If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Accused Teen Said to Keep Enemies List
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:aqrPa.1112$zy.60@fed1read06... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:8LfPa.548$zy.363@fed1read06... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Paul Fritz" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message newsrOOa.124729$MJ5.36547@fed1read03... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "dfsdfasdf" wrote in message ... If someone takes this angle about this they are ignorant. Columbine kids had both parents, what was the excuse there? I don't believe this has anything to do with psychosis or even systematic psychological abuse by classmates, which can cause mental problems and pent up anger. We just don't know what motivates certain kids to be pushed over the edge from being picked on, while other kids' internalize it and grow up with low self-esteem and complexes. Who knows? But it has nothing to do with single parent homes, especially single parent homes where the father is the single parent. Then perhaps we'll quit hearing so much about how single mothers 'ruin' children. The statistics speak for themselves. Those of us mothers raising good, considerate children would probably appreciate it. There's a few of you. You can bet the ranch she ain't one of them I don't know which I find more amusing - that you would use the posting of a newspaper article as yet another opportunity to flame me, personally........ or that you would attempt to flame me personally, and my mothering, when you've met neither me, nor my children. Have you met Bill Clinton personally? Non sequitor It's not a comment; it's a question. It still has nothing to do with anything - nor does it have anything to do with people who would use the posting of a newspaper article (about someone else) as an opportunity to attack me and my mothering of my children, when they've met neither. Is it a prerequisite to meet someone in person before making claims against their character? If they want to continue to make things up this way, they only make themselves look bad. On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 17:54:21 -0500, "Moon Shyne" wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...Teen-Plot.html The father, Ron Lovett, has raised his sons alone since his wife died nearly 10 years ago |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Accused Teen Said to Keep Enemies List
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Accused Teen Said to Keep Enemies List
That's a good question, Teach, basically boiling down to "Is the average father
a better parent than the average mother?" Or is that really the question we're looking at? I don't think so. When we see all the negative stats that come out of single-parent homes, we can see at least one or two things that all these negatives have in common - a poor sense of responsibility and an inability to follow (society's) rules. In the "what ever happened to them" two-parent family that we're prone to compare to, those just happened to be aspects of maturing that were more often put under the father's guiding hand. With the traditional set of values learned from the father on one side and the traditional set learned from the mother on the other, it seems fairly easy to see that a failure to gain those that are on the father's side would be more likely to cause a child or young adult to become one of these statistics we read about. It's not that the things on mother's side are any less important in an overall sense, it's just that losing them is less likely to cause a child to become one of the stats. So, assuming that fathers and mothers were equally dedicated to doing a good job, I would say that kids from a single-father home would tend to do better in these particular stats because the fathers would view "doing a good job" as concentrating on those particular things which would be more likely to help the kids avoid becoming stats. Now for the part that's more difficult. I wrote above "... assuming the fathers and mothers were equally dedicated to doing a good job ..." I don't believe that's true in our current world. We have spent too many decades telling fathers that not only were they not necessary to raise kids....we don't even want them trying. At the same time, we've put enormous pressure on girls/women to be the one who will sacrifice anything and everything to keep and raise the kids. I've written about this before. I think this has caused a lot of mothers to feel they have NO CHOICE but to raise the kids, even when it was the LAST thing they wanted to do. I think this has resulted in a lot of very poor mothers insisting on raising their kids and doing a very poor job of it. But I also think it has probably made dedicated parents out of some mothers who would have been mediocre parents without the added pressure Sooo....full answer - if a coin were tossed in each case and fathers got the kids half the time and mothers the other half ... I have to say that I don't know if the stats would be any better. I also have to say that in an overall sense we'd probably see a (small) decline in the overall quality of parenting. The difficulty in answering this question is that it's much easier to see the importance of NOT robbing a liquor store or NOT becoming pregnant at 13 than it is to see the the importance of making sure you're always dressed in clean clothes or that you always get sufficient sleep or that you know how to fix your own meals. Even sticking with the narrow view of "good parenting" as defined by avoiding becoming one of these stats, I think it should be fairly obvious that by far the better situation is two loving parents, with single parents of either gender following a distant second and third. Mel Gamble (Mel Gamble) wrote in message ... Columbine was an anomaly. The problem is kids who have failed to develop a sense of worth and a sense of responsibility, kids who have failed to learn that actions have consequences, kids that have their values all screwed up. Columbine was ONE example of an "intact" family which failed to instill these important lessons, possilbly in spite of all good intentions. This story is ALSO an anomaly - it is ONE example of a single father who failed in the same way. But our prisons and juvenile detention centers are FULL of the status quo - (mostly) men from single-mother-headed "families" where that same teaching failed. Kids from an intact family CAN "go bad". Kids from a single father home CAN "go bad". But the statistics show that the odds of a kid going bad are MUCH higher for kids from single mother homes. I sometimes wonder about that, Mel. If the preponderance of single-parent homes were single father homes, would statistics show that children from single father homes fared more poorly than others? Do children from single mother homes do so much more poorly statistically because mothers are granted custody almost as a matter of course whether they are the better parent or not, and the fathers who fight to raise their children are the fathers who really, really want them, so will do a good job raising them? (Of course, I am not saying that if a father does not get custody, he doesn't really want his kids enough) Or are the statistics saying that children really do need both parents to have the best chance of turning out as balanced, happy, responsible adults with both parents actively involved in their lives. And, if both parents are not involved, then a concerned parent, actively involved in the child's life is the next best thing. I just don't think we can jump from "single mothers are crappy, single fathers are better" based on the statistics until we see how the kids turn out with 50/50 custody being the norm, and those cases that aren't 50/50 divided evenly between mothers and fathers. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Accused Teen Said to Keep Enemies List
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:51:16 -0500, "Moon Shyne"
wrote: "Sunny" wrote in message .. . Your children, while perhaps considerate to you, are damaged by your actions toward their father. That is a given. Still can't control yourself - just have to keep replying to my posts......... *that* is a given. Why, it appears to be mutual! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Center for troubled teens is under fire | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 1 | February 5th 04 03:43 PM |
MONEY IS NOT just FOR CHRISTMAS!!!! | Rebecca Richmond | Twins & Triplets | 0 | December 13th 03 09:08 PM |
Rehab program for teens needs own helping hand | Wex Wimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | September 2nd 03 05:02 PM |