[marajade]

"If you are single and you get pregnant, seriously consider adoption to a loving couple."

That maybe a choice that you find for you.

I see nothing wrong with choosing to raise a child yourself out of wedlock.

[freedumb2003]

I see nothing wrong with choosing to raise a child yourself out of wedlock.

Other than ruining their life (or making it highly probable to do so).

During the important nurturing years, Mom is working and the kid is warehoused (with Gramma if lucky, with strangers if not). The probability of a kid going to jail is massively higher for those from a single parent home.

And lets not start about the number of parental figures that will probably stomp through the kid's life, and the kid gets attached, then abandoned, attached, then abandoned, until he/she thinks he/she is of no worth.

It is a choice, but it is a selfish one. MMEEE MEEEE MEEEE! Who cares about the child's welfare, this is ALLL ABOOUT MEEEE!

Oh, and please don't hand me that crap about how someone you know did just fine -- some do, most don't.

[angkor]

I see nothing wrong with choosing to raise a child yourself out of wedlock.

Question is whether it's a second-best "choice", or a primary preference.

The latter seems odd, and really doesn't compute for most people because it's contrary to millenia of human history, to genetics, to anthropology, and just about every other characteristic of human civilization.

And per the foregoing, there *is* no civilization with single motherhood as a "preference".

[JamesP81]

I see nothing wrong with choosing to raise a child yourself out of wedlock.

Look, my mother tried that after my parents divorced. Take it from someone who was on the wrong end of that equation: it doesn't work. Their marriage was rocky and rough, but even that was vastly superior to them being divorced. You could not possibly imagine some of the thing that happened as a result of that.

It is by nothing less than the grace of God Himself that I turned out as good as I good did. Make no mistake, however: not having both parents in the home had a negative effect on me personally. Most people who have lived as I do don't think about it that often, thinking themselves to be mostly normal. However, when I sit down and think about it and especially when I observe the social interractions of people my age who have parents who are still married, I can very starkly see that what happened with my parents 16 years ago left me different, and (mostly) not in a better way. Living with mom and only seeing dad a couple of times a month had a profound effect on my social perceptions, most them bad, that I still deal with to this day.

I have problems with relationships. I'm into my mid-20s and I've never really seriously dated anybody. Since my parents were divorced before those kinds of things became an issue, I never had an example of a husband and wife relationship to draw on. I have no idea what I'm doing. None. It's all good and well to read a book on it but it's quite another to have seen it in action. As a result, I find myself steadily moving closer to my 30s and steadily becoming less desireable for marriage, and I realize that I could seriously be looking at lifelong singlehood. The thought is not appealing.

Do not ever be deceived by the popular culture. Do not ever be deceived by the occasional success stories. The best chance a child can have for a good life is to be raised in the home with these three elements: a) Mom, b)Dad, and c) the Lord. There is no substitute.

[Old_Mil]

I see nothing wrong with choosing to raise a child yourself out of wedlock.

It is one thing to raise a child out of wedlock if and when finds themselves widowed. It is quite another to deliberately put yourself in a circumstance where you outsource the raising of your child to a minimum worker with a high school education through promiscuity or conscious choice.