Should people wait until marriage to have children?

Black Manta said:

Yes they should. Of course the law makes it so easy to divorce now it's almost ridicules to get married. When my wife and I got married we made an agreement that divorce for other than adultery (and even then maybe) was out of the question. We have had to work very hard at our marriage. I think this is part of the problem. People seem to think you fall in love get married and live happily ever after. What a load of poop.

Click to expand...

Head of Nail, meet Hammer. Instant-Gratification, If It Feels Good Do It, and The Purpose Of Life Is To Seek Self-Expression. :roll: People today think that when the puppy love fades "well, it just didn't work out"; or when they fight "well, the only answer to us fighting is to throw up our hands and quit". Utter bunk. My wife and I made the same oath ya'll did, and while it has sucked at times, you are right - the reward is so far and away more than worth it that you wonder at those who even stop to try to count the cost.

cpwill said:

Head of Nail, meet Hammer. Instant-Gratification, If It Feels Good Do It, and The Purpose Of Life Is To Seek Self-Expression. :roll: People today think that when the puppy love fades "well, it just didn't work out"; or when they fight "well, the only answer to us fighting is to throw up our hands and quit". Utter bunk. My wife and I made the same oath ya'll did, and while it has sucked at times, you are right - the reward is so far and away more than worth it that you wonder at those who even stop to try to count the cost.

Click to expand...

A husband can tell how successful he is as a husband by doing a simple test. Look into your wife's eyes. What you see there will tell you the whole story. Of course this works both ways.

Northern Light said:

I know that the state provides incentives to people to use marriage as the gateway to reproduction, such as a different set of rights and material rewards; but for the sake of argument, let's put all that aside. I want to know why some people think that the title of "married" is somehow a greater guarantee that a couple will stay together for the sake of the child?

Click to expand...

Well, if you will note the links I put above, I would suppose that would answer your question . The answer is: "People think that because it happens to accurately reflect reality."

Of the married homes where poverty is absent, how many parents are staying together "for the child" which could actually be damaging to the growth of a child?

Click to expand...

Statistically almost vanishingly few. Unless one of the parents is physically or emotionally abusive, it is pretty unlikely.

Isn't it more accurate to say that people shouldn't have children until they are in a committed relationship where a supportive desire to have children is mutual?

Click to expand...

No. As Maggie so eloquently pointed out. If you are committed to each other enough to have a child, then you are committed enough to each other to wed.

Because you can have that with or without marriage. With a divorce rate of 50% there are not just a lot of single parents out there, but also step-parents raising children. How does the philosophy of marriage before having children factor them in, considering it's a second marriage?

Click to expand...

Children raised inside marriages do better than those raised outside marriages. Children raised by a step parent do less well than Children raised by both biological parents who are married to each other, but better than single-parent families.

cpwill said:

Well, if you will note the links I put above, I would suppose that would answer your question . The answer is: "People think that because it happens to accurately reflect reality."

Click to expand...

The Daily Mail article did not quote any scientific sources, just the name of the location where the study was supposedly done. Can you please track down that peer reviewed source so that I can read it?

The PDF has this as its conclusion:

Although our knowledge is expanding, the implications of cohabitation for children are still largely undefined, despite the increasing likelihood that a child will be born into a cohabiting union. An important difference between these children and those born to married parents is that they are significantly more likely to experience their parents’ separation early in their life course, which may have serious consequences for their subsequent development. In addition, these family experiences and processes differ considerably across race and ethnic groups and by nativity status. Thus any deleterious consequences associated with the increase in cohabiting births may exacerbate the existing inequalities in children’s life trajectories.

Click to expand...

There is absolutely nothing concrete about this conclusion. It points in a direction but it says there is still a lot we don't know and more research is needed.

If you can put forth another study that is more concrete, one that relies on more than simple census statistics, I would really appreciate that. Maybe something to do with behavioral psychology or family studies?

cpwill said:

Statistically almost vanishingly few.

Click to expand...

Statistically, it would be impossible for us to know how many broken married homes are out there because people don't report that on their census. Again, can you please provide research based on more than statistics?

cpwill said:

Unless one of the parents is physically or emotionally abusive, it is pretty unlikely.

Click to expand...

Yes! Unless they are physically or emotionally abusive, which falls under the question I posed earlier about married yet dysfunctional households. I'm asking how marriage guarantees that physical or emotional abuse is less possible, given the divorce rate and actual statistics on parental child abuse from family services?

cpwill said:

No. As Maggie so eloquently pointed out. If you are committed to each other enough to have a child, then you are committed enough to each other to wed.

Click to expand...

That's not answering what I asked. I'm asking you: why should anyone believe that marriage somehow ensures the commitment is more real than two unmarried people who are just as committed to raising a child, and still believe in strong two-parent households with shared responsibilities?

cpwill said:

Children raised inside marriages do better than those raised outside marriages. Children raised by a step parent do less well than Children raised by both biological parents who are married to each other, but better than single-parent families.

Click to expand...

Sorry but nothing you've posted proves this. The not so subtle sub-text of this thread's OP is based on the traditional assumption that unmarried people are somehow less competent or committed toward raising children while also propping up the notion that marriage as the SINGLE VARIABLE is responsible for everything going right.

Total hogwash! There are plenty, PLENTY of messed up children out there who turned out not so right under the guidance of married parents, just like there are many children who became successful people in life with unwed or even single parents. What about where the child lives? Their socioeconomic status? The kind of community around them? The school they go to? The friends they keep? The kind of mentors in their lives?

You can't isolate one variable and give it all the credit or damnation. Raising a child is more complex than that.

Northern Light said:

The Daily Mail article did not quote any scientific sources, just the name of the location where the study was supposedly done. Can you please track down that peer reviewed source so that I can read it?

The PDF has this as its conclusion:

There is absolutely nothing concrete about this conclusion. It points in a direction but it says there is still a lot we don't know and more research is needed.

If you can put forth another study that is more concrete, one that relies on more than simple census statistics, I would really appreciate that. Maybe something to do with behavioral psychology or family studies?

Statistically, it would be impossible for us to know how many broken married homes are out there because people don't report that on their census. Again, can you please provide research based on more than statistics?

Yes! Unless they are physically or emotionally abusive, which falls under the question I posed earlier about married yet dysfunctional households. I'm asking how marriage guarantees that physical or emotional abuse is less possible, given the divorce rate and actual statistics on parental child abuse from family services?

That's not answering what I asked. I'm asking you: why should anyone believe that marriage somehow ensures the commitment is more real than two unmarried people who are just as committed to raising a child, and still believe in strong two-parent households with shared responsibilities?

Sorry but nothing you've posted proves this. The not so subtle sub-text of this thread's OP is based on the traditional assumption that unmarried people are somehow less competent or committed toward raising children while also propping up the notion that marriage as the SINGLE VARIABLE is responsible for everything going right.

Total hogwash! There are plenty, PLENTY of messed up children out there who turned out not so right under the guidance of married parents, just like there are many children who became successful people in life with unwed or even single parents. What about where the child lives? Their socioeconomic status? The kind of community around them? The school they go to? The friends they keep? The kind of mentors in their lives?

You can't isolate one variable and give it all the credit or damnation. Raising a child is more complex than that.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't give a single variable all credit or damnation. I simply point out that it is the most powerful determinable variable, in many cases, overwhelming most all of the others. If you want to read the science, we hashed this out pretty thoroughly a while back, and you are free to go back and read through the (gosh, I don't know, maybe two dozen all told) scholarly articles cited, all of which point to a single conclusion: a household in which a child is raised by two, married, biological parents is one in which they child will - all other factors being constant - do the best. Children are more likely to be physically, emotionally, or sexually abused in a single or non-married parent household, they are more likely to drop out of school, they are more likely to end up with a criminal record, they are more likely to end up as single-parents themselves, and perpetuate the cycle. :shrug: You don't have to like it - and you don't have to justify anything to us. But it is reality.

I think people should do whatever they want. If they don't WANT to get married, then they shouldn't, especially just because it will make other people happy. That's just stupid.

My parents were married, and it was a horrible relationship. They got married because my mother was pregnant with me. What a terrible reason to get married. I would've been better off if they had never gotten married to begin with. :roll:

I love how some of you people act as if you know what is best for everybody.

cpwill said:

well, there is mountains of evidence that demonstrates that it is better for the children involved - not least because marriage requires and implies a commitment that comes with (among other things) a higher level of difficulty in breaking.



:shrug: well, them's the stats.

...Unmarried parents are six times more likely to split by their child's fifth birthday than those who are married, say researchers. Cohabiting partners face a 'disproportionate' risk of breaking up in the early years of their son or daughter's life....​

of course, that's in the UK, where there are cultural differences. But it's the same in the United States:

...Children born to cohabiting versus married parents have over five times the risk of experiencing their parents’ separation...​

Click to expand...

Yeah, blah, blah, blah. People should do what they want and what makes them happy. Screw the stats.

Why would anyone think that two people who don't get along and despise one another would be "good" for children?

ChrisL said:

Yeah, blah, blah, blah. People should do what they want and what makes them happy. Screw the stats.

Click to expand...

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I present evidence #14,058 for Black Manta's case.

ChrisL said:

Why would anyone think that two people who don't get along and despise one another would be "good" for children?

Click to expand...

Well, because most don't, and because (again) the evidence is fairly overwhelming. The desperate effort to reach as far as necessary into outliers to create a counternarrative may relieve cognitive dissonance, but it doesn't do much for the actual people themselves. We don't help people become better parents by telling them that the decision to get/stay married / divorced is a neutral one.

cpwill said:

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I present evidence #14,058 for Black Manta's case.

Click to expand...

What is that supposed to mean?

cpwill said:

Well, because most don't, and because (again) the evidence is fairly overwhelming. The desperate effort to reach as far as necessary into outliers to create a counternarrative may relieve cognitive dissonance, but it doesn't do much for the actual people themselves. We don't help people become better parents by telling them that the decision to get/stay married / divorced is a neutral one.

Click to expand...

Where in the heck do you live? Divorce stats? What happens cpwill is that people jump into marriage before they actually know the person they are marrying. Once they REALLY get to know the person, they discover that they cannot possibly stand that person. You seem to live in a bubble. A make-believe phony la-la fantasy island bubble.

cpwill said:

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I present evidence #14,058 for Black Manta's case.

Click to expand...

Was this supposed to be some kind of insult or something?

Now you know what would be interesting? Compare statistics of those who come from homes where parents didn't get along but stayed married for the "sake of the children" as opposed to those who come from homes of divorced parents. Now there's a fair and accurate comparison.

ChrisL said:

Was this supposed to be some kind of insult or something?

Click to expand...

No. It's just sad. That is an accurate depiction of what many people believe.

Where in the heck do you live?

Click to expand...

Currently I live in Okinawa, Japan. Prior to that I was in North Carolina.

Divorce stats? What happens cpwill is that people jump into marriage before they actually know the person they are marrying. Once they REALLY get to know the person, they discover that they cannot possibly stand that person. You seem to live in a bubble. A make-believe phony la-la fantasy island bubble.

Click to expand...

On the contrary. I ended up in a marriage "before I actually knew the person I was marrying". Our early years sucked. They sucked a lot; both of us spent a lot of time angry or depressed. But we'd made a commitment to each other, and we'd made a commitment to be good parents. We didn't terribly like each other for a while there, didn't frankly respect each other, and quite honestly weren't good to each other, either. We were a low-single-income family with a short relationship prior to marriage, a kid extremely early on, and multiple deployments - all the stats that you hear about how poor conditions cause divorce? We had 'em. That's why the vast majority of my peers have gotten divorced - they had them too. In a bubble? Divorce stats? Have you seen the divorce stats for Marine Corps Infantry? It's a standing joke - when you reach Staff NCO you get issued a divorce and a giant pickup truck. We had one work-up / deployment I think we lost about a third to a half of our marriages in just that one tour. My wifes' mother was a single mom, her sister is a single mom, my cousins were all raised by single moms, I couldn't begin to tell you the number of friends I've had that have lost their marriages / had issues with adultery / had kids out of wedlock. I've seen plenty of the human wreckage of failed or failing marriages. But my wife and I had made a commitment to each other, and we'd made a commitment to be good parents. And so we did.

Turned out, Black Manta is right - relationships require work. Being a good parent is work. These things require sacrifice, they require you to be an adult, suck it up, and sometimes not do what is fun, not do what feels good, not take the easy way out that is the quick path to a life less richly lived. Life ain't perfect and our relationship never will be. Neither will my relationship with my boys - I argue with the oldest son all the time. I can't think of a single instance where I've thought "My goodness. My son and I argue all the time. Maybe I should put him up for adoption so that we can both be happier." But people have been taught to think this way of their spouses, and that tragic shift to focus on the self has left the self worse off. The split / separated / divorced are more lonely, depressed, and have more difficult lives than those who get and stay married. They are less healthy. They have shorter lives. Their children face greater difficulties in life, and succeed at lower rates.

Happiness - real happiness - isn't a goal. It's a by-product of doing the right thing. But the boomers thought they could make it their goal (and they have taught their kids the same) and like trying to seize mercury, when you do that, it just squeezes out of your grasp.

cpwill said:

No. It's just sad. That is an accurate depiction of what many people believe.



Currently I live in Okinawa, Japan. Prior to that I was in North Carolina.



On the contrary. I ended up in a marriage "before I actually knew the person I was marrying". Our early years sucked. They sucked a lot; both of us spent a lot of time angry or depressed. But we'd made a commitment to each other, and we'd made a commitment to be good parents. We were a low-single-income family with a short relationship prior to marriage, a kid extremely early on, and multiple deployments - all the stats that you hear about how poor conditions cause divorce? We had 'em. We didn't terribly like each other for a while there, didn't frankly respect each other, and quite honestly weren't good to each other, either. But we'd made a commitment to each other, and we'd made a commitment to be good parents. And so we did.

Turned out, Black Manta is right - relationships require work. Being a good parent is work. These things require sacrifice, they require you to be an adult, suck it up, and sometimes not do what is fun, not do what feels good, not take the easy way out that is the quick path to a life less richly lived. Life ain't perfect and our relationship never will be. Neither will my relationship with my boys - I argue with the oldest son all the time. I can't think of a single instance where I've thought "My goodness. My son and I argue all the time. Maybe I should put him up for adoption so that we can both be happier." But people have been taught to think this way of their spouses, and that tragic shift to focus on the self has left the self worse off. The split / separated / divorced are more lonely, depressed, and have more difficult lives than those who get and stay married. They are less healthy. They have shorter lives. Their children face greater difficulties in life, and succeed at lower rates.

Happiness - real happiness - isn't a goal. It's a by-product of doing the right thing. But the boomers thought they could make it their goal (and they have taught their kids the same) and like trying to seize mercury, when you do that, it just squeezes out of your grasp.

Click to expand...

Obviously, you and your wife did NOT have very serious issues. Good for your for being able to work through your problems. Not all relationships or probably even most cannot.

You fail to take into account SO MANY other factors too. It's just plain annoying.

And how long have you been married for, and how old are you cpwill? :roll: You still have a LONG way to go friend.

ChrisL said:

Obviously, you and your wife did NOT have very serious issues.

Click to expand...

Obviously you have no idea what issues we did or did not have, as obviously only we are the ones fully aware. However, I'll tell you that you are indeed quite wrong and leave it at that.

Good for your for being able to work through your problems. Not all relationships or probably even most cannot.

Click to expand...

On the contrary - the divorce rates we see today are a relatively modern phenomenon.

You fail to take into account SO MANY other factors too.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I simply refuse to discount will.

Black Manta said:

Yes they should. Of course the law makes it so easy to divorce now it's almost ridicules to get married. When my wife and I got married we made an agreement that divorce for other than adultery (and even then maybe) was out of the question. We have had to work very hard at our marriage. I think this is part of the problem. People seem to think you fall in love get married and live happily ever after. What a load of poop.

Marriage and child rearing are hard work. It is something you have to be willing to work at. Something you are willing to give concessions and also cooperate with. Children make it even harder.

It is sad people today get married for the wrong reasons and have no clue what they are getting into.

This is all anecdotal on my part, but I have been married a long time and have grandchildren. I am still happily married and my kids are doing great. I had to have done something right.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

Head of Nail, meet Hammer. Instant-Gratification, If It Feels Good Do It, and The Purpose Of Life Is To Seek Self-Expression. :roll: People today think that when the puppy love fades "well, it just didn't work out"; or when they fight "well, the only answer to us fighting is to throw up our hands and quit". Utter bunk. My wife and I made the same oath ya'll did, and while it has sucked at times, you are right - the reward is so far and away more than worth it that you wonder at those who even stop to try to count the cost.

Click to expand...

I think a better solution is knowing what your expectations of a SO are and being as confident as possible that the person you're with meets those. When I was in my 20's and was very selective about who I dated, my friends, and even I, questioned whether my expectations were too high. I wanted a lady who was attractive, ambitious enough to pursue graduate education, no divorce or kids, and shared my belief in the value of traditional gender roles (especially in a relationship). Just like how they say you find your partner when you're not looking, I met my wife when I was in London to give a lecture. Low and behold, she was also there as a visiting instructor from another country. Keeping in touch regularly, after the academic year was over, I flew her to be with me for a couple months. Surprisingly, that was enough time living together to realize we were soulmates, mostly because we were in our 30's and mature enough to really pay attention to much more about our connection than the physical attraction. I believe the divorce rate is so high more because of people not really setting the right expectations of their partner, or even themselves, in fulfilling a role in a relationship and mutally confirming they match.

A healthy and stable enviroment between two mutually exclusive opposite sex individuals is the greatest chance that their offspring will have at being successful and productive adults.

cpwill said:

Obviously you have no idea what issues we did or did not have, as obviously only we are the ones fully aware. However, I'll tell you that you are indeed quite wrong and leave it at that.



On the contrary - the divorce rates we see today are a relatively modern phenomenon.



Not at all. I simply refuse to discount will.

Click to expand...

Yes, divorce rates are modern phenomena because the Catholic church finally allowed people who were trapped in unhappy marriages to escape.

ChrisL said:

And how long have you been married for, and how old are you cpwill?

Click to expand...

:shrug: I'm only thirty. My parents, however, fought through tough years themselves, and taught me both explicitly and through example the same that I've written above. They learned it in turn from their parents (though to be fair, more my dad's). The model works, as it has for generations.

You still have a LONG way to go friend.

Click to expand...

and Thank God for that . I'm looking forward to the journey.

ChrisL said:

Yes, divorce rates are modern phenomena because the Catholic church finally allowed people who were trapped in unhappy marriages to escape.

Click to expand...

What a fascinating bit of historical trivia. I had no idea that the Catholic Church was allowed to write legislation in 17th through early 20th Century America.

Children can sense and they know when their parents don't get along and when their parents are unhappy. When the parents are unhappy, that, in turn, makes the children unhappy. Some marriages split for GOOD reasons, such as abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction, mental illness, etc. Other times, they split up because they are not compatible and have irreconcilable differences.

cpwill said:

What a fascinating bit of historical trivia. I had no idea that the Catholic Church was allowed to write legislation in 17th through early 20th Century America.

Click to expand...

Lots of religious people thought they would burn in hell if they got a divorce. Then all of the sudden, the church got a new revelation. :roll: Yes, God himself spoke and said that people CAN get a divorce now I guess.