11 Jun 06
Originally posted by scorppionYes. Stop stigmatising everyone.
we have an epidemic in our great land of fathers abandoning their kids for whatever reasons, any cure alls?
The only reason kids weren't abondoned as much 60 years ago is poverty. There was no way the mother and child would be fed, if the father wasn't bringing home the dough.
This led to circumstances were women couldn't get out of the relationship, even if they wanted to (like when they're getting the pulp beaten out of them each night).
Now they can.
Perhaps the lack of a father wouldn't be half so bad if rearing a child was seen as proper job and an investment in the future of our world. Then we could support single parents (of whatever gender) to a high standard and the chances of the child suffering because of the split up would be minimized.
11 Jun 06
Originally posted by shavixmirWhen the DPB (domestic purposes benefit) was introduced in NZ there were something like 16 solo parents, there are now 160 000 plus and the number continues to grow the more money guvamints throw at the problem,
Yes. Stop stigmatising everyone.
The only reason kids weren't abondoned as much 60 years ago is poverty. There was no way the mother and child would be fed, if the father wasn't bringing home the dough.
This led to circumstances were women couldn't get out of the relationship, even if they wanted to (like when they're getting the pulp beaten out of ...[text shortened]... standard and the chances of the child suffering because of the split up would be minimized.
11 Jun 06
Originally posted by WulebgrI think there is a problem with "fatherhood" today without the DNA issue. However , your response reminded me that motherhood is indeed easily established in the sense that there is a bond prior to birth and that bond is only solidified after birth. Fathers, on the other hand, it is much more difficult to have that bond. For me, and other men I've talked to, they need something back from the child in order for the bond to begin. They need a smile or something that affirms them. This isn't bad or means that we are "less than". It only means that our connection is not timed with the mother's.
Motherhood is easily established at the moment of birth; fatherhood is always a matter of speculation (albeit now sometimes supported by high probability DNA tests).
OK, back to my original question as to why this is happening. Men, today, are more "boy-like" than man-like. Boys want toys. Men are interested in providing a destiny and purpose for their sons (kids). I'll say more about this later.
12 Jun 06
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThe excuse poverty has been used as scapegoat for too long now. My Father who grew up in the depression never suffered the social degradation that occurs now. My Grandfather (his dad) kept the family together and fed by getting out and working instead of sitting on their asses and letting Uncle Sam take care of them. Nobody had any money then.
Poverty.
12 Jun 06
Originally posted by kirksey957Perhaps you've missed the point. Absent a DNA test, which offers a high probability identification of the father, all we have is the word of the mother. Now, if you think women never lie about sex ...
I think there is a problem with "fatherhood" today without the DNA issue.
12 Jun 06
Originally posted by WulebgrI was operating on the assumption that we know and accept who the father is. I was talking more about the quality of the fathering.
Perhaps you've missed the point. Absent a DNA test, which offers a high probability identification of the father, all we have is the word of the mother. Now, if you think women never lie about sex ...
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
12 Jun 06
Originally posted by kirksey957I haven't seen my father in years. I wouldn't call him a neglectful or "crappy" father, he just doesn't like me. I don't know why.
I want to hear some stories of some crappy daddies. Share your pain. There's healing in the sharing.
12 Jun 06
I agree that kids need their dads and there should always be contact with them but sometimes it is better for parents to be good in separate houses. I mean if the parents no longer loved each other/ grew apart then for the sake of the children it is better to live separate. I would rather my parents split up if they were in constant battle as it wouldnt just get them down but also has an effect on the kids listening to the constant argueing.
Its a shame when you hear people say that they are staying together for the shake of the kids, yes they are a factor but not a good enough reason to stay in a crappy relationship.
🙂
13 Jun 06
Originally posted by slimjimNobody is saying that poverty makes all dads bad dads.
The excuse poverty has been used as scapegoat for too long now. My Father who grew up in the depression never suffered the social degradation that occurs now. My Grandfather (his dad) kept the family together and fed by getting out and working instead of sitting on their asses and letting Uncle Sam take care of them. Nobody had any money then.
But poverty makes it more difficult to be a decent father.
If your father and grandfather were able to do so despite poverty that is great, but it doesn't mean poverty isn't a huge factor.
