Glenn Debates 'Single Mother by Choice' Advocate on the BBC
November 6th, 2007 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
Background: Recently Newsweek magazine and the British UK Guardian have written sympathetic articles about Single Motherhood by Choice. These include:
Knocking Yourself Up--Some women laugh about turkey basters replacing Mr. Right. The ongoing debate over going it alone (Newsweek, 11/5/07) and There's no shame in going solo, says mum: Career women with eyes on their biological clocks now have a 'how to' guide to single parenting, but the topic is provoking a backlash in America (U.K. Guardian, Observer, 11/4/07).
Both articles focus on author/"choice mom" guru Louise Sloan, and hold me up as an example of the "vehement" backlash against single mothers by choice. To learn more, click here.
Single mother by choice guru Louise Sloan, author of Knock Yourself Up, and I debated on the BBC Radio 5 Live's Stephen Nolan Programme on the BBC Sunday evening. To listen to the show, click here. (This audio link is newer and easier to access than the previous one).
The most important part of the show, even though it was a little off topic, was a letter from a 13-year-old boy named James which Nolan read on the air. The letter said:
"My mother loves me but she stops me seeing my dad though I want to. I'm starting to hate her for this. Because she hates my dad, why should I hate him?"
"));
20 queries. 0.331 seconds.
November 6th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
I'm sorry - I can't find this BBC interview on that site...
November 6th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
"I'm sorry - I can't find this BBC interview on that site..."
It's not very easy to find, unfortunately. You have to go to the upper left for "Stephen Nolan (3 hr)
Broadcast on Five Live Sun 04 Nov - 22:00" and then go to 18:00.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
Young James' letter should be a wakeup call to any and all women who would trash the non-custodial father, as follows:
- the smarter the kid is the more likely he is going to figure out he was lied to sooner
- the more he is lied to, the larger will be his reaction to having been defrauded of a father
- as this massive social trend of stealing fathers for profit to the state and legal profession gets further and further unmasked, the suspicion of false-father-trashing will move into the general awareness of all kids who are in the custody of mothers
therefore,
- more mothers than ever before in history can be expected to be abandoned by those kids they lied to, and to spend their old age alone -- including being cut out of their grandchildren's lives, and deservedly so. This makes sense as justice, but also because the 2nd generation will want to protect the 3rd generation from the nasty lies which it suffered from the mother in the 1st generation.
Yes, mothers, what goes around does come around, and since so much false-father-trashing has been going around, the backlash against those who trash a cut-out father might just be enough for YOU to lose your non-financial "rights" to your children for all of their adult lives. This could amount to you losing "your" children for an average of 50 to 70 years or more (until you pass away) .
So are you who would falsely disparage a father today, so greedy for money and control today, and until you kids reach 18, that you are willing to risk losing the next 50-70 years of your relationship with your children, during which period you will be remembered (abstractly) by your kids to have lied, cheated and stolen from their father? While they spend those years rebuilding that which you destroyed?
Are you confident you will get away with it?
Don't be.
But some good might come of this. After 50+ years of having been deserted by your kids, maybe you'll begin to understand what you did to their father.
November 6th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
From "AnonymousPamphleteer"
Are you confident you will get away with it?
The think they can get away with it because they have the advantage of planting the seeds of hatred towards their fathers during their formative years. Even after that child learns the truth the father still has an uphill battle. To put in plain that "poor defenseless mom" is taking a serious gamble by polluting that child's mind because:
1. The poison will take effect and the child will hate her/his dad forever just like mom planned.
2. Will decided not to trust either of them and end up turning her/his back on the entire family for fear of having no one to trust.
3. Grow up with a twisted sense of love is and become a stalker, molester, or worse.
4. Grow up too scared to trust not just family but any person in any capacity.
And don't forget that if mom does turn the kid against dad and then the kid and dad do reconcile mom can and probably will just use that as ammo to say that dad is turning the kid against her.
November 6th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Danny,
Your point is well taken, and I do agree that there is extreme damage done by these mothers, not the least of which is teaching children a sick version of what it means to be "loved" (i.e., loved=deceived, manipulated, used and injured). You are right, that is not good.
But all it takes is a tidal shift, which will happen in our lifetimes, not to mention the likelihood of one or two good Hollywood pictures to popularize the notion of the "Psycho-liar-single-mother" who trashes dad.
Once those pop-notions take hold, the dad-trashing mother will have no more place to hide from the consequences of her deceptions than does a lone father today from the brutal enforcement apparatus of the unconstitutional and false-pretense-based police state which America has become.
This American family court scam will come to an end, and it will be remembered in infamy. Similarly, those who have soiled innocent fathers will remain soiled by their own actions for the remainder of their lives.
November 6th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
What kind of parent would alienate the children for selfish reasons?
I think it’s the best indication of a dangerous parent.
People who do this should probably be denied contact with their children until they stop.
I’m not in favor of government interference, but if it’s warranted, this would be one of the types of abuse that should not be tolerated.
Let’s just make sure the Court doesn’t profit from finding someone at fault.
November 6th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Kevin asked: What kind of parent would alienate the children for selfish reasons?
My parents. Both of them trashed talked each other for decades. Before I was in fourth grade, I was writing on paper that I wished I'd never been born.
November 13th, 2007 at 8:27 am
Congratulations to James who is now standing up for his rights...to see and know his father. He clearly is developing a strong sense of balance and a high degree of maturity by confronting his mother on the importance of his father in his life. Wake up mother and listen to your son before he openly turns against you. He is old enough now to be heard in family court and have his feelings known
Mel.
November 13th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
This situation hasn't happened yet, as my grandson is only 2 - but...I know it will. We have had problems of all kinds and a lot of the problems are the judges, they all side with the mother no matter what she has done. If she says he is a bad father - he never gets to give his side and the judge sides with the mother.
November 15th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
This is a sad reality in many broken homes. The parents hate each other and can't understand why their children can't see "their" side of the situation and hate the other parent, too. I divorced my children's father after a 13 year marriage for very serious reasons. He is serving a 15 year sentence in prison & my kids are nearly 20 & 17. They know what their Dad did. They watched alcohol destroy him & our family. He put our family through hell. However; he is STILL important to them and they still love him very much and they still NEED him. Even with him being in prison, he still has things to offer as their Dad. He calls and writes and encourages them to live their lives differently than he did. He encourages them to make better choices and finish school. There was a period of time when he wasn't capable of doing these things and I did stop him from communicating with them, but he's made positive changes in his life and those positive changes have made him a better Dad and capable of having a positve impact, even from behind prison bars. My fiance' is a single Dad and has done an outstanding job raising his 2 children with very little help from their mother. He struggled with allowing his kids to love their mother early on after the divorce because he had so much hatred and resentment and he tended to try and alienate his kids from their mother because of that. I would always try to get him to understand that he shouldn't talk badly about their mother and that she was STILL their mother; regardless of how he felt about her. He's much better now, 7 years later, and the kids have been able to make their own assessment and have been able to see her more clearly on their OWN. Kids need to be allowed to love both of their parents and need quality time with both parents, as long as both parents are safe and responsible and the people in their lives are safe and responsible (like boyfriends, girlfriends, step-parents and step-siblings). Before watching my 2 kids suffer through the incarceration and absence of their own father for the past 7 years, I might have agreed that being a "single mom by choice" was a fair and perfectly acceptable and workable situation, but now; no. I think that it would be better for an orphan or a foster child to be adopted by a single parent rather than be left in an institution or left in a system where they are being shuffled from home to home, but I don't think becoming a single parent "by choice" is wise for the child. I also agree that Glenn was definitely being attacked on this show.
November 15th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
From the Newsweek article about single mothers by choice:
"The women in my study go to extremes in finding men who will help raise their children—uncles, grandparents, a best friend from college. This is not about creating a world without men."
Uncles, grandparents, and a best friend from college do not have the parental authority of a father.
Parental authority (without being totalitarian) is in the best interest of children.
November 25th, 2007 at 11:18 am
[...] few weeks ago I debated the issue of "Single Motherhood by Choice" on the BBC. The producer emailed the guests the 2006 London Times article Focus: Going solo (6/4/06), and [...]
November 26th, 2007 at 11:14 am
[...] A few weeks ago I debated the issue of "Single Motherhood by Choice" on the BBC. The producer emailed the guests the 2006 London Times article Focus: Going solo (6/4/06), and [...]
December 1st, 2007 at 2:21 pm
I'm writing a paper on the pros and cons of single mothers by choice through artificial insemination and wanted different opinions on the topic. I am seeking answers to the following quesions:
-Is it a selfish decision on the woman side to raise a child without a father and why?
-What will the absence of a father do to the child's development?
-Can the absence of a father bring anything good to the table?
December 1st, 2007 at 2:22 pm
I'm writing a paper on the pros and cons of single mothers by choice through artificial insemination and wanted different opinions on the topic. I am seeking answers to the following quesions:
-Is it a selfish decision on the woman side to raise a child without a father and why?
-What will the absence of a father do to the child's development?
-Can the absence of a father bring anything good to the table?
thanks for your time!
December 19th, 2007 at 6:09 am
[...] Found at: [Technorati] Tag results for fatherhood [...]