Nearly every time a young child or infant is severely abused or dies due to abuse, I've heard or read the comment 'They were just too young!' The statements are usually accompanied by head-shaking, a sad tone of voice: 'Kids having kids- Babies having babies!' After hearing these remarks numerous times, it occurred to me: of all the individuals I knew throughout my growing-up years and young-adult years, I couldn't think of anyone who was over 21 years of age when they became first-time mothers, and first-time fathers were around the same age. But none of us abused or neglected our youngsters- so what has been going on for individuals in their twenties and even early thirties to be considered 'too young' to be good, responsible parents?
The first thing that occurred to me: lifestyle differences. When the individuals in my early years became first-time parents, they were married- they already had a solid commitment to a spouse, and stable adult lives. Of all the kids I grew up with, only one was pregnant when she got married. When I was a young adult out on my own, nearly all the people I knew were single parents. However, there were factors that allowed such situations to work: single mothers had the ability to spend those important early years at home raising their own children; and single mothers did not share their households with individuals they had no intention of marrying.
From what I've seen, the 'too young' excuse started with personal relationships before it spilled over into 'parenting.' I recall a long-ago magazine interview where a 23-year-old actress told the interviewer that she was 'much too young!' to get married; she was living with her much-older boyfriend at the time. Later, when a 23-year-old man approached Oprah Winfrey for advice, she admonished him with the remark that he was 'much too young to even think about' getting married. And there was even an elderly gentleman who founded an online dating site- he told his readers and his own kids that no one should marry until they are at least 26 years old. The rationale behind this: 'You don't know who you are... You don't know what you want... You've gotta think of Yourself!' It should not be too surprising when individuals are encouraged to take this self-centered approach, the same approach spills over into the parenting subject. Not long ago, I read a blog post written by a young woman- her friends told her she'd 'regret' having a child when she was 'so young.' Not only was she 24 years of age, she'd been married for years, was a college graduate, and she and her husband owned their own home.
The government is partly to blame. There are a number of sides to this statement. Single mothers no longer have the option of taking care of their own children. When individuals bring a child into the world, they are encouraged to live apart- not only can they have benefits if they do so, the word 'mother' now means a paycheck and 'father' means child support; both can have rights without the daily responsibilities. There are no penalties for single parents (usually but not always mothers) living with one person after another; 'boyfriends' and 'girlfriends' are considered 'substitute' parents when there is no legitimate role or relationship. And another side of this issue, which I initially read about years ago: underaged single mothers in some states cannot receive any government assistance unless they and their children live with their own parents.
Parents can be to blame, too. In addition to the government's say-so, this part of the issue has been increasing. Not too long ago, it was quite rare for single mothers and their children to live with the mother's parents. In the distant past, I was riding along one day with a friend when she spotted a young woman and two little kids turn off the sidewalk and into a driveway; she said the parents had told their daughter that she and the children could live with them 'as long as she works!' When a single mother works- who takes care of the kids? In addition, who is in charge? In these situations, a parent is reduced to the role of 'one of the kids.' But this rare occurrence has become commonplace- instead of single-parent homes, adoption, or marriage, even the youngest 'teen parents' are encouraged by their own parents to 'live at home.' A few years ago I heard from a woman who stated she'd not be bothered at all if her 13-year-old daughter became pregnant; I also read a story in the news where the same approach was taken to a boy and girl, who were both only ten years old when they became 'parents.'
It's really no different from the idiotic trend of parents allowing their teenagers' 'boyfriends' or 'girlfriends' to 'move in'- it has nothing to do with 'morality,' what it has to do with is throwing family dynamics off-kilter- teens have adult-level relationships, with or without children of their own, but without the role and without the responsibilities. And regardless of all the modern-day harping about 'honesty,' it's really no different from the olden days when the children of unmarried girls were passed off as the mother's siblings, raised to believe the grandparents were their actual parents, some learning much later in life that this arrangement was not based on the truth. Kids today may know the truth- but it's the truth in name only, the family dynamics are the same.
Agencies can be at fault, too. One example: while I respect much that pro-life groups do, they should be encouraging girls/women who consider abortions to consider adoption instead. Second example: agencies that provide various types of assistance to teens should not be telling teens that the only factor involved in being a parent is 'getting a job.'
We can look at the media, also. I happened to notice a site about 'Celebrities who had kids when they themselves were only kids.' Some of the people they referred to were in their late twenties. I also noticed headlines on another site stating 'Young families today cannot manage unless they live near their own families so they can help.' My first thought: 'Help with what?' My thoughts went back to a point in time when my preschool-aged child and I lived in our own apartment on the opposite side of the country. The grandparents sent Christmas presents and birthday gifts, occasionally including a bottle of children's vitamins or bubble bath, but financial assistance was not part of it. And when they did live nearby, the relatives were not babysitters.
Most of these issues are relatively new, but issues surrounding environments are not. A long-ago online buddy summed it up when he remarked about young teens who lived near him- he said boys and girls alike were astonished whenever they met a new teenager who had not had a baby by the time they were 15 years of age. In negative environments, kids have an entirely different way of looking at growing up than kids from better environments. Instead of the latter's phase of adolescence and important milestones, kids from bad environments generally look at certain experiences as 'proof that they are now adults.' Even kids who are not yet in high school drink, use illegal drugs, have sex, and bring babies into the world. And while they are in no way ready for other adult activities, they are certainly not prepared to be parents.
When I think of this subject, one person comes to mind- because she represented what, to me, was average. This person I'll refer to as 'Dawn' (not her real name) was a little older than I, and we met when I was 4 years old. Not long ago, Dawn and her husband celebrated their 42nd wedding anniversary- 'empty-nesters' in the same house where they'd raised their children. They'd married on her 18th birthday, and have been together ever since.
When it comes down to it, which individuals, couples, and children fare better in the long-run- the majority of people I knew all my life, like Dawn, or those whose lifestyles are so self-centered that even through their twenties and thirties they're deemed 'too young!' for adult commitments and responsibilities?
The first thing that occurred to me: lifestyle differences. When the individuals in my early years became first-time parents, they were married- they already had a solid commitment to a spouse, and stable adult lives. Of all the kids I grew up with, only one was pregnant when she got married. When I was a young adult out on my own, nearly all the people I knew were single parents. However, there were factors that allowed such situations to work: single mothers had the ability to spend those important early years at home raising their own children; and single mothers did not share their households with individuals they had no intention of marrying.
From what I've seen, the 'too young' excuse started with personal relationships before it spilled over into 'parenting.' I recall a long-ago magazine interview where a 23-year-old actress told the interviewer that she was 'much too young!' to get married; she was living with her much-older boyfriend at the time. Later, when a 23-year-old man approached Oprah Winfrey for advice, she admonished him with the remark that he was 'much too young to even think about' getting married. And there was even an elderly gentleman who founded an online dating site- he told his readers and his own kids that no one should marry until they are at least 26 years old. The rationale behind this: 'You don't know who you are... You don't know what you want... You've gotta think of Yourself!' It should not be too surprising when individuals are encouraged to take this self-centered approach, the same approach spills over into the parenting subject. Not long ago, I read a blog post written by a young woman- her friends told her she'd 'regret' having a child when she was 'so young.' Not only was she 24 years of age, she'd been married for years, was a college graduate, and she and her husband owned their own home.
The government is partly to blame. There are a number of sides to this statement. Single mothers no longer have the option of taking care of their own children. When individuals bring a child into the world, they are encouraged to live apart- not only can they have benefits if they do so, the word 'mother' now means a paycheck and 'father' means child support; both can have rights without the daily responsibilities. There are no penalties for single parents (usually but not always mothers) living with one person after another; 'boyfriends' and 'girlfriends' are considered 'substitute' parents when there is no legitimate role or relationship. And another side of this issue, which I initially read about years ago: underaged single mothers in some states cannot receive any government assistance unless they and their children live with their own parents.
Parents can be to blame, too. In addition to the government's say-so, this part of the issue has been increasing. Not too long ago, it was quite rare for single mothers and their children to live with the mother's parents. In the distant past, I was riding along one day with a friend when she spotted a young woman and two little kids turn off the sidewalk and into a driveway; she said the parents had told their daughter that she and the children could live with them 'as long as she works!' When a single mother works- who takes care of the kids? In addition, who is in charge? In these situations, a parent is reduced to the role of 'one of the kids.' But this rare occurrence has become commonplace- instead of single-parent homes, adoption, or marriage, even the youngest 'teen parents' are encouraged by their own parents to 'live at home.' A few years ago I heard from a woman who stated she'd not be bothered at all if her 13-year-old daughter became pregnant; I also read a story in the news where the same approach was taken to a boy and girl, who were both only ten years old when they became 'parents.'
It's really no different from the idiotic trend of parents allowing their teenagers' 'boyfriends' or 'girlfriends' to 'move in'- it has nothing to do with 'morality,' what it has to do with is throwing family dynamics off-kilter- teens have adult-level relationships, with or without children of their own, but without the role and without the responsibilities. And regardless of all the modern-day harping about 'honesty,' it's really no different from the olden days when the children of unmarried girls were passed off as the mother's siblings, raised to believe the grandparents were their actual parents, some learning much later in life that this arrangement was not based on the truth. Kids today may know the truth- but it's the truth in name only, the family dynamics are the same.
Agencies can be at fault, too. One example: while I respect much that pro-life groups do, they should be encouraging girls/women who consider abortions to consider adoption instead. Second example: agencies that provide various types of assistance to teens should not be telling teens that the only factor involved in being a parent is 'getting a job.'
We can look at the media, also. I happened to notice a site about 'Celebrities who had kids when they themselves were only kids.' Some of the people they referred to were in their late twenties. I also noticed headlines on another site stating 'Young families today cannot manage unless they live near their own families so they can help.' My first thought: 'Help with what?' My thoughts went back to a point in time when my preschool-aged child and I lived in our own apartment on the opposite side of the country. The grandparents sent Christmas presents and birthday gifts, occasionally including a bottle of children's vitamins or bubble bath, but financial assistance was not part of it. And when they did live nearby, the relatives were not babysitters.
Most of these issues are relatively new, but issues surrounding environments are not. A long-ago online buddy summed it up when he remarked about young teens who lived near him- he said boys and girls alike were astonished whenever they met a new teenager who had not had a baby by the time they were 15 years of age. In negative environments, kids have an entirely different way of looking at growing up than kids from better environments. Instead of the latter's phase of adolescence and important milestones, kids from bad environments generally look at certain experiences as 'proof that they are now adults.' Even kids who are not yet in high school drink, use illegal drugs, have sex, and bring babies into the world. And while they are in no way ready for other adult activities, they are certainly not prepared to be parents.
When I think of this subject, one person comes to mind- because she represented what, to me, was average. This person I'll refer to as 'Dawn' (not her real name) was a little older than I, and we met when I was 4 years old. Not long ago, Dawn and her husband celebrated their 42nd wedding anniversary- 'empty-nesters' in the same house where they'd raised their children. They'd married on her 18th birthday, and have been together ever since.
When it comes down to it, which individuals, couples, and children fare better in the long-run- the majority of people I knew all my life, like Dawn, or those whose lifestyles are so self-centered that even through their twenties and thirties they're deemed 'too young!' for adult commitments and responsibilities?