Single parenthood: why it rules

[KateSMumsnet]

A recent study has found that children raised by a single parent are just as happy as those raised by two biological parents. Fortuitously, at the time the study was published we were already putting together a page about the best things about being a single parent, based on Mners' posts.

We'd love to hear your reaction to this study, as well as your experiences of being a single parent. Are you content with your family set-up? If you had previously been in a dual-parent relationship, is your life better or worse than it was before? Got any wise tips for being a fulfilled lone parent while raising happy kids? As ever, please let us know what you think.

[BluebellTuesday]

For the parents.

I wondered about posting that for the reasons you say. But my honest belief, after over a decade of single parenting, and a period of parenting with a weekend partner, is that there is a burden on the single parent which should not be overlooked. Quite simply put, if you have two committed adults, you have twice the options re childcare, work, whether you can meet friends or not; there are twice as many people around to help with homework, to take to activities; etc. The fact that in reality it is often not like that is to do with broader inequalities in society.

What being a single parent does, nine times out of ten, is simply formalise those inequalities.

Now we can argue till we are blue in the face that being a single parent is empowering, that we can make our own choices, that there are positives, but the simple fact is, if you are in a position of power, you don't need to be empowered.

Over half of absent fathers pay no maintenance; I don't know how many have little or no contact; most people become single parents because their relationship has broken down. Things work out because of the massive emotional and physical investment which single parents put into making it okay.

[BluebellTuesday]

Things work out for the children, I mean in my last sentence.

I think the counter argument is that recognising that single parents are not two parents is the argument which justifies the additional social support which single parent families get. If you say that one parent can do everything two parents can, how can you justify say, the lone parent element in tax credits. Whereas, it is precisely those supports which help to even out financial inequalities and therefore wellbeing outcomes.

[Theincidental]

As per spero, basil, bluebell and others, I too don't like the tone of the OP and the thread title.

It's one thing to trumpet that lone parents are not inferior and another entirely to say single parenting "rules".

Please MN, if you want to do something positive for single parents campaign for positive changes to the csa - such as removing fees for claims or stronger enforcement of csa payments, or making universal credit fair for us, but not this.

It's so trite and offensive to lone parents and other family types and set ups to try and promote as some kind of super hero status - effectively setting us up to fail.

I'm cross about this thread - have muttered about it on the LP board.

When universal credit comes in, I stand to lose £200 + per month, and I'm already skinned to the bone financially.

[BluebellTuesday]

Yes, I am trying to articulate my last post better.

I don't think it is helpful to argue that there is no difference between single parent and (functioning) two parent families. All the policies which have benefitted single parent families, and helped iron out differences, are based on a premise that one parent families have a specific set of needs. That they are NOT two parent families. In countries such as Sweden where there is no difference in a range of child outcome measures, there are also a range of social support measures. Receiving child maintenance improves outcomes. Having a social fabric which supports a range of difference is surely also helpful. It is not about whether we are as good, it is about what we need. Happiness is a pernicious measure; it doesn't keep you clothed or fed, or give you equal access to higher education, or ensure you get five fruit and veg a day.

[BluebellTuesday]

In short, our children can do as well, and be as happy, but that does not happen by osmosis. And actually, it is not just about our children, ut every child. The 64% who are only sometimes or never happy.

[BluebellTuesday]

but every child i mean.

I spend as much time correcting myself with this damn phone as posting. Am off to do some work anyway now.

[AskBasil]

Oh yes I wouldn't argue with you on any of that bluebell, I hate this "I don't know how you do it, I take my hat off to you" etc. stuff as well.

I think it is basically saying that we are super-women and actually, anyone who isn't a superwoman shouldn't dare to even think of joining the club, she'd better stick with her unsatisfactory husband because she's just an ordinary woman and would never be able to do what the superwomen do. It's just the madonna/whore thing at work again in single parent stereotyping IMO - you're either a feckless hoo-er or superwoman. Either way, no normal woman would want to be in either of those clubs.

I dunno though, yes there's lots of it that's exhausting but I wonder if there's lots of parenting that's exhausting full stop. I think if you've known nothing else, you've got nothing to compare it with. I've been a single mother since my eldest was 2 and I was pregnant with my second, so really have done it all alone and don't know how much easier it might have been. OTOH I also don't know how much harder it might have been with someone who didn't measure up to that rare ideal we're always being sold.

[WishiwasHenry]

I've been a single dad for years, and it's brilliant.

I do get on great with my ex, she does it her way and I do it mine.

Both children live with me full tome now, and it's brilliant.

[WishiwasHenry]

Also, looking after children is rewarding, it's hardish, but what better job is there?

[IfNotNowThenWhen]

Ha! Yes AskBasil. It reminds me of a stand up routine I saw once, where the (black female) comedian was railing against the idea of the Strong Black Woman", and saying that this stereotype gave men carte blanche to treat women like crap e.g "Ooh, you're such a Strong Black Woman, you will take all my shit and be fine". She was saying how she didn't want to be a Strong Black Woman. She wanted to be able to fall apart!

It's the same with the Strong Single Mum stuff. I totally and utterly agree with Bluebell in that we do need help, and things in place to ensure our children don't suffer.

At the heart of it though, the government don't like helping lone parents , because it is seen to be giving legitimacy to the idea of women raising children alone. (Whether we are doing so because the men have simply left us to it is neither her nor there).
Look, lets face it, when we, or the media/government, talk about single parents, what is meant is single women with children, which can either mean sexually incontinent teenagers, or sad, abandoned women.
Either way, it's not a good look.

Interestingly, I used to date a single Dad who had sole custody, and the way he was treated was totally different. H was back at work FT, with the baby at FT nursery, when the baby was 3 months, and everyone agreed that he couldn't really do anything else, could he? Good for him for providing for his child.
He was considered a virtual saint for hanging in there, doing a days work, and going home to take care of his baby, He admitted to me that the main reason he did go back FT was because he wouldn't have been able to handle doing the FT baby stuff any longer.
Fair play; he was doing his best, as most of us do- his DP had left, and he soldiered on , but the difference was, he was always treated by everyone like a hero. He was a good parent, but no different to a million single mums out there.
There is a massive double standard, because the vast majority of us are women.
So, we don't only need help and support, but also a shift in media perception, and the realisation that single parenthood can happen to a very diverse section of society.

[IfNotNowThenWhen]

Ooh, X -post Wish IWas Henry !

[Spero]

It is not an effective way to counterbalance one lie/prejudice by trying to promote another lie/prejudice.

I.e 'only couples can successfully parent' versus 'single parents are the best!'

Neither is true. I would rather deal with stigma by pointing out the truth - single parenthood does not necessarily cause children harm. Bad parenting causes children harm and bad parenting can happen in any kind of family.

[BluebellTuesday]

Oh yes, the 'I don't know how you cope' means 'and don't expect me to help you!'. Worst was when my xh said it.

In other words, I can confirm it is harder with someone who doesn't measure up. OTOH, you don't have the stigma of being the poster person for broken Britain - though I may be imposing that stigma on myself.

Agree re bad parenting happening in any kind of family. My parents are still happily married after 40 odd years, I can attest to the damage they did.

[Lioninthesun]

Please MN, if you want to do something positive for single parents campaign for positive changes to the CSA - such as removing fees for claims or stronger enforcement of CSA payments, or making universal credit fair for us, but not this.
^ THIS
As I said in my post earlier and has been said since, we need respite to make it work. We need the support from society and the govt that even if the father doesn't have contact, he pays for his own children. The stigma SM get is mainly down to the assumption we are all on benefits. Stop the fathers wriggling out of financial responsibility by allowing CSA to enforce their power and you stop not only a societal stereotype but probably hook the poorest families out of the benefits system. These men are tax evaders (paid cash in hand to avoid CSA) and yet no one wants to deal with it, which in turn condones and perpetuates this system.

[Spero]

Yes, times 100 to Lion.

Focus needs to be on educating people that you don't have children and just walk away. If we can't enforce your moral obligations we can at least try to ensure you meet your financial ones.

[Swannery]

Single parenthood, with no input from an ex-P, is extremely hard work, if you don't have support around you. It requires enormous self sacrifice - never an evening out, or a few days away with a friend, as it is you and you alone. And whatever walk of life you come from, a lot less money than you would have if in a couple. There is a higher likelihood of your making mistakes, as 2 heads are generally better than 1, and no safety net when you fall ill or lose your job.
I would far far rather do it within a happy couple. An unhappy couple is a different matter.
I know plenty of single mums who have raised great, happy, successful kids. But appreciation of what they have done from those around them is markedly lacking - it's a blame only game, if you're a single mum, even if you've never taken a penny in state benefits.

[FreckledLeopard]

For me, single parenthood does 'rule'. I've raised DD alone from birth - she's 13 now and met her father for the first time last year (it took him a while to get his head round the idea ).

I married briefly - when DD was 9 - and the marriage ended pretty quickly for a number of reasons. Whilst I appreciate that I didn't marry DD's father, I found parenting with another adult far harder than parenting alone. Of course there are variables and if you have a wonderful, supportive partner, then great, but my relationship with DD has always come first and I wouldn't want to have to compromise in order to please a partner.

I suppose it's different if you meet someone first, then have a baby and raise it together - perhaps there are fewer compromises as you learn how to parent. Having said that, I have pretty strong opinions and ideals on child-rearing and unless I was with someone who fundamentally supported those beliefs (co-sleeping, attachment parenting, breastfeeding for 2+ years) and didn't get resentful, then I doubt that being a couple would have had any benefits for me at all. I consider myself extremely fortunate that I've been able to raise DD exactly as I wanted, without having to consider anyone else. I've loved the freedom it brings, the fact that I can travel anywhere in the world, whenever I want, with DD. If I wanted, I could re-locate to Australia and start a new life there.

I'm now in a situation where I'm seriously considering having another baby - I've always wanted more children and my biological clock is ticking - and I am reluctant to consider meeting someone first. I honestly think that I'd prefer to use a sperm bank, have a child and worry about any kind of relationship as a secondary thought.

I appreciate I have a selfish attitude and that this goes against the norm. But IMO, single parenthood is preferable to coupling up.

[Swannery]

There's a theory that, as a single parent, you can do just about anything with one child, but that that doesn't work with 2.
As a single parent, the relationship with the child is maybe more intense? I suspect that if the children had a DF they would love him more than me (they certainly worship their uncle), but as a single parent you get all the love and sharing of their lives! And life is very child-centred. Whether that's good or bad I don't know.

[Spero]

I wonder why there is so much need to identify this one 'gold standard' of parenting which is undeniably 'the best' as this is of course bollocks.

As this thread shows, people have different needs and wants over time, as do children.

Single parenting can be very hard in poverty, with lack of family support, dealing with a disabled child etc, etc. But parenting in a couple can also be very hard if couple don't work well together, for whatever reason.

I am much happier as a single parent than with my lazy, unpleasant, emotionally constipated ex. But I would be happier still with a kind, decent partner who made me laugh and took me to the cinema from time to time.

Some people actively prefer single parenting, some people don't.

But we don't define good parenting this way. We look at what works for the child, and if you and your child are happy, functioning, kind people then your family works and who cares who is in it.

[AskBasil]

Amen to that.

[MexicanSpringtime]

Here in Mexico they say better alone than badly accompanied and that is definitely how it was for me.

I was the child of separated parents and on saw my father twice in my childhood after he left when I was small and, to tell the truth, when I got to know him better, I could only be grateful that my parents separated when they did. Likewise, when I was bringing my daughter up on my own, if ever I felt sorry for myself being a single parent, I only had to conjure up the picture of her father, and I realised how lucky I was.

[Spero]

I think that is saying common all over the world! I was certainly told it in the UK.

The tragedy is that so many people don't believe it. I know of so many relationships that are very unhappy, but the people in them seem to think it is an even worse fate to split up and be 'lonely' - as opposed to being belittled, shouted at or hit.

I would rather be 'lonely' by far than be with someone who didn't value me, or even seem to like me very much. But the thing is, I am not 'lonely' because now I DO value myself and find spending time with me a treat - if that doesn't sound too wanky.

I think it is that which gives me the tools to be a good parent - because I am happy with myself and what I have got. You don't get that by having a partner, that is something that has to come from within you.

[BluebellTuesday]

I have not heard that saying but it is very true. I like it, thank you!