What happened to getting married before having children?

andrealm

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

So, by your thinking, the government never needed to set up a whole department (CSA) to get money out of absent fathers? Perhaps you should have told them this years ago!:rotfl:

To be fair, it was set up to deal with absent parents,in about 1 in 10 cases that the CSA deals with. It's not unheard of for mothers to be the ones who leave, while many men are very committed fathers who take their responsibilities seriously.

Fang_3

maggied wrote: »

Really? What this article (from 2007 by the way) shows is that approx 1 in 4 familes is a lone parent family and that a high proportion (43.5%) are unemployed and relying on benefits. There is no 'proof' here that those familes are supported by the absent parent.

Must try harder MrF;)

The proof is that the majority of families in this country are not single parents families with absent fathers. Which rather easily proves my point that the majority of women (in this country at least) do not agree with that poster.;)

Fang_3

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

So, by your thinking, the government never needed to set up a whole department (CSA) to get money out of absent fathers? Perhaps you should have told them this years ago!:rotfl:

You've missed the point too. My point was that the majority of families of this country do not have absent fathers.

Fang_3

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

How could anybody be happy if they had gone against their moral view, much less their faith?

People's morals change as they get wiser. You'll see.;)

That with the growing numbers of atheists in this country and falling numbers of church goers, it looks like those religious nutjobs really are a dying breed. Literally.:rotfl:

Such a shame.:rotfl:

maggied_2

Fang wrote: »

The proof is that the majority of families in this country are not single parents families with absent fathers. Which rather easily proves my point that the majority of women (in this country at least) do not agree with that poster.;)

Let me get this straight....women who are in stable relationships with the father of their children do not believe that there are men out there who do not see having a children as a commitment. Really?

I don't have any children - how should I stand on this issue - please tell me as it would appear that from your statement only those who find themselves in a precise situation can understand or empathise with a different one.

Or maybe you'd just like to re-phrase?

Fang_3

maggied wrote: »

Let me get this straight....women who are in stable relationships with the father of their children do not believe that there are men out there who do not see having a children as a commitment. Really?

I don't have any children - how should I stand on this issue - please tell me as it would appear that from your statement only those who find themselves in a precise situation can understand or empathise with a different one.

Or maybe you'd just like to re-phrase?

I'll talk you through it.

This was said:

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Not necessarily. The world is full of men who never (or rarely) see their children. For a man, fathering a child is no commitment whatsoever, whatever some women manage to persuade themselves.

I took exception to the expressed implication that all men have that attitude. I then backed it up by posting research that showed that in this country alone the majority of families are not single mothers, thus proving my point.

I didn't dispute that there were men like that in existence, I disputed the claim that all men think like that.

maggied_2

No you didn't - you said that women would disagree with that because they WEREN'T in single parent familes. It's not the same andI really don't need to be talked through it petal - you're conflating fact with opinion.

I've got a younger brother by the way, so am completely immune to your patronising and sarcastic humour - not that I don't like it but it just doesn't work on me

janninew

brians_daughter wrote: »

Oh we got a suprise alright with our last one... my oh had the snip after ds2 was born, 12 months after his op we got our suprise - we were the one of the failure statistics!!

I will be going to be sterilised in the future and if we STILL manage to conceive after that then it is seperate beds for us!:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I'll let you off with that one then!! A lovely surprise I'm sure! The same happened to my parents, Dad had the snip, 9 months later my mum is pregnant with my younger brother at 44! :eek: They still say its the nicest surprise they have ever had!

janninew

INT1 wrote: »

I think the modern attitude towards marriage is that "It's just a bit of paper"

Many young families, myself included have kids before the marriage. It's just such an old fashioned way of thinking if you get married first.

Marriages are so expensive these days that I would prefer to put my money towards having a good standard of living for me, partner and kid/s. Then if we get any extra money, we can put that aside towards a marriage.

Did you mean to say weddings are expensive as opposed to marriages? How is it more expensive to live as a married couple then a non married couple? Weddings don't have to be expensive, they can be done on a tight budget.

Fang_3

maggied wrote: »

No you didn't - you said that women would disagree with that because they WEREN'T in single parent familes. It's not the same andI really don't need to be talked through it petal - you're conflating fact with opinion.

I didn't say any such thing. My exact wording was: "Reality proves you wrong."

maggied wrote: »

I've got a younger brother by the way, so am completely immune to your patronising and sarcastic humour - not that I don't like it but it just doesn't work on me