Mum has new boyfriend, lost interest in kids

[SqueakyPuffskein]

NC, just wanted a discussion on this. I don't want or have kids (broody hormone absent) but I find it interesting from a biological POV.

Single mum adores kid -> exciting new man appears -> maternal care hormones go poof -> kid is now annoying little pest, in the way -> neglect, abuse, abandonment, murder.

There have been countless examples of this phenomenon in the news, threads on here, and I've known a few cases in real life (my own mum was one, dumped me on other relatives so she could move away chasing men. It was much better than living with her, thankfully).

I'm curious if there's a name for it, or any research done? If not, why not? I know it's taboo to think about mothers not adoring their children, or that 'magical bond' disappearing and things turning sour. But it does happen and we need to understand how, and how to intervene effectively before harm is done.

Do you think there's any way to get the maternal love back, after the whirlwind romance has calmed/ended? That's what I find most chilling: once the hormones have faded, they never seem to return later. But I'd be interested to hear anyone's stories of mothers 'coming out the other side' and caring about their kids again.

When we see media focus on these stories the mothers are almost always quite disadvantaged/vulnerable.
As such, I wonder how much is male coercion and new boyfriend making out the child is a pain and monopolising her attention, even telling her to leave them
alone (in order to attend to him!)
I would be quite reluctant to add a man into my family mix I think.

I think there’s quite a few layers to this, to be honest. You’re coming from the assumption that these mothers were truly devoted and well… were they? We have no idea, we’d have to be to their children to actually know. My mother presented as a very devoted mother and never brought a relationship home post divorce, but if you ask her children, we’d all unanimously tell you her devotion was just for show and to look all self sacrificing. She was horrible at home (and later diagnosed with a serious MI). So it could simply be that these mothers weren’t that nice to begin with and once they found a new purpose, the children become nuisances.

Also worth noting that single mothers are often targeted by very specific men that prey on vulnerable women. Being a single parent is relentless, especially if you have no support, so any attention that looks genuine can suddenly feel like a lifeline you absolutely can not let go of.

I was a single parent long term by choice as I didn’t feel comfortable bringing a man into my home with a small child and now that I’m in a relationship again, even a few years later I’m still amazed at how much easier it feels to be able to share daily issues with someone. I can see the appeal of it, I am not surprised anymore that so many people are desperate to immediately find a new partner. I’m not saying it’s the right or safe thing to do, but I definitely understand the feeling of urgency now.

I think the fact that we develop a different, deeper love over time is the bit that is different to animals. Not many animals continue to have a 'relationship' with their offspring past a (often pretty short) period of dependence. Sometimes they actively drive them away, otherwise they are just like any other member of the herd/pride/whatever. Birds care for their young but they aren't popping in to see them when they're grown! In that regard they're exactly like the behaviour you describe - devoted to one season of offspring for a bit, but then it's time for the new mate.

This is exactly what happens in nature. A male lion for example will kill another male’s cubs unless that male is closely related. Once he’s killed the cubs, he then breeds with the lioness to produce his own.

It’s no surprise we see similar scenarios playing out with humans. We are all products of nature after all, no matter how “advanced” we are.

I am also curious if you’re a man, forgot to ask?

Yes and many women are addicted to that early babyhood phase and want to try to replicate it again and again and older children don’t seem to give them that “high”.

This is why I cringe a bit at all these threads when people say they “yearn” for another baby when they already have three or four. This constant state of hyper broodiness isn’t healthy.

When someone is only able to enjoy a baby and can’t get anything positive out of parenting older children it makes me think they have some arrested development. It’s people who can’t cope with a relationship when the other person isn’t totally dependent and supplicant.

Its presumably this which drives the constant need for them to “complete our family” with every bloke who they become involved with.

I've a friend (well, ex friend now I guess) who would act like my best friend, be incredibly kind and giving and supportive, then suddenly turned on me and laid into me for no reason. She has done this before.

I gather idealising someone then devaluing them like this is a criteria of borderline/emotionally unstable personality disorder. Due to a bad upbringing/abuse themselves. I'm wary of linking it to PD, because so so many traumatised women who don't behave like that are labelled BPD, and equally it seems someone can have this one trait - absolutely loving someone then turning on them - without other traits and with their lives otherwise intact.

Overall, my point is - this pattern of apparent love and care that disappears overnight is not limited to the mother-child bond. Perhaps we idealise that bond and so it seems more shocking when something gles awry?

When someone is only able to enjoy a baby and can’t get anything positive out of parenting older children it makes me think they have some arrested development. It’s people who can’t cope with a relationship when the other person isn’t totally dependent and supplicant.

Totally agree. I also think the same - and this is much more controversial - about people who say they prefer dogs to people.

It’s called “splitting”. My mother did it throughout our childhoods. It was like being on a rollercoaster.

It’s two different evolutionary survival strategies. On one hand, the species continues when a mother is fiercely protective of her offspring. But from an evolutionary perspective, the mother is more successful protecting her offspring if the father is present to protect and provide for her. So finding a new man if the father is absent is one primitive evolutionary survival drive.

We deviate from primal instinct and there are variations. Some people can thrive in a step parent role, but others unconsciously view the offspring of someone else as a threat to their own genetic reproductive opportunities. There have been historical sad stories of women finding love after abandonment or widowhood but only on the condition that they find new living arrangements for their kids.

Some women feel having a man present as a role model is better for their kids than not having one - which can be true if he is a good man. Many women struggle to provide for their kids without a man. I’ve seen women in a situation where they cannot both mother and provide so they marry a stepdad who turns out to be an abuser, but they don’t have ability to provide financially and don’t want to take on the struggle all over again, so they stay.

What makes the mother turn to being an abuser themselves? I agree with someone who mentioned personality disorder. But I think there may be some primitive evolutionary mechanism similar to how a male king of the pride lion will kill male cubs to stop them competing with him. Unconsciously, this man is a new chance at survival and new procreation opportunities. If he won’t accept the children of another man, then they are a barrier to this opportunity.

I’m not saying this is in any way justifiable. I truly believe some people are more evolved and advanced than others. Some people have animalistic primitive elements to their thought patterns, emotional processing, and intelligence.

If it were me, if I ended up a single mother, I’d live like a nun while the kids were young and vulnerable and be very, very cautious and slow to accept a new man as any significant presence in our lives. That said, I now have chronic health issues, can’t work, and am estranged from family. So I have sympathy for women who have very few options.

I used to volunteer for a DV charity including working with women who have had their children taken from them due to abuse.

The amount of women who come out of abusive relationships and end up back in another potentially even more abusive relationship is really high. I have been there myself but did not ever abuse my children, in fact for the duration of that relationship I felt like I was protecting myself and them. Leaving him was transformational for me, I remember thinking social services are going to take my kids if I don't leave now. However I would say that I'm really lucky to come from a privileged family who had the means to get me out as well as growing up with parents who are still together and very happy. Some of the women had little education and also had no value in themselves. One woman I spoke to had only ever seen her mums and sisters be in abusive relationships so putting men first was normal to her.

Generally where this happens the mum is vulnerable in some way- mental illness, personality disorder, addiction, low intelligence, abuse victim, PTSD. I also think the manipulation that happens in abusive relationships can exploit someone who is already struggling.

Perfectly ordinary mum in non-abusive relationship suddenly becoming uninterested in her kids to the point of abandonment- incredibly rare.

Young babies and toddlers give off a smell that is very reinforcing for the mother as well (presumably it is packed with hormones etc), but this fades off after a few years with only minor recurrence up to around 4 if they are ill. I would imagine this coincides with the switchover.

I think whilst some may be the same, it's often different when people say they prefer dogs. Although I wouldn't say this myself, I have volunteered in animal rescue and so had contact with a lot of "dog people"/other animal people. Often I think there's some neurodiversity or past trauma, and when someone has been treated badly, repeatedly, by other humans, the straightforwardness of a dog's relationship with it's owner must be amazing. More that it's straightforward and fun, rather than a power/hierarchy thing.

Nature is conservative by design. The hormones that make you fall in love are the same as a mother (usually) feels for her new baby.
The hormones last as long as mother is breastfeeding, which used to be until around age four in our evolutionary history, and then the woman would usually have another baby with a different man. Childcare was divided among a group, and parenting wasn't done in isolation like these days.

We still have all that going on inside us. Most people think it's a historical curiosity, but it's our blueprint.

So it's totally natural that the focus can get shifted to a new man. Culture, conditioning, control of women, marriage, be kind etc makes us believe the nuclear family is natural, but it isn't.

I've read several books about the anthropology of motherhood. There is one by Jared Diamond where he writes about this. What stood out to me is that by age 6-7, parents didn't give continual support to their children, it was all absorbed by the group. So in that way, we are more like the animals who don't have much, if anything to do with their offspring.
As I see it, it is the cultural control of women to behave differently and men's inclination to mate guard (like animals, in fact we are fancy apes) that got us here where women are supposed to be saintly and be consumed by their children for 20 years.

I think of this every time some desperate mothers post on here about being overwhelmed and frazzled by her young children and hoping for a solution, but it won't come in the nuclear family. Instead she gets the blame for not coping with the unnatural situation. If you have enough support, then it's better.