Did the Pro-Life Movement Lead to More Single Moms?

[ShanaA1984]

I don’t think poorly of aingle mothers, but study after study has proven that housesholds without a father consistently have higher rates of child abuse and neglect, poverty, and that the children are more subject to teen promiscuity, delinquency, etc. Studies also show that kids need a good father in their lives. Should a pregnant widow give up her baby? No. That’s NOT a single mother. Who cares about food stamps? Money helps but it doesn’t change the dynamic in the house. I think kids are better off being raised in an intact family. That’s all.

So then by your logic Jackiemom, I should have given up my daughter who is the only link I have to her father? Her father who commited sucide in his barracks room in Italy from PTSD which he got after serving 2 tours in Afangistan and whom I loved very much. What a cold and callous thing to say.

ETA: I am also not on any state programs, I DO NOT abuse my daughter, I am an Army Reservist and I got to school full time getting a nursing degree all to make sure my daughter has everything she needs.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

With all due respect, statistics don’t mean anything. Not every single mother is an abuser (which you know). I personally don’t see the difference between a never-married woman who wants to give her child a good life and a widow who wants to.

What is your definition of single mother, since widow is excluded?

What I got out of that was not that women should give up their babies for their own good, but should give them up as penance to make up for having sex out of wedlock. Since widows didn’t do anything “wrong” they shouldn’t be punished with losing their child.

 

[ExGratia]

What I got out of that was not that women should give up their babies for their own good, but should give them up as penance to make up for having sex out of wedlock. Since widows didn’t do anything “wrong” they shouldn’t be punished with losing their child.

I was going to say that it seemed to be a moral judgment, but you beat me to it.

 

[thewanderer]

What is your definition of single mother, since widow is excluded?

Seriously!!! How is a pregnant widow not a single mother?

Or, JackieMom, how about my mother? She seperated from her husband because of abuse and took us kids to another country to raise us far from our father. Does she count as a single mother? It sounds as though she ought to count as much as BEL’s mother. And for the record, since you seem to want to ignore everything BEL has to say because she disagrees with you, I am both pro-life and pro-abstinence.

Is being a single mother ideal? No, of course not, the ideal is for kids to be raised in a loving and intact biological family.
Is being a single mother somehow immoral? Not at all!
Is having a single mother necessarily worse than being adopted? NO. It completely depends on the situation at hand and the particular circumstances involved. Honestly, I feel unbelievably honored to have been able to know my mother and certainly would not want to have been raised by some other couple. I’m just curious, you are aware that child abuse is much higher when non-biological parents are involved than when biological parents are? Who knows what would have happened if someone else had raised me. Many abusers manage to fool those around them into thinking they are good, moral, and religious people.

 

[thewanderer]

What I got out of that was not that women should give up their babies for their own good, but should give them up as penance to make up for having sex out of wedlock. Since widows didn’t do anything “wrong” they shouldn’t be punished with losing their child.

Yeah… thats kind of the impression I got too. Truly unbelievable.

 

[Robertanthony]

I think it’s looking at a phenomenon (single-mother/parent families) from the wrong angle. The sexual act divorced from its natural consequence (procreation) is the main culprit. Individualism and materialism (no transcendance) are big factors, too. In an ideal world, we’d all come from a loving, nurturing nuclear family with a selfless, devoted father who brings security, godly leadership and confirmation and affirmation. What good is it to come from a nuclear family with a mentally unsound father?I think some single moms can do an awesome job at raising a child, some aren’t just fit for the task (they’re needy, immature, selfish etc.) But nothing will ever beat having a mentally sound mother and father who love each other and are happy to have kids. Incidentally, I think that was in a nutshell God’s eternal plan.

 

[JackieMom]

What I got out of that was not that women should give up their babies for their own good, but should give them up as penance to make up for having sex out of wedlock. Since widows didn’t do anything “wrong” they shouldn’t be punished with losing their child.

A married woman who, with her husband, was ready, willing and prepared to become a parent who loses her husband to death before the child is born is not a single mom. Neither is a divorced woman who has children. A “single” mom is a woman who was never married and is raising the child without the father’s participation.

I don’t think a pregnant widow would be wrong to choose adoption, if in her state she felt she could not adequately parent. But should she? No. She and the child are victims of tragedy, and no doubt WILL suffer from the lack of the father, but that is a completely different situation than…

The 20-year-old who hooks up with a guy at a college party, finds herself pregnant, and decides to drop out of school to be a single mom.

I am not saying every single parent situation is awful. And I am not saying that there are not some circumstances where, with the great support of her parents and a strong commitment to mothering for example, a single woman might seriously consider keeping her baby.

All I’m saying is that single parent households are not as good for kids as two parent households, and that women should always put the best interests of their kids first, even if it’s hard or hurts.

 

[thewanderer]

A married woman who, with her husband, was ready, willing and prepared to become a parent who loses her husband to death before the child is born is not a single mom. Neither is a divorced woman who has children. A “single” mom is a woman who was never married and is raising the child without the father’s participation.

I don’t think a pregnant widow would be wrong to choose adoption, if in her state she felt she could not adequately parent. But should she? No. She and the child are victims of tragedy, and no doubt WILL suffer from the lack of the father, but that is a completely different situation than…

The 20-year-old who hooks up with a guy at a college party, finds herself pregnant, and decides to drop out of school to be a single mom.

I am not saying every single parent situation is awful. And I am not saying that there are not some circumstances where, with the great support of her parents and a strong commitment to mothering for example, a single woman might seriously consider keeping her baby.

All I’m saying is that single parent households are not as good for kids as two parent households, and that women should always put the best interests of their kids first, even if it’s hard or hurts.

So you are admitting then that your decision of whether or not a “single mother” should be allowed to raise her child(ren) has nothing to do with what is best for the child?

 

[BlueEyedLady]

A married woman who, with her husband, was ready, willing and prepared to become a parent who loses her husband to death before the child is born is not a single mom. Neither is a divorced woman who has children. A “single” mom is a woman who was never married and is raising the child without the father’s participation.

I don’t think a pregnant widow would be wrong to choose adoption, if in her state she felt she could not adequately parent. But should she? No. She and the child are victims of tragedy, and no doubt WILL suffer from the lack of the father, but that is a completely different situation than…

The 20-year-old who hooks up with a guy at a college party, finds herself pregnant, and decides to drop out of school to be a single mom.

I am not saying every single parent situation is awful. And I am not saying that there are not some circumstances where, with the great support of her parents and a strong commitment to mothering for example, a single woman might seriously consider keeping her baby.

All I’m saying is that single parent households are not as good for kids as two parent households, and that women should always put the best interests of their kids first, even if it’s hard or hurts.

Whether the woman was married at the time of conception or not the result is the same-a single mom and kids without fathers. It made absolutely no difference in my life that my mom was married when she got pregnant. Things would have been the same if I was the result of a one night stand. But the idea that I, or someone like me should automatically be given away even if their biological family is a loving, supportive, tight knit environment just because there is only one parent is revolting.

Had I been cast aside I wouldn’t have my mom, who has always been my best friend. I wouldn’t know my brother, who I has been such a positive and inspirational influence in my life. I wouldn’t have known my grandmother, who taught me everything that I know about love, loyalty, family, music, and cooking. By extension I never would have known my nieces, who I love more than life.

That all of that should have been denied to me in favor of a different family solely on the basis of one vs. two parents is heartbreaking.

And I can assure you that as a 40 year old woman living in poverty with an abusive alcoholic, my mom was not prepared to have a child.

 

[Robertanthony]

Whether the woman was married at the time of conception or not the result is the same-a single mom and kids without fathers. It made absolutely no difference in my life that my mom was married when she got pregnant. Things would have been the same if I was the result of a one night stand. But the idea that I, or someone like me should automatically be given away even if their biological family is a loving, supportive, tight knit environment just because there is only one parent is revolting.

Had I been cast aside I wouldn’t have my mom, who has always been my best friend. I wouldn’t know my brother, who I has been such a positive and inspirational influence in my life. I wouldn’t have known my grandmother, who taught me everything that I know about love, loyalty, family, music, and cooking. By extension I never would have known my nieces, who I love more than life.

That all of that should have been denied to me in favor of a different family solely on the basis of one vs. two parents is heartbreaking.

And I can assure you that as a 40 year old woman living in poverty with an abusive alcoholic, my mom was not prepared to have a child.

In Catholic circles, just like in any other circles, you’ll find all kinds of opinions. Your mom did the best she could in a less than ideal situation. If she was able to take good care of you, i don’t think she should have given you away. If a woman can be a proper mom and look after her child, I don’t think it’s a good idea to uproot that child in favour of adoption.

 

[JackieMom]

So you are admitting then that your decision of whether or not a “single mother” should be allowed to raise her child(ren) has nothing to do with what is best for the child?

Please re-read my post.

I don’t think anyone should be “not allowed” to raise their child or that kids should be forcibly taken from single moms (unless the situation is abusive or neglectful.) I think that the best interest of the child should always come first. It is sad that single motherhood has been glamorized and normalized because in many cases, things do not turn out well. Obviously, some pull it together and raise great kids in a wonderful home. But the default should not be, “I’ll keep it.” The default should be to carefully, prayerfully discern what is right for the child. I feel that in a large number of single mom cases, the best interest of the child is to go to a prepared, loving two-parent family or for the couple involved in creating the baby to marry.

My husband is number three of four, and his father died when his mother was 5 months pregnant with her fourth child. The other kids were 5, 3 and 1. Obviously, she did not place that last baby for adoption. Was this detrimental to their family? Hell yes. Did they miss out on a lot because they did not have a dad around? Absolutely. Do the kids have some issues because their mom was not able to raise them full-time, but instead had to work and put them in daycare to make ends meet? Of course. My husband said being raised without his dad was awful and he really does still feel a sense of loss about it. Watching other little boys go to Boy Scouts with their dads, seeing his sisters skip the Father Daughter events at school. It hurt. It was not good. They had family support, but no dad is no dad. Their mother struggled. Nothing could be changed, and it was what it was. But he would say now that his childhood had a huge missing piece and that piece was his dead father.

Of course, the best option is for single people not to get pregnant in the first place. Things happen and tragedies occur. Not every single mom will make a poor household for her child. But it’s not ideal, and it’s not healthy, and while there are always exceptions it’s not something I’d celebrate, glorify, normalize or encourage.

 

[Kelfa28]

You can’t punish a woman for being a single parent.

Personally, I don’t think it should be “celebrated” either or encouraged. I would just be happy that this mother chose life and chose to give the child a chance to be the exception to the rule.

What needs to change is how our society views sex and marriage. You’re not ready to have sex unless your are married. You are not ready to live together unless you are married. You are not ready to have a child unless you are married.

Marriage is a vow before God that is agreed upon by both a man and a woman. They have a sacrificial love for each other that is evident…which, in turn, says they are ready to bring a child into the world.

If sex wasn’t viewed so carelessly and casually…something you did when you were bored, were looking for a good time…with anyone who so much as winked in your direction at the bar on Saturday…we wouldn’t be having such issues in our society.

I’d say the majority of single mothers are excellent parents that are the result of a tragic situation. I’d say the children of said parents are raised well and there are mixed results…as with any child.

My husband is the product of an abusive marriage, subsequent divorce and an end result of being raised by a single mother.
He is successful, married, owns a house and has a daughter he loves and wants nothing more then to be apart of her life every day.

 

[thewanderer]

Look at this post.

I don’t think poorly of aingle mothers, but study after study has proven that housesholds without a father consistently have higher rates of child abuse and neglect, poverty, and that the children are more subject to teen promiscuity, delinquency, etc. Studies also show that kids need a good father in their lives.

This part is saying that single motherhood is bad for kids because there is no father involved.

Should a pregnant widow give up her baby? No. That’s NOT a single mother.

Here, in the same post, you make the claim that that those who morally conceived their child should keep their child while those who immorally conceived their child should give them up for adoption.

Who cares about food stamps? Money helps but it doesn’t change the dynamic in the house. I think kids are better off being raised in an intact family. That’s all.

And then you go back to making the point that kids are better off being raised in an intact family.

So… the fact that you think a child that is immorally conceived should be (willingly) given up for adoption when one that is morally conceived but in the exact same circumstances ought to be kept by the mother is an indication that you are not basing your ideas of who should give their child up for adoption on what is best for the child but rather on the past action of the mother.

Again

I don’t think a pregnant widow would be wrong to choose adoption, if in her state she felt she could not adequately parent. But should she? No. She and the child are victims of tragedy, and no doubt WILL suffer from the lack of the father, but that is a completely different situation than…

here you actually advocate for widows raising their children alone NOT to put their children up for adoption. The only neccessary difference between a widow with children from her marriage and a non-married woman with children is that one was married when her children were conceived and the other wasn’t. Because of this any distinction you make in the way the children of such women should be treated can only stem from this difference, that one had sex outside of marriage and the other didn’t. This is NOT advocating for what is in the best interests of the child.

 

[thewanderer]

I sent a nice gift and an encouraging card to be helpful and supportive, but no, I don’t think a party is appropriate in this situation. I am pro-life, but I refuse to act like single motherhood is healthy or good for the child. I am very glad she disn’t kill her baby, but disappointed she did not marry or choose adoption. That child is still at a massive disadvantage and just as I do not feel a bridal shower is appropriate for couples who shacked up prior to marriage (although I am glad they are legitimizing their relationship) neither do I think single moms should have showers.

Being pro life is NOT about celebrating single motherhood.

Sorry, I left out this all important quote where you claim that you were disappointed that this woman did not give her child up for adoption. You council widows to NOT give up their children for adoption but then are disappionted when an unmarried woman keeps her child to raise herself because you think it is not good for the child. Look, you are being inconsistant. Either it is always better to adopt or always better to keep the child or else it is something that depends entirely on the individual case in which no one should be making statements about whether a certain type of person should or should not adopt. Those are your only options if you wish to be able to claim to care about the best interest of the child.

And yes, I am well aware of the bad effects of being rasied without a father, if you note in my earlier post on this thread you will see that I was also raised without one. I agree with you (as I have already said multiple times) that being raised in ones intact loving biological family is the best possible situation. If that were all you were saying in your posts I would have no problem with anything you said.

 

[JackieMom]

Look at this post.

This part is saying that single motherhood is bad for kids because there is no father involved.

Here, in the same post, you make the claim that that those who morally conceived their child should keep their child while those who immorally conceived their child should give them up for adoption.

And then you go back to making the point that kids are better off being raised in an intact family.

So… the fact that you think a child that is immorally conceived should be (willingly) given up for adoption when one that is morally conceived but in the exact same circumstances ought to be kept by the mother is an indication that you are not basing your ideas of who should give their child up for adoption on what is best for the child but rather on the past action of the mother.

Again

here you actually advocate for widows raising their children alone NOT to put their children up for adoption. The only neccessary difference between a widow with children from her marriage and a non-married woman with children is that one was married when her children were conceived and the other wasn’t. Because of this any distinction you make in the way the children of such women should be treated can only stem from this difference, that one had sex outside of marriage and the other didn’t. This is NOT advocating for what is in the best interests of the child.

You’re putting words into my mouth. I think if a widow can’t properly raise her baby, all options except abortion, obviously, are on the table. Adoption being one of them and a totally legitimate choice.

But the widow example is not totally analogous to the single mom one. Does the widow have other children by this same husband? Are her in-laws and her parents going to step up and help her raise the child? Is she mentally stable? These all play into her decision.

Ultimately, I guess I do see a difference in the two situations, though. One, the child grows up knowing he had a father who loved him, wanted him and was prepared and excited to raise him. The plan was an intact family, and all the right choices were made, but tragedy struck and they had to make do. The other, he knows his mother made a poor choice, and that his father has no interest in him and refuses to accept responsibility. His mother disrespected and both parties abandoned with no concern for how they will survive. That’s a huge difference in the mind of a child.

Knowing your dad died and knowing he was a fling that ditched you and your mom are very different. Which is why, historically, it was common for single mothers to tell their child that their dad had died instead of ran away.

 

[thewanderer]

You’re putting words into my mouth. I think if a widow can’t properly raise her baby, all options except abortion, obviously, are on the table. Adoption being one of them and a totally legitimate choice.

But the widow example is not totally analogous to the single mom one. Does the widow have other children by this same husband? Are her in-laws and her parents going to step up and help her raise the child? Is she mentally stable? These all play into her decision.

Ultimately, I guess I do see a difference in the two situations, though. One, the child grows up knowing he had a father who loved him, wanted him and was prepared and excited to raise him. The plan was an intact family, and all the right choices were made, but tragedy struck and they had to make do. The other, he knows his mother made a poor choice, and that his father has no interest in him and refuses to accept responsibility. His mother disrespected and both parties abandoned with no concern for how they will survive. That’s a huge difference in the mind of a child.

Knowing your dad died and knowing he was a fling that ditched you and your mom are very different. Which is why, historically, it was common for single mothers to tell their child that their dad had died instead of ran away.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you, but even still you seem to have made a distinction which still doesn’t make sense. You included married women whose husbands left them in the same category as the widow. My mother falls in this category. I most certainly did not grow up knowing that my father loved me and wished we could have been an intact family. My father abused my mother and then she left for her and our safety. The absence of a father will be sorely felt whether or not the father is absent due to his own actions. Yes, there is a certain amount of difference between a father who is absent because he couldn’t care less and one who was clearly very loving but died while the children were young, but that difference is not the be all and end all. There are too many other factors that need to be taken into account that are far, far more important, some of which you bring up above, the support system the mother has, her mental health, etc. Also, being adopted has its own issues, feeling unwanted and unloved, having a desire to know where you really come from, feeling as though you do not truly know who you are because you don’t know you’re parents. There are just too many different circumstances in each case to be able to make any generalization here.

 

[Litcrit]

Ultimately, I guess I do see a difference in the two situations, though. One, the child grows up knowing he had a father who loved him, wanted him and was prepared and excited to raise him. The plan was an intact family, and all the right choices were made, but tragedy struck and they had to make do. The other, he knows his mother made a poor choice, and that his father has no interest in him and refuses to accept responsibility. His mother disrespected and both parties abandoned with no concern for how they will survive. That’s a huge difference in the mind of a child.

Knowing your dad died and knowing he was a fling that ditched you and your mom are very different. Which is why, historically, it was common for single mothers to tell their child that their dad had died instead of ran away.

But surrendering the baby for adoption somehow rectifies this for the child? If a single mother surrenders her child, won’t the child then know that,

A) “his father has no interest in him and refuses to accept responsibility”

AND

B) his mother gave him up too, because she also has no interest in him and refuses to accept responsibility?

 

[Kelfa28]

But surrendering the baby for adoption somehow rectifies this for the child? If a single mother surrenders her child, won’t the child then know that,

A) “his father has no interest in him and refuses to accept responsibility”

AND

B) his mother gave him up too, because she also has no interest in him and refuses to accept responsibility?

C) A loving adoptive family welcomes the child into their home and raises them as their own. Adopted children are very well adjusted and absolutely recognize their adoptive families as their parents and their biological parents as a separate entity.

My mother was adopted by parents who abandoned her. My Grandparents are her parents and my grandparents. There has never been a desire or discussion about meeting her “real” parents. She has never wallowed in pain or self-pity about the fact that anyone abandoned her.

I know many adopted children and they are all well adjusted and absolutely recognize these parents as theirs.

This statement discourages adoption. Which is very sad. There are plenty of families that want children of their own but cannot and would love to adopt a child and give them a good and stable home. Why discourage this?

 

[Litcrit]

C) A loving adoptive family welcomes the child into their home and raises them as their own. Adopted children are very well adjusted and absolutely recognize their adoptive families as their parents and their biological parents as a separate entity.

My mother was adopted by parents who abandoned her. My Grandparents are her parents and my grandparents. There has never been a desire or discussion about meeting her “real” parents. She has never wallowed in pain or self-pity about the fact that anyone abandoned her.

I know many adopted children and they are all well adjusted and absolutely recognize these parents as theirs.

This statement discourages adoption. Which is very sad. There are plenty of families that want children of their own but cannot and would love to adopt a child and give them a good and stable home. Why discourage this?

I am not discouraging people from adopting abandoned children.

I am discouraging the idea that more abandoned children need to be made available by being abandoned by their mothers so that worthier (married? or just richer?) people can have their babies.

It is culturally unacceptable for adopted people to be anything but grateful to their adoptive parents. It is culturally unacceptable for adoptees to feel abandoned by their bio parents or to see their adoptive parents as anything other than their “real” parents.

If they express feeling rejected, or even only curious about the possibility of reunion, they are viewed as “unstable,” “ungrateful,” and “ill-adjusted,” and then no one listens to what they have to say. They can’t win this one.

So most shut up. And most would never express their feelings to anyone who they thought would see only gratitude and “being adjusted” as acceptable.

But many have begun writing anonymous blogs recently, where they tackle their actual feelings, the feelings they would never dare discuss with their families, acquaintances, even friends in real life, because they are so afraid of being seen as ungrateful and emotionally abandoned.

Here are links to literally hundreds of these blogs.

theadoptedones.wordpress.com

declassifiedadoptee.com

ungratefullittlebastard.blogspot.com/2007/05/new-adoptee-blogs.html

adoption.about.com/od/newsandreference/tp/adopteeblogs.htm

ecbjournal.wordpress.com/adoptee-blogs

 

[ThyKingdomCome]

I don’t know what is the full truth on the issue, but as a pro-life person, I would happily admit that the pro-life movement may very well lead to more single mothers (although as others have pointed out, there are a lot of other factors that also contribute, that are related to the culture of death). And yes, an increase of children being raised outside of marriage is unfortunate for those children. But which is better - single women who commit lots of sins AND also kill their babies, or single women who commit lots of sins but DON’T kill their babies? Of course, the only response to the people who make this case is to tell them they must follow their argument to its natural conclusion. Ask them to talk to the children of single mothers and tell them that the world would be better if they had been killed. Because that is the alternative.

So no single motherhood is not a good thing. But there are much worse things, like dead babies.