For the Sake of the Children?

[Jess]

I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.

Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?

The adults in question are not financially dependent on each other, agree on child-rearing, core religious values/issues, basic politics and most everything else, neither is wanted by the police or has ever been on COPS, Cheaters, Montel, Maury Povich or the Jerry Springer Show.


What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them? Just your religious/moral beliefs? Do you have personal experience?

[SassyLady]

I think each situation should be assessed on its own merits. Different children will react differently. It's not something that has a black and white answer. Some children will welcome the person that makes their parent happy and joins the family dynamics without controlling them or changing them much. Other children don't want any competition for their parent's attention.

For me it has nothing to do with religious beliefs .. it has to do with what makes everyone in the family happy so that a cohesive, healthy family life can be achieved.

[Abbey Marie]

My traditional gut tells me that if the two adults are not committed enough to marry, they probably shouldn't be living together in the house with the kid(s).

[Kathianne]

My traditional gut tells me that if the two adults are not committed enough to marry, they probably shouldn't be living together in the house with the kid(s).

That was always my take. I could date, but I always came home alone. Now? I live alone.

[ConHog]

I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.

Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?

The adults in question are not financially dependent on each other, agree on child-rearing, core religious values/issues, basic politics and most everything else, neither is wanted by the police or has ever been on COPS, Cheaters, Montel, Maury Povich or the Jerry Springer Show.


What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them? Just your religious/moral beliefs? Do you have personal experience?

I think it's not a good idea when children are younger, but if they are old enough to understand that one of the adults is not their parent then it's okay IMO.

[J.T]

I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.

Yes, their piece of shit father moving back in would be extremely detrimental in a great number of situations I've seen...

Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?

It really depends on whether the guy moving in is a good father figure/male model or not. There are numerous benefits to a two-caregiver household, especially if the individual moving in provides a strong positive role model where one is absent.

What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them?

The people objecting are fucking retards who are basing their judgements on their (willful) ignorance of the parties involved and their own arrogant self-righteousness and aren't actually considering what's really best for the children.

I reached this conclusion because it's the truth.

Just your religious/moral beliefs?

if they are old enough to understand that one of the adults is not their parent

Why does it matter if they're not the genetic parent and whether the child knows this immediately? Should we not adopt out children too young to know they've been adopted? What's the difference here?

[ConHog]

Yes, their piece of shit father moving back in would be extremely detrimental in a great number of situations I've seen...

It really depends on whether the guy moving in is a good father figure/male model or not. There are numerous benefits to a two-caregiver household, especially if the individual moving in provides a strong positive role model where one is absent.

The people objecting are fucking retards who are basing their judgements on their (willful) ignorance of the parties involved and their own arrogant self-righteousness and aren't actually considering what's really best for the children.

I reached this conclusion because it's the truth.




Why does it matter if they're not the genetic parent and whether the child knows this immediately? Should we not adopt out children too young to know they've been adopted? What's the difference here?

I'm assuming a situation where mom , or dad, is still in the picture even though they don't live with the family anymore. I've too often see situations where moms (mostly) have moved a new guy into the house when young kids are still trying to figure out how to cope with a divorce and then on top of that mom suddenly wants this new guy to replace dad not only in HER life, but in the kid's life as well. Now an older child of course has the cognitive ability to understand that dad is still around and that the while mom is mad at dad and wants the new guy to be "daddy" the fact remains that the child already has a dad. But little children don't , and can't possibly, understand this.

[J.T]

I've seen it work before. Dad was Dad and Clint was Clint, mom's new boyfriend. The boys spent time with both and both men served as male role models. If the children asked why Dad didn't live with Mom and Clint did, the answer was something along the lines of 'Mommy likes Clint a lot and Mommy and Daddy, while they still care for eachother very much and love you as much as ever, are happy living apart, Eventually, Daddy got a new girlfriend, too and the boys knew her name (though she wasn't as involved with their lives). (In time, the children came to think of and call both Clint and their father 'Dad'). If a woman tried to force a child to call the new man 'dad' (or a man tries to force the child to call a new woman 'mom'), then there's clearly a problem, but I see no reason to think there's any inherent harm in Clint or Alice living with Mom or Dad and being a part of the children's lives so long as they are good people and provide a good role model and play a positive role in the children's lives as another adult and caregiver and any issues between them and the other parent are left behind-the-scenes or in private-- and not waged in front of the children, as some unscrupulous POS 'parents' do.

It's not so unlike a more communal or extended family -like setting. It can work. It doesn't always, though nor do all marriages or mother-father families and homes. It depends on all parties involved.

From the rumours I've been making up about the hypothetical situation Jess is talking about (which, it will be rumoured, is about those people with the pool down the street), the children involved have benefitted quite a bit from having a good male role model around where one has been absent, they call him by his first name and know Father is Father and Tom is Tom. They know Tom and Mom love eachother, they've adapted to Mom and Father being apart and seem to be rather fond of Tom and enjoy having him around to fill a role in their life that has been left unfilled for far too long.

In such a situation, and in many others, the presence of the new person is in many ways a huge positive change for the children. Of course, this is not always the case and sometimes the new person can be a negative influence on the home, but that's why I stress that it depends on all parties involved. Hard rules would be impossible to lay down as it is entirely dependent on the people and circumstances of a given case. I've seen very unhealthy homes that were terrible for children with a couple that's been married and faithful for ages. I've seen happy and well-adjusted children from positive households with polyamorous adults where more than one person was called 'Mom' or 'Dad'- biological parentage wasn't all that important outside of medical information, because dna has absolutely nothing to do with being a mom or a dad and there is no reason to demand a child draw artificial distinctions if there is more than one person who fills that role and is as a mom or a dad to that child. Mom is Mom. Dad is Dad. Tom might be called Dad some day if the children come to view Tom as Dad- even as a second Dad. Sometimes, that's the best thing that can happen in the child's life.

[ConHog]

I've seen it work before. Dad was Dad and Clint was Clint, mom's new boyfriend. The boys spent time with both and both men served as male role models. If the children asked why Dad didn't live with Mom and Clint did, the answer was something along the lines of 'Mommy likes Clint a lot and Mommy and Daddy, while they still care for eachother very much and love you as much as ever, are happy living apart, Eventually, Daddy got a new girlfriend, too and the boys knew her name (though she wasn't as involved with their lives). (In time, the children came to think of and call both Clint and their father 'Dad'). If a woman tried to force a child to call the new man 'dad' (or a man tries to force the child to call a new woman 'mom'), then there's clearly a problem, but I see no reason to think there's any inherent harm in Clint or Alice living with Mom or Dad and being a part of the children's lives so long as they are good people and provide a good role model and play a positive role in the children's lives as another adult and caregiver and any issues between them and the other parent are left behind-the-scenes or in private-- and not waged in front of the children, as some unscrupulous POS 'parents' do.

It's not so unlike a more communal or extended family -like setting. It can work. It doesn't always, though nor do all marriages or mother-father families and homes. It depends on all parties involved.

From the rumours I've been making up about the hypothetical situation Jess is talking about (which, it will be rumoured, is about those people with the pool down the street), the children involved have benefitted quite a bit from having a good male role model around where one has been absent, they call him by his first name and know Father is Father and Tom is Tom. They know Tom and Mom love eachother, they've adapted to Mom and Father being apart and seem to be rather fond of Tom and enjoy having him around to fill a role in their life that has been left unfilled for far too long.

In such a situation, and in many others, the presence of the new person is in many ways a huge positive change for the children. Of course, this is not always the case and sometimes the new person can be a negative influence on the home, but that's why I stress that it depends on all parties involved. Hard rules would be impossible to lay down as it is entirely dependent on the people and circumstances of a given case. I've seen very unhealthy homes that were terrible for children with a couple that's been married and faithful for ages. I've seen happy and well-adjusted children from positive households with polyamorous adults where more than one person was called 'Mom' or 'Dad'- biological parentage wasn't all that important outside of medical information, because dna has absolutely nothing to do with being a mom or a dad and there is no reason to demand a child draw artificial distinctions if there is more than one person who fills that role and is as a mom or a dad to that child. Mom is Mom. Dad is Dad. Tom might be called Dad some day if the children come to view Tom as Dad- even as a second Dad. Sometimes, that's the best thing that can happen in the child's life.

Sure it can work, you're kid could also thrive eating nothing but dog shit. That doesn't mean it is the best approach , or good for the kid.

[J.T]

Sure it can work, you're kid could also thrive eating nothing but dog shit. That doesn't mean it is the best approach , or good for the kid.

You're comparing allowing a good role model and caregiver into your children's lives where one is missing to feeding your child dog shit?

I've seen you post some really stupid things before, but that one just goes to prove my point about you being too stupid to be allowed to reproduce. I hope to hell you haven't condemned any children to having you as a father. I can only plead that you promptly remove your testicles before further contaminating the world, lest such mental deficiency prove to have a genetic component and you perpetuate the problem.

I'm not bothering with you anymore. Either you're just plain fucking trolling or you're simply to damn stupid to bother with.

/ignore

[ConHog]

You're comparing allowing a good role model and caregiver into your children's lives where one is missing to feeding your child dog shit?

I've seen you post some really stupid things before, but that one just goes to prove my point about you being too stupid to be allowed to reproduce. I hope to hell you haven't condemned any children to having you as a father. I can only plead that you promptly remove your testicles before further contaminating the world, lest such mental deficiency prove to have a genetic component and you perpetuate the problem.

I'm not bothering with you anymore. Either you're just plain fucking trolling or you're simply to damn stupid to bother with.

/ignore

LOL @ JT accusing ANYONE of trolling.

[gabosaurus]

It's a bad move at any age. Unfortunately, it is getting more common.
Younger kids don't understand what is happening. It is bad enough that they are dealing with the loss of a parent (to divorce, death or whatever else). No they have to deal with someone coming in to replace their parent.
Older kids often build a hostile resentment. This is especially true if the newcomer brings in their own kids. Blended families are one of the worst situations a kid has to deal with.

It is a bad idea. If you can avoid it, do so.

[Gunny]

My traditional gut tells me that if the two adults are not committed enough to marry, they probably shouldn't be living together in the house with the kid(s).

Interesting. Define "marriage".

Are you referring to a legal document between a man, woman and the state of their choosing?

Or a relationship between a man, woman and God?

Last I checked, in my opinion, God doesn't need the state's permission nor endorsement.

On one hand, we are told that same sex marriages are normal and will have no affect on the children. On the other hand, because a man and woman do not have a legal contract with the state the little tikes' psyches and moral compasses will explode out of their heads.

IMO, what is n the best interest of the children AND the adults has to come first. Whether or not it is ordained by the government is irrelevant.

[Gunny]

I'm assuming a situation where mom , or dad, is still in the picture even though they don't live with the family anymore. I've too often see situations where moms (mostly) have moved a new guy into the house when young kids are still trying to figure out how to cope with a divorce and then on top of that mom suddenly wants this new guy to replace dad not only in HER life, but in the kid's life as well. Now an older child of course has the cognitive ability to understand that dad is still around and that the while mom is mad at dad and wants the new guy to be "daddy" the fact remains that the child already has a dad. But little children don't , and can't possibly, understand this.

I disagree. I liked and still like my stepfather WAY more than I ever will my biological father. I was 6 when my parents divorced and I didn't have any trouble understanding the situation. And I was glad the MFer was gone.Your premise that "this new guy replace dad" is wrong from the get go, and I can see why you would think that wouldn't work. On the other hand, if the children got no attention or only bad attention and broken promises from dad and they got attention, time and promises kept by "the new guy", things can only go up for the children.

Sure it can work, you're kid could also thrive eating nothing but dog shit. That doesn't mean it is the best approach , or good for the kid.

Nor does it make your absolute the only nor best approach. You presented pretty-much nothing but a negative scenario as if it was the only way the situation ever occurs.Such is not the case. The same aforementioned stepfather I like? My brother couldn't stand him and almost caused their split more than once. So three people should suffer for the spoiled rotten selfishness of one momma's boy? I think not.

It's a bad move at any age. Unfortunately, it is getting more common.Younger kids don't understand what is happening. It is bad enough that they are dealing with the loss of a parent (to divorce, death or whatever else). No they have to deal with someone coming in to replace their parent.Older kids often build a hostile resentment. This is especially true if the newcomer brings in their own kids. Blended families are one of the worst situations a kid has to deal with. It is a bad idea. If you can avoid it, do so.

One can but wonder where some of you people come from and where your heads are .....

[Jess]

I'm assuming a situation where mom , or dad, is still in the picture even though they don't live with the family anymore. I've too often see situations where moms (mostly) have moved a new guy into the house when young kids are still trying to figure out how to cope with a divorce and then on top of that mom suddenly wants this new guy to replace dad not only in HER life, but in the kid's life as well. Now an older child of course has the cognitive ability to understand that dad is still around and that the while mom is mad at dad and wants the new guy to be "daddy" the fact remains that the child already has a dad. But little children don't , and can't possibly, understand this.

Assume that the divorce has been a while - over a year for the kids to adjust to the differences in their life, so that point isn't as valid, if at all. Next assume that Mom/Dad makes it very clear that this new person is not trying to take the place of the other parent and that new person make the same clear. Also assume that there is not blatant animosity between the parents and at least the parent in question makes a point of not badmouthing the other parent to or even in front of the child/children.

Factor in that the other bio parent is not a good influence on the kids and the new adult in the household is.

Does that help muddy the waters some?