Fathers and familiy stability data

[Truth in love]

This is also some very old data. I'm going to ignore how old it is as you said not a debate thread. Just wondering if the data has been peer reviewed. I'll worry about if I can find more up to date data elsewhere

It is a bit old. Massive amounts of stuff was from journals I’m not really in a position to type many pages of references. I had the summary from grad school so it was semi way to cut and paste.

 

[JustGeorge]

It is a sad topic and I apologize if my post comes off as tone deaf. The sarcasm come from the stark reality of it; I work with kiddos from broken homes. I see the impact of it every day.

But the issue is often used to justify conservative ideas of a nuclear family that can't be realized in modern America. A community approach is the more viable option where social and economic supports can help families impacted. We should also begin to study and educate folks on how diverse family structures (including LGBTQ+, poly, and non-romantic) play a role in communities.

The sarcasm was meant to juxtapose the American mythology of the independent American cowboy with the nostalgia of the 1950s Leave it to Beaver family.

Community approach is right!

We have a 'nuclear family', but sometimes that isn't quite enough... I know reaching out for help in the past hasn't gone well, often receiving the "I'm sure you guys can handle this yourselves" attitude". Sure, we can... but how much better is it when we can all see to a child's well being together? I know some of the most influential adults in my young life were adults other than parents or relatives.

I know, the saying's old and no one likes it, but it takes a village to raise a child.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Community approach is right!

We have a 'nuclear family', but sometimes that isn't quite enough... I know reaching out for help in the past hasn't gone well, often receiving the "I'm sure you guys can handle this yourselves" attitude". Sure, we can... but how much better is it when we can all see to a child's well being together? I know some of the most influential adults in my young life were adults other than parents or relatives.

I know, the saying's old and no one likes it, but it takes a village to raise a child.

I maintain it takes a family to raise a child.

Im not a proponet for institutionalized rearing of children.


.

 

[Truth in love]

Community approach is right!

We have a 'nuclear family', but sometimes that isn't quite enough... I know reaching out for help in the past hasn't gone well, often receiving the "I'm sure you guys can handle this yourselves" attitude". Sure, we can... but how much better is it when we can all see to a child's well being together? I know some of the most influential adults in my young life were adults other than parents or relatives.

I know, the saying's old and no one likes it, but it takes a village to raise a child.

the village helping the family works well. The village instead of the family is a nightmare.

 

[JustGeorge]

the village helping the family works well. The village instead of the family is a nightmare.

Not always. Sometimes when the home is a nightmare, the village is preferable.

I suspect that's the exception rather than the rule, but it happens. My husband's childhood was like that, going through severe abuse and being abandoned at 12. He may not have made it without the village.

 

[JustGeorge]

I maintain it takes a family to raise a child.

Im not a proponet for institutionalized rearing of children.


.

I'm not for an institution raising a child, either, but it helps a kid to know their neighbors and other friendly adults.

I'm in the traditional nuclear family(also, I'm a homemaker, and I homeschool the kids), but it really does take a community, in my mind. You don't know its missing until its gone. The community is good for the parents, too. I sure would love some other parents to take the kids to the park with, but... not gonna happen these days.

 

[VoidCat]

Not always. Sometimes when the home is a nightmare, the village is preferable.

I suspect that's the exception rather than the rule, but it happens. My husband's childhood was like that, going through severe abuse and being abandoned at 12. He may not have made it without the village.

I wouldn't have made it without the village either. I mean my legal guardians kicked me out the house twice. Once for chewing up a hairbrush. So yeah I needed that village. 12 is a rough age to be abandoned. I got kicked out at 15 but I wasn't abandoned. I got put in a mental hospital then a group home then foster care and finally lived with my grandma. At 12 tho I was kicked out regarding the hairbrush. I'd rather not go into specifics regarding that. Tho it wasn't permanent it was rough. It was permanent with the second time I was kicked out

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I maintain it takes a family to raise a child.

Im not a proponet for institutionalized rearing of children.


.

But sometimes there is no family or the family is worse than the alternative.

 

[Truth in love]

Not always. Sometimes when the home is a nightmare, the village is preferable.

I suspect that's the exception rather than the rule, but it happens. My husband's childhood was like that, going through severe abuse and being abandoned at 12. He may not have made it without the village.

Sometimes the home is bad. (Ive collected a few horror stories over the years). But on the average the village is much more traumatizing than home. The trauma keeps hurting for years and years to come, lot of mental health problems, physical health problems dying young etc.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Sometimes the home is bad. (Ive collected a few horror stories over the years). But on the average the village is much more traumatizing than home. The trauma keeps hurting for years and years to come, lot of mental health problems, physical health problems dying young etc.

Yeah, the problem is that you assume that for all cases of fatherless homes adding a father will work, because those with a father work. It doesn't follow, because they might be fatherless, because the father and/or mother don't work.
Have you accounted for that?

 

[Truth in love]

Yeah, the problem is that you assume that for all cases of fatherless homes adding a father will work, because those with a father work. It doesn't follow, because they might be fatherless, because the father and/or mother don't work.
Have you accounted for that?

In some cases the core issue is a bad parent or parents. I’ve got a project I read about years back I’ll see what I can dig up.


Question if the main issue is lack of economic resources why did Child well being in the US and Sweden go down not up when the government started showing the kids with money through various programs?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

In some cases the core issue is a bad parent or parents. I’ve got a project I read about years back I’ll see what I can dig up.


Question if the main issue is lack of economic resources why did Child well being in the US and Sweden go down not up when the government started showing the kids with money through various programs?

Well, I don't know. But there could be several factors and not just one.

 

[Truth in love]

Well, I don't know. But there could be several factors and not just one.

Most things have more than one factor. However when one factor stands out as large and in change over and over again we need to pay attention.

I found one the bits of data ( Duncan W. G. Timms 1991 Family structure in Childhood and mental health in adolescence university of stockholm

Big study of about 15,000 youth. "the experience of family disruption involving parental separation or divorce has negative effects on the later mental health whenever it occurs and regardless of the socioeconomic status of the household or later changes in family structure"

There another bit I'll try to find but I don't think I have it on the computer.

 

[Left Coast]

the summary is that stable intact families is the best envious for kids, men and women. It lowers rates of poverty, crime childhood trauma etc.

But "stable intact" does not mean "heterosexual nuclear." That's the issue with the interpretation.

 

[Truth in love]

But "stable intact" does not mean "heterosexual nuclear." That's the issue with the interpretation.

That is an areas where more research is needed. Many alternative family forms have been studied and do not work out nearly as well for children. Given the relatively low numbers of L/G couples raising children until very recently it will be quite some time before we have a large enough mass of long term data on those environments.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Question if the main issue is lack of economic resources why did Child well being in the US and Sweden go down not up when the government started showing the kids with money through various programs?

Even if this were true, and I've seen no evidence just insistence without corroboration that it is, my question would be:

• What constitutes 'showering money'?
• What kinds of programs?
• What are the programs looking to achieve and how good is their accessibility?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Even if this were true, and I've seen no evidence just insistence without corroboration that it is, my question would be:

• What constitutes 'showering money'?
• What kinds of programs?
• What are the programs looking to achieve and how good is their accessibility?

Further where the number of the problems actually reported the same over time.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

That is an areas where more research is needed. Many alternative family forms have been studied and do not work out nearly as well for children. Given the relatively low numbers of L/G couples raising children until very recently it will be quite some time before we have a large enough mass of long term data on those environments.

There's been literal decades of research with study sizes much bigger than a lot of the studies provided by this thread with overwhelming evidence kids of lgbt do just as well in all metrics and even better in some (particularly communication).

 

[SkepticThinker]

I've already responded to this in another thread.

 

[Left Coast]

That is an areas where more research is needed. Many alternative family forms have been studied and do not work out nearly as well for children. Given the relatively low numbers of L/G couples raising children until very recently it will be quite some time before we have a large enough mass of long term data on those environments.

This is simply incorrect. Multiple studies have already been done showing that children of same sex couples are just as successful, healthy, well-adjusted, etc as children of opposite sex couples. It would behoove you to look at some peer reviewed research on the topic.

Moreover, you have not accounted for other family arrangements common in non-Western cultures where extended families and even non-family members in the same tribe, neighborhood, etc. are often highly involved in child-rearing.

Here's an example from the literature for you that also summarizes prior research on the topic:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0003122420957249