Why do Asians/Jews/West Indians do better?

Parent Cafe
61

<p>“The lack of two parent homes is also the huge driver in income disparity in a knowledge based economy. I wish the right could find a way to make their message less didactic and religiously based - communicating a message of good life choices and economic skills - and at the same the left would be more receptive to just how elemental two parent homes are to solving many of our challenges and that doing so would accomplish far more than any government program.”</p>

<p>Too many on the left are deeply committed to the notion that fathers are not necessary (hence ALL family structures are presumed equally good for children), and that extensive and expensive governmental programs are the only solution to the many problems facing lower-income groups. It should be glaringly obvious, from social science research and simple common sense, that women having sex and conceiving children with men who are interested in neither marriage nor fatherhood is a REALLY BAD IDEA, but that message gets lots in the soothing rhetoric about sexual freedom, families coming in all shapes and sizes, and the need to provide universal free daycare and year-round schools for the children of single mothers.</p>

62

<p>Claremarie, I can’t speak for the “many on the left” but I can speak for myself, who tends to be left-wing:</p>

<p>I don’t subscribe to any notion that fathers aren’t necessary. I merely react to the REALITY that in many families fathers are absent. I also don’t think that extensive and expensive government programs are “the only” solution for the poor. </p>

<p>I do subscribe to the notion that the fatherless child may need extra support, both financial and psychological, and I subscribe to the notion that government programs are one solution to providing some of that support. I also subscribe to the notion that in many cases, it ends up being far more expensive down the road NOT to have helped that child.</p>

63

<p>katliamom,
I don’t disagree with anything you posted. Yes, it’s a reality that many fathers are absent, and the children of those fathers need extra support, some of which must be provided by various governmental agencies.
But what is missing from much of the dialogue is a explicit acknowledgment that children fare badly in the absence of their fathers, and that every effort should be made to prevent future children from being raised without their fathers. It’s akin to combatting AIDS by focusing solely on treatments, rather preventing transmission by eliminating the specific behaviors that led to the infection in the first place.</p>

64

<p>No one will give that kind of explicit acknowledgement because the mere presence of a father in a child’s life does not in itself create that child’s life better. Ever hear of abusive, neglectful, cruel, deadbeat fathers (or mothers)? I have. I’ve dealt with children of those kinds of parents. Believe me, those kids would have been much better off – and society as a whole would have been much better off – if those men (and women) never had anything to do with their children. </p>

<p>But if you want an explicit acknowledgement that ‘children in general do better in a healthy, loving, sane, responsible two-parent family supported by the laws and care of a a healthy, compassionate, sane and responsible community’ – there you have it. Now go out and support leaders that will help build that community. Because without the latter, it’s much harder to have the former.</p>

65

<p>

</p>

<p>I wonder why people are always trying to convince others of how acceptable an undesirable alternative is by comparing those alternatives to even worse alternatives. </p>

<p>Here’s how real life works:
Abuse is bad, from anyone, any gender, any orientation, including those who are gay and trans.
Non-abusive parenting by both genders has been proven over time to be the best option.
Non-abusive parenting by one parent or by two “parents” of the same gender is a second-best alternative.</p>

66

<p>epiphany
“Non-abusive parenting by one parent or by two “parents” of the same gender is a second-best alternative”</p>

<p>— according to whom? And what if it’s NOT an alternative, but a reality?</p>

67

<p>I take it by your reply, katliamom, that you, like many others, find the presence of two genders (presuming a healthy environment) no more advantageous than the presence of only one (healthy) gender, correct? </p>

<p>Because be very clear that that is what is being compared: not two unhealthy adults (both genders) vs. a one-gender parent situation involving healthy parent(s).</p>

<p>As to the “reality” bit, it remains, yes, second-best, unless you buy into the dispensability of gender as a critical element of identity. Probably, people who have gone to enormous lengths, heartache, and suffering to re-identify their own genders would not agree that gender has no importance in the formation of personhood.</p>

68

<p>“Ever hear of abusive, neglectful, cruel, deadbeat fathers (or mothers)? I have. I’ve dealt with children of those kinds of parents.”</p>

<p>Why, yes, I have. I’ve even met some of them, living in the real world as I do.
Why is it so difficult for some people to conceded what used to be obvious – children do best when raised by their own mother and father, who love each other and their children?
ANY other arrangement, however lovely and supportive and nurturing it may be, is NOT AS GOOD for children as being raised by their biological mother and father, who love each other and their children: </p>

<p>Adoption is a wonderful gift, but it would not exist but for a tragedy or loss of some kind, often on both sides of the adoption. Adoptive parents are well aware of the special challenges their children face, especially if they were adopted at older ages or from different ethnic backgrounds. </p>

<p>Widowed parents do a heroic job under difficult circumstances not of their choosing, but they would be the first to agree that they are making the best of a bad situation.</p>

<p>Divorced parents can often do a heroic job if they can put their children’s needs first, but research tells us that their children often suffer for years, even in the most amicable and friendly divorces.</p>

<p>Single mothers can be wonderful parents, but they cannot be both mother and father to their children. </p>

<p>And same-sex couples who conceive children with third parties or adopt are DELIBERATELY depriving those children of a mother or father, in order to satisfy their own needs to be parents. In the case of children conceived with donor sperm or by surrogates or friends, the couple cannot even make the argument that they are providing a loving home for a needy, abandoned child whom no heterosexual couple is wiling to adopt.
NONE of these alternative arrangements is in the best interests of the child.</p>

69

<p>

In the “real world”, children of gay parents do just as well as children of straight ones.
[APA</a> Policy Statement on Sexual Orientation, Parents, & Children](<a href=“http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/policy/parents.html]APA”>http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/policy/parents.html)</p>

70

<p>What a limited statement, with almost no depth. It is focused on the absence of negatives, such as mental breakdown. Terrific. We all assume that an absence of mental breakdown is pretty fundamental to happiness.</p>

<p>It is extremely “clinical,” therefore, in its focus (deficit-oriented). When one is looking rather to the fullness of life experience, the direct interaction with gender-different primary parents is by definition fuller and richer. Those conclusions come about from a full life experience, investigating more extensively from the subjects, their perceptions of gains & losses in life, particularly as they compare their lives with the lives of peers raised very differently. I don’t think the study involved a lot of 80-year-olds with actual perspective on their own lives. This study is shallow.</p>

71

<p>

Your definition of depth requires that 80-year-olds to ruminate about something that has only been legal for a few decades. Excellent.</p>

72

<p>^ You’re just making my point for me. The evidence is NOT in. There is no arc of evidence by which to make rational decisions on a social experiment affecting generations after us. Popularity is not the measure of wisdom.</p>

73

<p>I propose that same-race adoption be banned - the experience created by a racially-different parents is by definition fuller and richer. And if evidence proves me wrong, well, the evidence isn’t deep enough.</p>

<p>Question: if the studies supported your claims, would you still reject them?</p>

74

<p>These are apples and oranges, lockn. There is not a parallel here. Gender is a different category than race.</p>

75

<p>How do you explain the fact that the healthiest happiest children and families are found in the Scandinavian countries where same-sex couples are common and single parenthood is rampant?</p>

76

<p>Are kids being raised by gay parents subjected more to bullying and teasing? Where we live they would be. I’d think a gay parented family would have to live somewhere like NY, Boston, Berkeley, Ann Arbor, etc. There’s a gay couple here who are “hiding” the fact that they’re a couple. (their child’s in kindergarten). How long can you hide that?</p>

77

<p>For such healthy and happy people, the Scandinavian countries certainly have relatively high suicide rates. Considerably higher, in fact, than many desperately poor countries such as the Philippines and many Latin American nations.
[List</a> of countries by suicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate]List”>List of countries by suicide rate - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>Also, the number of same-sex marriages in Norway and Sweden is extremely small, with 5-7 homosexual marriages for every 1000 heterosexual marriages. [THE</a> DEMOGRAPHICS OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGES IN NORWAY AND SWEDEN* | Europe > Western Europe from AllBusiness.com](<a href=“http://www.allbusiness.com/human_resources/3482857-1.html]THE”>http://www.allbusiness.com/human_resources/3482857-1.html)</p>

<p>“Our first observation is that the incidence of same-sex marriage in Norway and Sweden is not particularly impressive. Our data for Norway contain 1,293 partnerships contracted in 1993-2001.13 During the same calendar period, 196,000 heterosexual marriages were entered, which suggests a ratio of around 7 new same-sex marriages to every 1,000 new opposite-sex marriages. For Sweden, our data comprise 1,526 partnerships entered during 1995-2002, which, in light of the corresponding 280,000 heterosexual marriages registered during the same calendar period, gives a ratio of 5 new partnerships to every 1,000 new opposite-sex marriages. The ratios of partnerships to marriages are thus considerably lower than the various estimates of fractions of homosexuals that we noted earlier. The incidence of partnership formation in the two countries also appears relatively low when compared with the levels of partnership formation in Denmark and the Netherlands (Digoix, Festy, and Waaldijk 2004; Eggen 2002:229; Noack et al. 2002: figure 1; Waaldijk 2001:463).”</p>

78

<p>couldn’t the rate of same-sex marriage in Norway and Sweden be related to the fact that the rate of heterosexual marriage is also pretty low? Doesn’t Sweden have one of the highest rates of children born to unmarried women?</p>

<p>As to the suicide rate - watch some Bergman, read some Strindberg and Ibsen and you’ll see suicide and depression existed in those cultures LONG BEFORE (and my thought have little to do with) the widespread acceptance of same-sex unions and single parenthood!</p>

79

<p>“couldn’t the rate of same-sex marriage in Norway and Sweden be related to the fact that the rate of heterosexual marriage is also pretty low? Doesn’t Sweden have one of the highest rates of children born to unmarried women?”</p>

<p>That’s just the point – even though the (heterosexual) marriage rates are among the lowest in the western world, the same-sex marriage rates are only a tiny fraction of that extremely low base. For whatever reason, same-sex couples in Sweden and Noway are deciding not to take advantage of the marriage institution that is open to them.</p>

80

<p>So what? Married or not, they’re still couples, living openly together and in many cases raising children openly together. And those children do not appear to be unhappy.</p>

<p>In other words, people in Scandinavia appear to have redefined your idea of a family – and they, along with their children, appear to be happy with this redefinition. Something you don’t believe can be the case.</p>