I think you're confusing the terms "father" and "husband".

Also, assuming that families that consist only of a mother and child(ren) are so by the mother's(or father's) choice.

And assuming that if a child's father is not living with him/her...that the father is not involved financially (or to what physical and emotional extent) with the child.

Stereotyping leads to a number of false impressions and assumptions.

Huh??? to monica. pa

I think the OP is just saying two parents TOGETHER are what kids need......

I agree.

My niece and her boyfriend have 3 kids (so far). They recently moved from New Yorek to Florida. I wish them well but really wish they'd get married.

YEA Monica! Absolutely Stereotyping leads to a number of false impressions and assumptions.

.why would women outside that culture choose to have and raise a child or children without the emotional and financial aid of a partner?

Sis was married to a wonderful husband. A great pal,sincere friend kind of guy. They had a terrific child after 4 years of marriage but dear B-I-L was a complete failure as a father emotionally. I must say he did say he really didn't want children yet before the baby was born and the pregnancy was a failure of the birth control method. They split when their child was 3, Dear B-I-L did send support money for a few years. Then he was gone. Sis reared her son and supported him without financial help from anyone. My first husband became a father like figure to her son and did so very well on the occasions when a man's input was necessary for a growing boy/young man. Even though a woman knows the manly things it is easier emotionally for a young boy to ask a man. After her first husband was such a disappointment sis decided she would rather not marry again but wanted another child. Shocked people NOT get a husband help-mate for her next child? She went solo and had insemination. Her daughter is amazing and my ex also is a father figure to her. How does a little girl learn to dance except by standing on daddy's shoes. Having a loving Uncle of course!
Just because a man can be a biological father does not necessarily make him a Supportive loving DAD. My ex could not father a child and he is quite thrilled he has had some father role in the lives of my nephew and niece. I know other women who have sidelined a man and can do everything financially for a child or more but yes a man like figure is not a bad idea and there are men in families, in Big Brothers and other fraternal organizations that would help the emotional side of child rearing.

As for who raises a child while Mom is working? Since many families are now two income homes there is a question of
WHO is raising children when the parents are at work NOW!? HMMMMMM? If you really thnk a man has to be in the childs life and there is none among family and friends, man nannies are an up and coming thing.
Life goes on and society changes.

CT

I see some professional women watching their biological clocks ticking toward the time when it might be too late to have a child, yet they want one. No husband is in sight. So they sometimes make the choice to become a single mother. Our schools have after school care and many businesses have childcare on site, and a women who does well financially can make arrangements for childcare. I think we all agree that a loving, supportive father would be ideal, but it is not always possible, even in some marriages.

However, it is sad to see this new attitude in young people that a family setting is not a goal for child rearing. Look at all the tv, music and movie stars that they admire who do not marry before having children. There is a different message out there for this generation.

I second what coloredthumb said.
Donna

Until you have something happen in your own family and are aware of the problems with a single parent you should not judge others. For whatever reasons their are many single parents, and yes I do include men. We have 3 acquaintances where the father is or will be raising the children. One mom died of cancer and the other in a boating accident. As a senior, I see way too many people some much younger than myself condemning these families and yet they are truly wonderful people. That is when the community and family can help.
The other thing is where I used to live, hundreds of parents, and yes I do mean hundreds of parents, leave for work at 4-5 am and, drive up to 2-3 hours on freeways to a big city, get back home between 7-9 pm and haven't the slightest idea of what the kids did all day. Some were in day care, some by themselves and many in gangs. These are the latch key kids. Yes the attitude is changing but we as adults can also help. Even the parents who don't drive so much feel like they have to work to pay house payments, car payments, sports fees, music dues, sports fees/dues, and yet when we asked them for help with a youth group- too busy--no money.
Sorry, this is a real sore spot for me.

I have a DD that is 32 years old, single Mom.
Her first marriage ended in divorce, wives and girl friends on the side don't go well together! This was after a child was born. My DGS's Daddy is involved and does pay child support and helps with "extra's". He was a lousy husband but is DGS's Dad, and always shall be.
DD then remarried. They had my DGS#2. DD's DH, who was a very wonderful man BTW, died of cancer when DGS was almost2. DGS will NEVER have his father.
My DD works very hard and is supports herself and her boys. Yes, she gets a SS check every month for her youngest. DSIL paid many years by working not one but 2 full time jobs! It is a struggle for her sometimes making ends meet. Would she do everything all over again? In a heartbeat!!!! In spite of all the hard times, handling pretty much everything on her own (I mean maintaining a home, working and dealing with sickness,practices,school and daycare...she says there is NOTHING that equates with the love of her 2 boys! Does she wish she had a partner in life? I would guess so. But she isn't looking. She said she had the BEST with my youngest DGS's Daddy and no one will ever measure up or bring her as much happiness as he did.

Speaking of what Marie said and single parents, my DS (age 27)is a Daddy, not married, never was. I wish he wasn't, but none of us would give up his sweet DD! Never. Ever. DGD's Mother is an extremely difficult, minipulative person, his time with his daughter is way too few and far between and treasured beyond anything else in his life. He travels 300 miles to pick up and return his DD during visitation. DGD's Mother cut us all off from that precious little girls life for months! It took a hard fought and many $$ court battle to get everything ironed out. Does he provide financial support? Yes. Child support. and Above and beyond. My DS voluntarily pays half of her clothing, half of her dance lessons,half of her swimming lessons, he will also pay half of her Catholic schooling this fall. He also provides all insurance and he pays all medical deductibles. He is involved with what her mother will let him be, which means she tells him how its going to be! Fair to him?? He!! no! But he is through fighting her on almost everything. He does what he has to do to try and keep peace.
My grandchildren are not on public aid as you called it. Not everyone that is a single parent is on it.

One more thing here you should realize, many people that do get public aid ARE working...there is NO extra money. A child is expensive. How can someone working for minimum wage even begin to think of health insurance or provide food for an entire month. People on it usually don't get rich.

Yes, I've heard the arguements of abuse. There are honest people in the world though.

My neighbors are part those stats. They have two children, both extremely well cared for and they as it turns out were planned. They have a beautiful (and rambunctious) 4 year old boy and a darling daughter who is less than a year.
They are not married. So what?
An article I read about these stats did mention that many families, who are living together, intact families are headed by unmarried parents.

If it seemed that *I* was 'stereotyping', that was not my intent. Perhaps the Feds who put out the stats were? It was they who counted 'births to single mothers between 20 - 30+'. (I also asked in my OP if they might be missing the mothers who lived with but were not married to the fathers of their children.)

I made a distinction between mothers who are single due to divorce or death and those who purposely become mothers while single.

I'm asking why a woman would take on bearing and raising a child or children *deliberately* as a single caregiver. Don't we all know how difficult it is to do that?

chisue
I'm asking why a woman would take on bearing and raising a child or children *deliberately* as a single caregiver. Don't we all know how difficult it is to do that?

i believe many of us answered that but to clarify a bit. . Wanting a child, loving it and making sure you do your best is something that just IS. . Even when there are 2 parents in the picture it is hard to rear a child There is no guarantee you will have the partner all the child's life and if you want that child bad enough to make the choice to do it alone it is usually with a lot of thought and making the arrangements to do what is necessary for a happy healthy child.
I know many single parents (some are single by choice some are single because of death or divorce).and most are doing okay I know some parents together who are horrible parents and providers of love and physical necessities but they aren't under watch or scrutiny because they have done the traditional get married and have babies thing. Mommy and Daddy together is not the perfect child rearing situation in all cases, I'm a believer in the adage It takes a village. to raise a child . I hope to always be able to help a loving parent with the care and well being of their children.

CT

I feel as though I am looking at this as a "Why do this?" and hearing back how people have *coped* with the PROBLEM.

That's my point. Why set yourself and a child up for the harder road?

I do not accept, "Because I want a baby," as a good reason for single parenthood. Is this in the best interests of the child to be created from a woman's need? It's the kind of thing teenaged girls say -- because they want someone they think will love them.

Examples of divorcees and widows who 'cope' only illustrate my point about how much harder it is to single-parent.

Why put a child in the position of being dependent on 'the village'? Help isn't 'bad', but is it best, or even better than OK? Hiring a competent caregiver is nice, but that's not 'parenting' -- which I thought was the desired object here.

Some here seem to be saying, "It can be done." I'm just asking, "Why do it the hard way -- hard for you AND for the child?" (Especially in a country without social and financial supports available to children and single-parent families.)

What does this trend say about our country? Is 'responsible fatherhood' in short supply? Are people afraid of the commitment of marriage? More and more adults out there now who don't trust?

Honestly, I'm not trying to 'judge', just wondering why?

I think raising my kids with their father after the divorce was actually harder for me than if I had done it all by myself. He put me through h@ll.

Not that I would've done it without being married, probably not because of the way I am, but looking back it would've been so much easier, mentally.

I actually do believe that responsible fathers/husbands are in short supply...others may not agree, but that's my opinion, as a thirty year old woman.

I read an article recently stating that more and more men are either waiting till much later to get married, or not wanting to get married at all, wanting to extend their bachelorhood for as long as possible. While women are on much more of a timeline, men don't have the same constraints.

I would definitely choose to have a baby by myself if it was obvious I wouldn't have a suitable mate and was approaching the end of my child bearing years. I have seen many single parents be MUCH better parents than some married couples I know, so I do not honestly believe that a child is neccesarily better off with two parents. I think it depends on who the parents are. I think children can be raised in many different situations successfully, and any child can have positive male and female role models in their life, regardless of who their primary caretaker is.

I also disagree with your non-acceptance of "because I want to have a baby". That is the reason EVERYONE has a baby, because they want to. I don't think the trend of single women choosing to have babies alone says anything about our country (except maybe there aren't enough men who want to be husbands/fathers), or maybe women are not willing to put up with a less than adequate man because they are able to provide for a child alone. Many years ago, women often didn't have the means of having a child alone, and now they do.

I have two nieces, both got pregnant, bought a house, then got married. In that order. While it may seem unconventional, it is the way they do it now...
It is a simple shift in culture, which is always evolving.

Rearing a child alone is not necessarily harder or easier than rearing that child with a partner.
I've fostered and adopted children for many years with and without a Daddy figure. Having a Daddy figure did not make rearing the kids any easier. I'm thankful all the kids I have taken into my heart and home have turned out to be pretty good adults. Granted the children I have taken in were usually abused in many ways so the extra work to make them love life, live in peace with their past and not turn to a dark place of hate and anger was hard but having a Daddy figure didn't make it any easier.
Women who choose to have and rear children alone usually have the financial means, are mentally and emotionally stable and truly have no need to have a dependent or co-dependent relationship with a man to have a child.

Why would a woman have and raise a child alone.
It is the Spirit given nature of a woman to reproduce and nurture the progency at a certain time in her life. Not so the man. That is another reason women choose to have children without a male partner.
Yes there are some women not willing to put up with a less than adequate man, and can because they are able to provide for a child alone. Many years ago, women often didn't have the means of having a child alone. We were considered 2nd class and our lot in life was to be married have babies and take care of them and the home. Now we are able to do that and have a life, own property and VOTE! ALONE not as the property of a man.
We've come a long way baby.

You ask "Why put a child in the position of being dependent on 'the village'?" It is not putting a child in that position. It is stating the village should be willing and able to help rear the children. We should all watch over the children and guide them to responsible and moral usefulness in society. The children will one day be the leaders and movers we look to. I believe we owe all of them our wisdom and guidance while they are growing into those future adults. WE have to feed the mind and the body in order for them to grow.

CT.

For the past couple of decades, the ratio of women vs men has not been in the women's favor.

Combine that with the real need for women to be self supporting in this world - that is now pretty much fact - to live above "survival" level, to be decently self supporting, they must be well educated, build their career - they can't "take time off" and expect to come back and be on the same track they were - the business world does not accomidate planning a family and Im not sure that it even should.

I feel it to be very necessary for women to build up that career because of the high divorce and financiall, child abandonment rate - the women and children end up worse off and the man ends up better off financially. So it's now simply the law of nature that a woman must be prepared to take care of herself and her children alone. NOthing is written in stone anymore. That is a very, very sad fact about our society and the world, but it's simply the fact of life.

I hope that mothers today are raising their little girls not on the Cinderella story but on strong, self managing role models. I think it's now basic good mothering and leading their little girls to the best possible life for them. Everyone must learn to live on the idea to be able to financially depend upon themselves, no matter what. It's a new world.

So many are building that career that the biological clock gets ignored through necessity. Unlike a man, the woman can't ignore what is happening with her body. So many are now not married yet or the clock is running down and simply can't wait, or even count on, that prince or likely decent father to show up if they want to have the healthiest chance to have a healthy child, so they are choosing to have their family alone.

It's sad, but it's now how this world turns.

I have no problem at all with these women - they are much more likely to make good and effective mothers who support their carefully planned family well. They have done the work, done the planning and are prepared emotionally and financially.

It's the young/younger unwed mothers who have no real source of income which can decently support themselves OR child and is frankly unlikely to ever have a realistic source of income that will enable them to stand on their own two feet and be effective, loving mothers.

Or, the mothers who reproduce without worrying about any of this at all because somebody, somewhere will provide the basics and they know this - our taxes at work.

The world and women's expectations for their life is very, very different than it was back in the 70's when I was starting out. Adjustments must be made for the best future of these women and their children.

I wonder if there will ever be a time in the future of this century where males as a whole will be having the same discussions about family and career and raising a child alone that women now must have.

I doubt it, it's built into our DNA. In general, they start them, we raise them. The idea that male "hunting" for the offspring seems to have fallen off the DNA chain *sigh* Sometimes I really ponder this, I wonder if that drive is no longer there because the world is so populated now that the male natural drive to provide simply isn't necessary anymore. There are so very many that his DNA is likely to survive, regardless.

Sometimes I over analyze, can you tell? ;)

Thank you for thoughtful answers. I'm hearing that some of you are sure there is a vast shortage of 'father material' men. I wonder if that's true. Could it be that some women have impossible standards for a partner? Don't want to 'break one in'? LOL Are afraid to risk? I *know* there are true jerks out there...just wondering if the problem is all one-sided.

Does a woman who can't sustain a balanced relationship with a man present a complete experience of 'family' for children? Is it a self-perpetuating thing?: "Men are no good as fathers. Daughter, don't you trust one. Son, you aren't expected to be one."

Is it possible that we've 'met the enemy' and it's not all about men, it's women too?

mylab123 - very nice post.

Chisue, in your last post you touched on something I have given a lot of thought too. I think (very generally speaking, read: do not take personally) we have coddled the "20 something's" and even "30 something's" (and coming generations) so much that we no longer know what it means to be a traditional husband/father.

I believe strongly a point could be made about women too, but I'll focus on men for now.

We allow and encourage children about "fairness" and "being the best" Life is not fair, not everyone can be #1. It will not kill you to be picked last for kickball.
Sometimes you have to work harder for what you want than the next guy.
Sometimes you really should punch that bully in the nose! So what if you have to sit in detention? It just means more people will find out you can't be pushed around.

Ladies, let men be men. Let them go play poker, go to the rifle range. Tell them you appreciate when they help you.

I think too often we confuse men and they just give up trying.

Mylab is right...we have certain traits built into our DNA. Men instinctively want to be the provider (hunter/gatherer). Women desire to be the nurturer.

There are ALWAYS exceptions - don't beat me up over this.
It's just as a society we have allowed traditional roles to slip by...(cost of living is a huge factor that can't be denied also.)

That said, I believe some of those factors play into why there are so many one parent families.

At risk of being flamed, here I am. I fully support the right for women who want a child, and have the time and means to care for said child, to have that child.

I have no sympathy or compassion for women who 1) do not use birth control, 2) expect "the system" to take care of them with no effort on their part, 3) who use "the system" to provide for themselves and their children with no effort on their part, 4) who have babies in order to get more from "the system."

The ones I DO have compassion for are the children, who will never know what a normal family is, and will most likely continue the system abuse; and, without early and serious intervention, will never know any better. And we will all pay the price.

Normal family??? In all my years I am not sure I have ever seen a NORMAL Family! Seriously I have seen many family situations and Most have NOT been normal in any way! From the traditional 2 parent Mommy and Daddy to the same sex parents family to the single parent family and extended families of various members and generations in the same home. Each and every family has been a unique and individual expression of what it means to be family. These families include those who spend much time with each other in sports, church, activities meant to bring happiness and joy in life to those who go about their own concerns without regard for family members. Those with money those who have no money. Those with all their health and those with illness and disabilities. The functioning and dysfunctional. I really have never understood the term NORMAL when it comes to people and even less when referring to families.
CT

Perhaps I should have said 'those who will never know what a family is." Families come in all shapes and sizes.

Tough subject - on either side. I was raised in a single parent home. It didn't start that way, but when I was 12, Dad decided to walk - with someone else. It wasn't until I was well into my adult years that I knew how it affected me. I think that is because my Mom struggled dearly to prevent us from feeling as though we were victims. I will say that more recently, I'm hearing words that seem strange to me - my parents. I can't remember ever saying that; I've always said, my Mother. That truly makes me feel badly that I wasn't part of a 2 parent household. That said, it is what it is. I have never regretted the care and concern my mother provided. I just wish she had a choice. If a woman chooses to have a child on her own, then so be it. I would prefer that a father was there to help with a 2-sided perspective, but taking the path of single Mom doesn't mean that things will be bad, or that there will be struggle and strife in the home. Some women can't handle a partner, but make a great parent.

One thing that I think people forget - and the real reason for my post, is that a lot of single parents don't have fatherhood responibilities, and are getting Federal help, because the system was designed that way,for years. A woman could not get assistance if there was a man around. In some cases, even if the father was around, they couldn't make it. Now there is a push to get child support, as if that was enough. I think they should mandate parental involvement as well as money in the wallet. Again, tough situation because the parents most likely have sour relationships. Just maybe though, if involvement was promoted, both mother and father would stop the maddness of using the children as a battering ram to get at the other. Either way, you can't legislate the best situation, and you can't guarantee that 2 parents are the best. I think the most importat reason for promoting 2parent households, is to maintain the traditional family structure.

I wonder if what has really changed is that couples who found themselves expecting, used to rush to the altar (or gave the baby up for adoption). Now they don't since being a single parent is not as taboo, or taboo at all for the most part. Women aren't choosing to be a single parent as much as they are chosing not to get married just because a baby is on the way. And yes, lots of couples got married for this reason, even years and years ago (*cough*my in-laws for instance*cough).