Manterrupting.

Fruitbat said:

I don't see any difference in how any of their kids turned out. I can't tell which 25 year old had a stay-home mother, a working mother, a single mother or father. So, think if a child just has one good parent who has their best interest at heart, that is by far the thing that makes the difference.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the point. Just because a person works doesn't mean they don't spend time and effort on their kids. Just because a person stays at home doesn't mean they will.

Fruitbat said:

Also, gee it would have been nice if we all could have supported each other rather than that nasty competitive attitude in the first place.

Click to expand...

Still seeing that.

shadowwalker said:

This is exactly the point. Just because a person works doesn't mean they don't spend time and effort on their kids. Just because a person stays at home doesn't mean they will.

Click to expand...

Yep. And you can't always tell from the outcome how hard they tried, either.

Different kids bring different things into the world. Some are easy to raise, some are more challenging. That doesn't make them bad kids, mind, just that they may require more, and they might end up giving back more or less, too.

Nothing quite so sad as seeing the flak parents who are trying their best get when raising a kid with more challenges than most. The kid with autism who goes on and on about his latest passion at volume too loud for the environment, or the child with muscular dystrophy who hops into her younger brother's stroller for a break at Disneyland, or the anxious kid who is struggling to muster the nerve to get through an interaction with a cashier at the supermarket. All of these kids face challenges you don't see unless you know to look for them. The parents, too. And too often they get a chorus of "If it were me ... " or "my kid ..." or what have you.

Generally people are doing the best with what they have. Really, they are. Minding your own business when you can do so often avoids making less of that.

Added: Regarding manterruption, I'm harder on those in positions of power than not. I'm quite content to cut slack to people without as much power, but if you have more power in a given context--and yes, white guys do play on the easy setting--then you do have a greater responsibility to monitor your own actions for unintended consequences. Why? Because if you have more power, then the consequences are greater.

Okay, I have to say here it does crack me up when people who don't have any kids demand your "scientific study" documenting that your bond is biological, rather than only existing your own lil head, with a child you actually had recently created in your own body, that actually was one with you, and who then even after you gave it life, received your immunities through breastfeeding, the child's cries triggering the let-down reflex for that nourishment, which then caused a hormonal release of feelings of wellbeing, etc. Nope, nothing biological going on there a'tall, lol.

It's like when those male scientists in Germany informed us that female G-spot orgasm did not actually exist, due to their "scientific study."

On the other hand, bonds with adopted children (only in our own lil heads?) can be incredibly strong, and many biological parents care little or nothing for their offspring, sometimes ending in infanticide or the selling of the infant.

There are so many factors that go into the parent/child bond, and while I believe there is a biological connection, I am sure that is only one small part.

I kind of agree with you. Obviously there are always other factors, we can rarely say "always" about anything. Also, it doesn't mean biological bonds are the only type of bonds that can exist. But I do not think the biological part is small, I think it's profound.

Fruitbat said:

Okay, I have to say here it does crack me up when people who don't have any kids demand your "scientific study" documenting that your bond is biological, rather than only existing your own lil head, with a child you actually had recently created in your own body, that actually was one with you, and who then even after you gave it life, received your immunities through breastfeeding, the child's cries triggering the let-down reflex for that nourishment, which then caused a hormonal release of feelings of wellbeing, etc. Nope, nothing biological going on there a'tall, lol.

It's like when those male scientists in Germany informed us that female G-spot orgasm did not actually exist, due to their "scientific study."

Click to expand...

No one is asking that. What is being asked for is proof the mother is the only real canidate for things like placing an infant on their chest to sooth said child after birth in light of the evidence that says otherwise. I haven't seen anyone suggest there isn't a bond, only that it isn't all consuming for everyone as some suggest. Biology isn't the end all be all or all women would take the same path.

I also find it odd that people who claim there's a strong biological bond tend to discount the experiences of surrogates, who by and large claim that the existence of that innate bond isn't true for them. Either these women are extreme anomolies, or the mother infant bond is without social conditioning no more strong than in other prime apes.

Lillith1991 said:

No one is asking that. What is being asked for is proof the mother is the only real canidate for things like placing an infant on their chest to sooth said child after birth in light of the evidence that says otherwise. I haven't seen anyone suggest there isn't a bond, only that it isn't all consuming for everyone as some suggest. Biology isn't the end all be all or all women would take the same path.

I also find it odd that people who claim there's a strong biological bond tend to discount the experiences of surrogates, who by and large claim that the existence of that innate bond isn't true for them. Either these women are extreme anomolies, or the mother infant bond is without social conditioning no more strong than in other prime apes.

Click to expand...

There are several different discussions going on at once here, not just one thing that "is being asked." Also, I can't answer for those who discount anything else, but I also know that personal experience is not to be waived off as nothing, when it is certainly of more substance than armchair discussion.

Well, my personal experience is that of a woman with three children; two biological and one adopted.

mccardey said:

There are so many different discussions going on in this thread, I think it should be shut down and sent out for ice-cream.

I can't make head nor tail of it.

Click to expand...

I think you are right! Personally, I deserve any confusion that comes my way for sneaking off from writing the guide I'm supposed to be working on anyway!