The statistics on outcomes for children raised by widows give lie to the myth that having a father in the home is essential to a child's well-being. The outcomes for children raised by widowed mothers are virtually identical to those of children raised in two-parent homes. Bulk statistics on outcomes for children of single mothers are massively skewed by the huge phenomenon of welfare-home teens girls having babies with street-gang young men who are also from welfare homes. Kids who are raised by just a mother do just fine if the mother is a decent person. And kids with teenage welfare moms wouldn't do any better if their thuggish fathers lived with them (they'd probably just join a street gang a little sooner). The children of these financially self-sufficient, educated, employed single-mothers-by-choice, will do just as well as the children of widows. Of which there will unfortunately be quite a lot in this coming generation, due to the large number of young men being killed in the war. Good for you for raising a child on your own!
You just blew your credibility as an analyst with that second to last sentence. The number of men killed in the current war is miniscule compared to those killed in prior conflicts and to other causes of death. By your logic the automobile is the cause of the fact that these women will have to raise children without fathers. The number of males killed in auto accident exceeds those killed in the "current war" by a factor at least in the 20s. (Less than 1000 deaths per year in Iraq/Afghanistan and more than 40,000 killed in auto accidents annually; divide 40,000 by two -- as approximately half auto-accident victims are male -- and you have the ratio.) Math helps cut through the bogus stuff on this board and allows us to see what is beneath and true.