Jump to content

Menu

How would you interpret this?


Kathryn
 Share

Recommended Posts

One of my Facebook friends posted a link to this video: http://covernator.com/articles/video.php?postId=76 with this comment about it:

 

"Today I'm thankful for dads who stay with their families and for moms who stay with their husbands so their children have a dad in their lives daily.

 

This video is nearly impossible to watch without misty eyes. It is painful, but the reality is that it isn't honest. The child has a dad. That man is either deceased or not active in his child's daily life. The first is unfortunate, the second is inexcusable - the result of poor choices. Excuses and rationales don't change the truth. They merely provide an acceptable alternate reality that makes living with that lie palatable."

 

I don't know if I'm taking her comment the way I should or not, so wondering what other people think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a bit clueless to the reality of why single parent homes exist.  I'd roll my eyes, and ignore it.

 

I know women who left their husbands because they wanted to party, not be a mom.  some of the children were fortunate to be able to live with their fathers instead of their party-hardy mothers. 

 

 

I know children who have one parent because a parent died. (and to insinuate their parent was bad for 'leaving' them is inexcusable.  some children do see it that way when some adults make snide comments like that one.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That person is either a truly terrible, heartless person, or a total idiot if they think that an abusive father is better than no father.

 

I suspect it's difficult for that FB poster to imagine a scenario in which it would be preferable to be away from an abusive relationship IF she had no experience with abusive relationships.

 

There's also the unfortunate stereotype that abuse is only physical/sexual or that it always leaves visible marks.  The most photogenic, upper class, Benz-driving-charity-giving-boy-scout-leader-soccer-coaching father can still wreck his kids through long term psychological abuse.  That's a double-whamy because kids have trouble giving it the same weight as physical abuse, and wrestle with whether or not to seek treatment for it as genuine trauma.  At least I did.  For a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a clear cut response because life is more complicated than a blanket statement. However, I believe that no one has any business having children before they know for sure that their partner will be a reliable father. I don't believe that the vast majority of divorces involve abuse, and I do believe that simply 'moving on' when you get bored or see something better or aren't happy is wrong, and that divorce is incredibly damaging to children. I'm a product of the sort of marriage where the father didn't stick around, and I certainly believe we were damaged in different ways by being raised without a father in the house. I consciously made better choices, and we've been through enough tough times that I know dh won't ever leave the kids, nor would I take them from their father. Our role as adults, as parents, is to accept the choices we've made and make a good life from there forward. We don't get to run from those choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also the unfortunate stereotype that abuse is only physical/sexual or that it always leaves visible marks.  The most photogenic, upper class, Benz-driving-charity-giving-boy-scout-leader-soccer-coaching father can still wreck his kids through long term psychological abuse.  

and so can the mommies in such marriages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a clear cut response because life is more complicated than a blanket statement. However, I believe that no one has any business having children before they know for sure that their partner will be a reliable father. 

or a reliable mother.

 guys should not be doing anything that might make a baby with a woman they aren't absolutely positive they want to be connected to for the rest of their lives.

 

it goes both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's ridiculous to reduce such a complex issue into such a singular simplistic idea. This person is either very ignorant or very indoctrinated.

 

Therefore, I don't tend to attribute much meaning at all to the person or their perspective. Sharing ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have found that blanket statements and blanket assertions of "better"or "ideal" miss the mark.

 

I've seen a *paper marriage* - meaning 2 adults (usually male/female) who stay married on paper and live in the same house to be elevated to "better" status over more nuanced and usually more honest situations.

 

I've radically changed my view of the word "marriage." It's not tied to paper - almost at all - for me. My first marriage was over LONG before the Judge's date stamp of dissolution. My second marriage is even more complicated. While it continues on paper, it's not a marriage at all. It wasn't a marriage during the 2 years I was his medical advocate - but it was rather a unique relationship based on my own personal integrity with my understanding of our personal marriage.

 

The FB verbiage also implies a common idea that divorce is commonly frivolous. From a statistical standpoint, that has not been my observation personally or professionally.

 

Is divorce often deeply impacting, and even damaging? Yes. But there has been precious little studies done on children who were *parented* through the divorce of their parents and who kept an active relationship with both parents. Even the anecdotal stories we read here usually contain a divorce and then acting out/poorly parenting parents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I really wonder why anyone would post such a thing on facebook.  It suggests that this woman knows the ins and outs of every family's private issues.  Makes her look like an idiot.

 

I am a single mom by adoption.  I chose to subject my children to a single-parent home.  So you can probably guess what I think of the self-righteousness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds to me like she's saying every child has a "dad" (or "daddy" as the quote from the video actually was) whether they're there or not and you're just lying to yourself (why?) or your child if you say otherwise. While I agree that there was male involvement in creating the life, I can think of many, many instances beyond the dad dying that lead to a child not having a dad. I had a friend adopted as an infant by a single mom. Women are artificially inseminated. Women are raped. Women have casual encounters and don't know who the father is. Men walk out on their wives. Women walk out on their husbands. All of these can lead to a child not having a "daddy," (not to mention those that are physically present but not at all "daddy" material) and I'm just not sure how it's a lie or dishonest to say that. I certainly don't feel that the man who left my mother weeks before I was born was ever a "dad" to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, everyone does not have a daddy or a father. Ejaculating does not make a man a daddy. It is sad that there are parents who can not or will not be in their children's lives but sometimes that is truly for the best.

 

My brother didn't meet his dad until he was 5 and my mom married my dad and my dad adopted my older brother. My older brother's bio dude (I can't even say dad) was a rapist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...