This Page

has been moved to new address

Mothers: What It Means To Have a Live-In Boyfriend

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Bloviating Zeppelin: Mothers: What It Means To Have a Live-In Boyfriend

Bloviating Zeppelin

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Mothers: What It Means To Have a Live-In Boyfriend


To those of us in the Right-thinking vein, this gets applied under the "common sense and logic" category; to some strata of overeducated white people and some Liberals, there will be a severe intake of breath and perhaps even an attempt to push a very important study to the side.

Go here to see the abstract of a referenced study from the November 2005 issue of the journal Pediatrics. Go here if you wish to see the full text of the article.

The point of the article is this: young children who live with their mothers' boyfriends or other unrelated adults are 48 times more likely to die from child abuse.

Not twice as likely; not ten times as likely. Almost 50 times as likely.

Please first note what isn't here: not likely to die from fathers.

Also: single parenthood is not the culprit, mother or father.

It is the "presence in the household of unrelated adults, usually a male boyfriend, that dramatically increases the risk."

The core of their paper:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate household composition as an independent risk factor for fatal inflicted injuries among young children. We analyzed 8 years of the Missouri CFRP data to test 2 hypotheses: (1) that children residing in households with adults unrelated to them are at higher risk of inflicted-injury death than children residing in households with 2 parents and no other adults; and (2) that children living with a single parent were at no greater risk of inflicted-injury death than children living with 2 parents as long as no other adults lived in the home. Secondary objectives included conducting a descriptive analysis of perpetrator characteristics including gender, relationship to decedent child, and whether the perpetrator was a member of the decedent's household at the time of the child's death.

Two important factors the authors discovered:
  • There was no increased risk to children in households with step or foster parents or with a single parent and no other adults.
  • It is a misconception that children in single-parent households are more likely to die from inflicted injury.

I repeat (and will continue to believe, as will many of my fellow bloggers): there is no other ideal for a child other than a full and complete traditional family to include one biological mother, one biological father, and a strong, lasting relationship between the two.

On one level: a very important study. On another: so very sad.

10 Comments:

Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

The conclusions aren't surprising, but that is really scary. How do we, as a society, emphasize the importance of marriage to young people when so many adults are train wrecks as examples?

Wed Nov 09, 04:13:00 PM PST  
Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

11 09 05

My God, how unfortunate! I think the reasoning behind this may have biological and psychiatric causes. I have seen the silverback mountain gorilla (in documentaries). He rises to prominence and kills or seriously maims his predecessor and then goes after the predecessors children and kills them. I wonder if somehow these behaviors go with humans; that if a kid isn't related to them then abuse is sanctioned. And I say this as applicable to the real sickos who aren't very different from animals!

What a sad state of affairs. And from personal experience I know this to be true. It is always someone's boyfriend who is beating or molesting that person's kids. And on the flip side, some women can be pretty abusive too! I still can't get how folks can abuse a child at all, even if I have limited patience with them at times. What a f&#d up world we live in! Good but sad post Blo Zep!

Wed Nov 09, 04:14:00 PM PST  
Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

11 09 05

And II:
We must live by example. We have to take responsibility for our actions and that is the only way children will listen; to learn by seeing not just hearing. I really wish that marriage as an institution was discussed in high schools. I graduated from HS in 1994 and can't recall a serious discussion of marriage EVER being done in my courses. We discussed sex ed and biology and even gay rights! But never the institution of marriage. Interesting eh?

Wed Nov 09, 04:16:00 PM PST  
Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

MSR -

We should be examples. Studies in psychology repeatedly confirm that much of our programming is instilled by our parents at a young age. They are our examples. Some of us are really blessed but, unfortunately, many are not.

That is a great idea to offer marriage and relationships as a class for high schoolers to get them thinking about how serious these topics really are.

I am a mentor in a big sister-like organization and we give a workshop to the girls on relationships and self-respect. The things some of the girls say are so disturbing. My mentee was abandoned by her parents at a young age, so she's taking cues from me, her aunts, her brother, her grandmother, but the feeling of being abandoned by her parents could emotionally cripple her for life.

BloZep and MSR - I'll use this as my sales pitch. Become mentors! It is a profoundly rewarding experience and it puts your money where your mouth is in terms of trying to make a difference in the world. It's easy to complain about the state of affairs and it is quite another to break the cycle. My mentee has a savings account for college, she goes to summer camp and we do charity work together. If she doesn't have a baby before she turns 18, she will be that much better than those before her.

Wed Nov 09, 04:40:00 PM PST  
Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

11 09 05

Good points II and Blo Zep!

Wed Nov 09, 08:35:00 PM PST  
Blogger bigwhitehat said...

Judges all over the country are instructed to ignore cohabitation in custody battles. Sick.

Wed Nov 09, 10:07:00 PM PST  
Blogger Little Miss Chatterbox said...

I can't remember when it was but I learned these statistics awhile back. It is sad in today's society how vigilant we have to be in protecting our kids. But I guess its nice to know by having a healthy marriage you are lowering the chances of abuse.

Wed Nov 09, 10:12:00 PM PST  
Blogger Eddie said...

One of my supervisors at work is married to a public school teacher. He says that he and his wife constantly stress the importance of marriage and a two parent home because his wife she's kids from both. She says it's obvious the one's from broken homes don't adjust very well, aren't very balanced, and tend to create more problems.

While no one is perfect, the one's from two parent homes are better balanced, and adjusted.

Thu Nov 10, 06:29:00 AM PST  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

First things first, II: we're going to have to sacrifice one for the other, and do it soon. We either sacrifice the kids and throw our cash and focus on adults, jobs, education, emphasis on morals, religion, the tenets of being Good, honest, self-sacrificing -- or we ignore the adult aspect and throw our cash and focus on children, removing them totally from corrupting environments, supporting them, valuing their well being. Why do I choose one OR the other, you ask? Why can't we do both? History -- it's what I've seen.

That's the horrible corruptive force of Democrats and, moreover, most politicians. Money and money and money for more and more "social programs" isn't the answer and never will be. It LOOKS good, it FEELS good, it's an ACTION and tends to jerk off the public by making us think politicians are doing something.

Everybody: get ready for a shocking statement. Money can't fix stupid or ignorant. Matter of fact, in my opinion, money ruined generations of black Americans in the early 60's by forcing fathers from the picture under the guise of goodness. Forcing fathers away! How ridiculously stupid is that? Up until that time blacks had a pretty darned GOOD family structure. And we wonder "what happened?" WE happened. So we doomed subsequent generations to poverty and dysfunction.

II: you're right. So many adults are train wrecks. We frequently have children raising children -- and that never works.

II and Mahndisa: with those comments you are BOTH so spot on! Kids pick their cues from parents -- who else do they have to pattern from? Another horribly judgmental comment: kids need moms AND dads: moms to love 'em and nurture 'em, dads to show them risk taking and daring AND love. And more than anything else, the parental relationship must be rock-like, and THAT shows kids the true ideal. Live by example? Oh boy, how true that is! II: God bless you for doing the mentor thing. Any child you save is one less for the "thrown away" stack. That is such a great thing, you can really be proud of it! Good for you!

BWH: so clearly they've never read the darned study! Frustrating!

We all know: nothing beats a healthy, TRADITIONAL biological family. No matter what we want, say or do, we're hard-wired that way at our core, as a species.

Thu Nov 10, 06:40:00 AM PST  
Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

11 10 05

Blo Zep:
You are so right about many things here and obviously we all agree that marriage and family is the best environment for children, and arguably the adults that raise them:) I just wanted to point to something you said about the Black family. It is not so simple. While the Black Middle class has made strides and GENERALLY always had intact family structures, poor Blacks didn't necessarily have the two parent structure always and it is a misrepresentation to state that. Ultimately extended family networks were the saving grace for Blacks who did not come from nuclear families and kept many families intact. But with the programs in the 60's that took government to replace personal responsibility AND the sexual morees becoming non existent, this led to a horrible brew in the witche's cauldron. One other issue is that desegregation broke up ethnic enclaves that had exhibited STRONG economies. Everyone thought the grass was greener on the other side and there was massive Black FLIGHT from traditionally Black neighborhoods too. In effect, this flight decimated extended family networks. So there are many factors as to the state of the Black family. But it hasn't always been a two parent structure. And yes, I am familiar with Mr. Sowells writings on this, but he negated some key evidence. I can supply this to you at your leisure. Even still, Ithink you did a great post and brought up valid points. A society cannot grow if many of its members don't come from a stable home. Period!

Thu Nov 10, 09:05:00 AM PST  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home