What about the crippling toll a mother’s career can take on a child?
The conventional nuclear father-mother-child family optimizes society. Period. It is not a village. It is not single motherhood. Ask any teenage mom how a child destroys your life prospects going foward and makes even the easiest of tasks into a major operation.
Western Civilization has gone off the rails. By design. It is all going according to plan, from fatherless children to homelessness to drug addiction to porn. All of it.
I will give a crap when they run a series on how a wife and kids cripple a mans job prospects and future financial stability.
This is just not about abortion rights, etc.
It’s bigger than that.
Remember, though it has gone unsaid, unreported, etc., to the Leftist Progressive woke mofos, the world is over-populated and is in desperate need of a culling. Therefore, to them, abortion is needed to help curtail further population growth. This article is nothing more than a continuation of that theme guised under ‘abortion rights’.
Why isn’t your husband helping?
Huh ... Babies have fathers. Where is the baby’s father in all this?
Is she a poor widow, bereft of her loving, supporting, and protecting husband?
Is she a proper garden tool who has no clue as to which of many donors might have successfully inseminated her?
The world wonders.
Feminism ideology, a woman can have it all but it’s a cruel lie. A woman has to make a choice, wife, mother, maybe, big maybe, a part time job. Otherwise if she wants a career then it has to be a total commitment like a man does, but for a woman, no kids, no long relationships, if any, and 80 hour plus weeks.
Spontanious generation?
More women need to be home - barefoot and pregnant
Europe is ‘beyond’ marriage. Much more ‘sophisticated’ than the US.
I remember when the MAN went out to work and mum took care of the kids and the house. The woman was not poor.
Remember that. The situation today didn’t have to be that way.
Old fashioned? No. The system did work at one time. It assumed there were two parents. A thought that brings irrational anger to leftists.
If she (and the sperm donor) was so concerned about their kid, they should have put it up for adoption.
She was 38 or 39 when she got pregnant. Probably wanted to be a single mom because then she would have complete control of the child. It is all about me. Now she wants government to pay up, yet she retains control. Should be no government money in situations like this.
Two moms can split a a seven-day a week job (like waitress or Amazon worker) and child care duties.
Mom 1 would work three days one week and four days the following week.
Mom 2 would work four days one week and three days the following week.
If their Amazon work day was 10 hours long, they would each get in 35 hours a week on average and would not need to pay money for childcare.
My neighbor’s son is a firefighter and the son’s wife is a nurse.
They have their hours arranged as to avoid the need to rely on and pay for childcare.
for those who have time (lots of it):
https://www.gov.uk/browse/childcare-parenting/financial-help-children
QUOTE: Emma and Molly's father separated when their daughter was a few months old, and he has not been a part of her life since.
As a single mum
I think I found the problem, unless of course this was one of those immaculate conceptions??
Try being an old fat white conservative.
The hardest and most rewarding job in the world is being a mother. Any woman who makes that a second place choice to some cubical gig needs to rearrange her priorities...
Oh no!
She probably had to get a Ford instead of a BMW!