An explosion of ‘baby mamas’

12 Apr

The blog is written around a set of principles:

All children have a right to a good basic education.

  1. Education is a partnership between the student, parent(s) or guardian(s), the teacher(s), and the school. All parts of the partnership must be active and involved.
  2. Society should support and foster strong families.
  3. Society should promote the idea that parents are responsible for parenting their children and people who are not prepared to accept that responsibility should not be parenting children.
  4. The sexualization of the culture has had devastating effects on children, particularly young women. For many there has been the lure of the “booty call” rather than focusing on genuine achievement.
  5. Education is a life long pursuit.

Increasingly, schools are being forced to deal with the social problems brought to school resulting from dysfunctional families, violence, and substance abuse. Any person who thinks they will decrease the number of abortions by defunding Planned Parenthood is a knuckle dragging idiot. Of course, those families and parents who support abstinence have a perfect right to espouse that value to their children. BUT, values training and sex education should begin at home early, when each child is ready to absorb that information. Parents should pass along their values to their children because the culture is out there promoting the values of “Sex in the City,” Paris Hilton, and Lindsey Lohan.

Sharon Jayson writes in the USA Today article, More children born to unmarried parents:

A growing number of firstborns in the USA have unmarried parents, reflecting dramatic increases since 2002 in births to cohabiting women, according to government figures out today.

The percentage of first births to women living with a male partner jumped from 12% in 2002 to 22% in 2006-10 — an 83% increase. The percentage of cohabiting new fathers rose from 18% to 25%. The analysis, by the National Center for Health Statistics, is based on data collected from 2006 to 2010….

The percentage of first births to cohabiting women tripled from 9% in 1985 to 27% for births from 2003 to 2010.

Karen Benjamin Guzzo, a sociologist at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio, who studies cohabitation and fertility, says she thinks the big jump since 2002 is likely because of the recession, which was at its height from late 2007 to 2009, right in the middle of the federal data collection.

“I think it’s economic shock,” she says. “Marriage is an achievement that you enter into when you’re ready. But in the meantime, life happens. You form relationships. You have sex. You get pregnant. In a perfect world, they would prefer to be married, but where the economy is now, they’re not going to be able to get married, and they don’t want to wait to have kids.”

Also, middle class parents may think more about how much kids cost, but “having kids is much more than about money. It’s about love,” Guzzo says. “You can be a good parent if you don’t have a lot of money. You can be with someone who can be a good parent.”

Sociologist Kelly Musick of Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., who studies cohabiting couples with children, says she’s noticed women with more education starting to have children outside of marriage. She says cohabiting used to be more common among women who didn’t graduate from high school but it’s becoming more common for those with a high school degree or some college….

The government report also found racial and ethnic differences.

About 80% of first children born to black women were outside of marriage; 18% of these women were cohabiting. Among Hispanics, 53% of first children were born outside of marriage, and 30% of the women were cohabiting. Among white women, 34% of first children were born outside of marriage, 20% to cohabiters. Among Asians, 13% of first children were born outside of marriage; 7% of women were cohabiting.

The new data also found no significant changes since 2002 in some other areas:

Average age at first birth (23 for women and 25 for men).

Percentage that had a biological child (56% of women and 45% of men).

Average number of children (1.3 births for women and 0.9 for men).

This rise in first births to cohabiting women parallels increases in first births to unmarried women overall. Of first births from 2006-10, 46% were to unmarried mothers, compared with 38% in 2002.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/wellness/story/2012-04-10/CDC-marriage-cohabitation-children/54186600/1#.T4Z8NWHELEQ.email

This is a demographic disaster for children as devastating as the hurricane “Katrina.”

In the American Progress report, Sisters Are Doin’ For Themselves, But Could Use Some Help Moses, Boggess, and Groblewski report:

In our paper, we argue that supporting responsible fatherhood and related pro­grams and services helps low-income mothers (single, married, or cohabitating alike) with the following:

Economic stability. Fathers with more access to effective employment assistance have an increased ability to help mothers with the costs of child rearing. Those fathers involved in the lives of their children are more likely to directly con­tribute to household income, pay child support, and provide noncash support, minimizing financial burdens on families.

Child care. Low-income mothers struggle to ensure safe and stable child care arrangements for their children. Fathers can help in providing care.

Work-life balance. As mothers struggle to balance the demands of work and fam­ily, the contributions of fathers can determine the degree to which family obliga­tions result in some available “me time” for mothers to rest and also to get ahead.

Domestic violence. Programs can help identify and serve mothers and fathers involved in violent situations.

Reproductive health. It is unfair for all the responsibilities associated with family planning and preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases to fall on the shoulders of women. Fatherhood programs can work with men on doing their part

Providing more relationship and family choices. Poverty often limits women’s and men’s choices about forming and maintaining relationships and families. Properly designed government family support programs can provide women with more choices regarding the future of their families.

Positive childhood outcomes. Research suggests that fathers can have a positive impact on the academic achievement and behavior of children. Mothers who want to do what they can to ensure positive outcomes for their children may be supportive of fatherhood programs, even participating in some of the services.

Many important federal policies that authorize and fund fatherhood programs are now under debate. President Obama is actively engaged in advancing his propos­als around fatherhood and marriage policy, and Congress is pursuing its efforts to reauthorize the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, anti-poverty legislation that also includes the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Child Support Enforcement programs.

We support the reauthorization of these programs and their continued fund­ing, but we also argue in this report that sufficient emphasis must be placed on responsible fatherhood programs that benefit entire families, including mothers. The great potential of many of these services suggests Congress should expand available funding while making important reforms.

Women have to be reminded over and over again to use contraception especially if they are involved in a relationship where their partner is not likely to be a committed and involved father to children resulting from that relationship. Maybe the peeps know of someone, but moi never knew a rocky relationship which got better because the woman got pregnant. Girlfriend, you need to make the trip to Planned Parenthood

As for the report by Moses, Boggess, and Growbleski?  Amen, sisters.  

Moi does not support abortion, but in order to decrease the number of abortions there must be access to birth control and information about reproduction. That is a key part of the equation. Those who seek to make political points by defunding Planned Parenthood are simply increasing the misery index for children in this society. Women also have to be responsible for their reproductive choices. If you are in a sketchy relationship or have a substance abuse problem, you must use birth control. Sisters not doing it to themselves is the other key part of the equation.

Sisters are not doing it for themselves, but they are doing it to themselves and their children.

Dr. Wilda says this about that ©

2 Responses to “An explosion of ‘baby mamas’”

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. The Trauma and Learning Policy Initiative « drwilda - June 27, 2012

    […] An explosion of ‘baby mamas’                                     https://drwilda.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/an-explosion-of-baby-mamas/ […]

  2. Intervening in the lives of truant children by jailing parents « drwilda - October 7, 2012

    […] An explosion of ‘baby mamas’                                                            https://drwilda.com/2012/04/12/an-explosion-of-baby-mamas/ […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: