I can't help but think people who go into it with their eyes open would do better on average. But that leaves no way to predict particular cases... for you or me.

But, I will agree with you that a child cannot "give" love, and any prospective parent who thinks this is the case will be disappointed. But this language on Anna's part may also be a shorthand for the other emotional experiences that come from raising a young child. She is the only person who can address that point regarding her own circumstances.

yguy

Your view of my qualifications for saying what I think is of no interest to me. She asked for opinions, and I gave her mine.

Maybe she should take thalidomide too so that the kid's missing arms can be a source of even MORE strength.

And her kid's gonna be another one. Ain't that great?

If through misfortune one finds one's self up a creek without a paddle, one obviously must improvise...but only an idiot starts the trip without one.

yguy

I see no particular value in the distinction.

I only have my own perceptions to go by, and I've stated what they tell me. I think it's a horrible mistake. I'm sure she can count on attagirls from plenty of others here.

dangin

Good luck. I think you can do it from the 3-seconds that I've known you. Children accept the reality with which they are presented. You love the stuffing out of that kid, and do your best. As a sperm donor, it would be hypocritical of me to say anything else. Millions of children have had shit lives with two parents so it's not like that is the end all be all of upbringing.

fatherphil

put the interests of your child ahead of your own.
perhaps you could look to adopt an older, harder to place child who but for you would go parentless.

dangin

Which is a very compassionate idea, but does not give you something that is made of your genes. Your genes want you to make a copy of them, it's kind of the point of life, it's why you have baby fever or whatever you want to call it. Make one of your own, it's worked for billions of your ancestors, which is why you're here. Why would you spend your resources helping someone elses genes get ahead?

Psycho Economist

So the rightness or wrongness are determined by the likelihood of harm in the statistical abstract? I'm not a utilitarian (much of the time), but everyone is entitled to his opinion.

I don't think it's necessarily good or bad. I think the tremendous capacity for overlap in other aspects of one's life makes concrete prediction based on this one factor like this impossible.

One problem with researching this area is the tremendous self-selection bias. Irresponsible people tend to have sex irresponsibly and end up pregnant. Abused people tend to be abusive. People planning on having a spouse as a fellow parent may never figure out how to cope with managing all angles of parenthood. It's very likely other factors that are related to single parenthood also bring about the other problems you're decrying.

Yes, having a male role-model is beneficial on average. Yes, being able to do good-cop / bad-cop is similarly "good". But those things will not make or break a childhood. And they don't require the biological father to assume those roles, either.

She hasn't gotten many so far. Most of the discussion here seems to be centered on saying it's not necessarily a bad or good thing. If you want to counter-balance the positive responses you think are inevitable, what's the harm in waiting to see if they materialize?

fatherphil

out of selflessness, which is a very good trait to have as a parent.

dangin

Protecting your genes, in the form of your own offspring, is extremely selfish. Looked at that way, selfishness is a far better trait. It's what has made us what we are. And I'm OK with that.

Selfish = my genes thriving

Selfless = my genes wasted

Nature tells me who is right.

babelfish

Anna K,

I think your decision to have a child on your own is completely up to you.

Anyone who says they didn't have a child because of selfish reasons is lying and trying to make themselves look good. I admit I had my two kids because I wanted to raise some kids. Not from some altruistic impulse to sacrifice myself on the altar of motherhood. I wanted to be part of a family. I wanted to raise and nurture a couple of little beings, to watch them grow, and learn, and to be so proud of them, and to have an excuse to go to amusement parks and ride rollercoasters with them. I love being a mom. I freely admit that I did it all for me.

I was single when I turned 30. I made a promise to myself that if I wasn't married by the time I was 35, I'd do my best to get pregnant and raise a child. Fate intervened and I am now married, but if it hadn't turned out that way, I fully expect I would now be a single mom.