Archive for the ‘Parenting’ Category

On Men, Women, and Children….

Tuesday, July 20th, 2010

I am in Costa Rica this week, on a quiet vacation with my children. I’m not supposed to be working. But thinking is my past-time so this blog erupted.

The blog started to bubble and hiss during a conversation with a young guide who helped us zip-line across the rain forest canopy. As he snapped hardware around the crotches of myself and a girlfriend, he grinned flirtatious directions like, “ladies, please spread your legs for me.” I thought this was a good time to ask if he was married. He shook his head and looked down. I took my cue and followed up with the other intrusive questions I have ready for evasive males. Children? Girlfriend? Fiance? Common law wife? In the end I discovered that this twenty-four year old has been living with a woman for the last five years and they have two children. But he has no plans to marry. This surprised me. In largely Catholic Costa Rica it appears that the no-rules-relationship-revolution is here too. I had thought this trend was exclusive to America where currently 40% of babies are born out of wed lock, my own included.

My thoughts came to a full boil a couple days later as I lay in a hammock under a palapa reading a biography referred by a friend. It is the story of the double life of author Alice B. Sheldon who found freedom in expression in the late 60’s and early 1970’s using a male pseudonym. A frustrated feminist, her work in the science fiction genre railed with themes of female oppression and female anger, all safely tucked inside the bodies of space aliens. This made me think about where I am today. Where we are, as women, as men, and children.

For years I have wrestled with questions destined for women of my generation. Unlike Alice, we were born liberated women, saddled with career goals (and identity!) Some of us are more like paycheck toting wives with economic parity on the home front but that’s still important. My mother, a sidelined feminist, never burdened me with a Cinderella dream of a prince and a castle, but instead noisily stuffed her unused ambition into my tiny head with words like “independence” and “…don’t need a man.” So many of my girlfriends were spoon fed the same messages by working mothers of the seventies or housewives who lingered at home and watched the battles from the foxholes of magazines, books, and television. I don’t consider myself a feminist in the vein of the early soldiers. Sometimes I call us post feminists. At other times I give a nod to those still actively organized in the cause of liberating women and acknowledge the third wave of feminism.

But my problem is this. Now that I am safely on the other side of the big leaps of struggle, past the shoulder pads and most of the glass ceilings, I see the flaws in the movement. I see the babies thrown out with the bath water. I hear the cries of toddlers with attachment injuries as motherhood increasingly becomes outsourced. I see the crumbling of good enough marriages and other kinds of love commitments as women continue to demand sanity and freedom. And I shake my head with astonishment at the one, last, accepted remnant of femininity, now exploded into a grotesque commercial monster — the sexualization of women. Must a new mother, plump with maternal fat stores designed to sustain a long term breast feeder, struggle on a stair master to squeeze into the latest Victoria’s Secret merchandize to please a husband and a culture and her female co-workers, who congratulate her for getting back into her jeans and her cubicle and her BMW within weeks of giving birth? I ask you, is this liberation?

What my mother forgot to tell me as she cheerfully handled Daddy’s paycheck and sent him off to supervise my brother’s hockey games and chauffeur me to ballet class, is that, in fact, to raise children well, you do need another person. That other person may not be a man. And he or she may in attendance out of economic necessity rather than biological obligation or love, but it really does take two people (at least!) to shoulder the workload and help us mothers feel liberated. And, by the way, raising kids and managing a home can be empowering itself. Mom didn’t know that because she didn’t have a cubicle or stock options to compare it to.

The third wave of feminism calls for more affordable childcare to help women on the path to some sort of economic equality. But shuttling babies and toddlers out to strangers is not the answer in my book. And what of the maternal women who work as childcare providers? Will the third wave of feminism find more liberated maternal women to help raise their kids? Then where does it all end? Probably with an underclass of low paid women skilled in childcare but little else. Oops! I think we have that already. We give these duties to immigrant women and call them liberated from their oppressive home cultures. Urgh! Feminism would do better to help “liberated” women relearn the some antiquated tools of relationship skills. Women have a specific skill set when it comes to communication and emotions. Why not put that to work into their relationships and get a helper with a biological interest in raising offspring?

And what of men? I mean, what are we going to do with all the fine men out there whose jobs as husbands and fathers are being outsourced?  I had dinner with a twice divorced man a while back who summed things up in a dismal way. “All women need us for is money,” he sighed. “As long as my child support checks keep coming, they need me for little else.”

But even that straight forward, though demoted task, may not be in the cards for men. If you believe last month’s Atlantic magazine article entitled “The End of Men,” women have both the numbers and skills to organize a coope. With 75% of embryos from fertility clinics being popped out as females (per parental request,) women outnumbering men on college campuses, and the decline of labor intensive jobs in favor of white collar employment that requires good social intelligence and communication skills, a matriarchal America is on the horizon. Already women make up more than half of the work force.

During the last year, my blogs has used data on gender and marriage to help us understand the changes in gender and relationships. I have tackled the rise of the metrosexual (liberated by masculine energy in women and by capitalist longings to sell more personal grooming products), the high divorce rate and birth outside of an old fashioned legal contract, the power and high depression rates of women today, the psychology behind cheaters, the growing single mother village and the confusing gender role expectations that sabotage so many relationships.

But the biggest question that still remains unanswered and it will be the burden of my daughters’ generation. What is the best basket to raise confident, loving children, who know how to attach long enough to raise confident, loving children? I’m still not sure what that answer is.

Our young zip line guide spends his days shuttling tourists like cattle across the treacherous heights of the rain forest canopy. He tells me his “girlfriend” says he works too much and doesn’t spend enough time with her and the kids. He tells me he loves his kids and he loves her, he just doesn’t like her anymore. So many marriages, legal or not, reach that stage of boredom and irritation. My best guess is that this is the time to use a human’s powerful mind to find a new path toward intimacy and commitment. Of course I speak from a place of wistfulness. Maybe the new kind of family will be our motley group who travelled to Costa Rica. Three single parents, five kids, and we mothered and fathered them all like an ancient village.

Is it Okay to Deprive Four-Year-Olds of Their Mother?

Saturday, July 10th, 2010

Abbie Dorn is a mother. She may not be able to play with, hug, or feed her children, but she is, none-the-less, a mother. After giving birth to triplets four years ago Abbie suffered from a series of medical errors that left her with brain damage and an inability to move or speak. Her only way of communicating is through a series of eyelid blinks. According to her mother, she can cry and even smirk with her eyes. Her parents care for her in their home in South Carolina.

Her husband, Dan Dorn, called them from his home in Los Angeles when the triplets were a year old and told their grand-father, “I need to move on.” He then divorced Abbie and has refused to allow the children to see their mother, saying it would traumatize them. They do not even know she exists.

Everything about this case disturbs me. It begs questions about the nature of motherhood? The rights of children and grandparents. And, perhaps most striking about this case, is what it says about our attitudes toward the disabled.

Long before we had institutions to house people with mental and physical disabilities, there were a common sight in our societies. Even Shakespere created characters with mental or with physical disabilities. I’m concerned that the more we insulate people, young and old, from seeing the full range of human possibilities the more we limit our capacity for compassion.

Abbie may be a single case of a family’s trauma. But it makes me wonder about the thousands of dedicated young men and women who are continuing to return from Iraq and Afghanistan with disabilities. I happen to support an organization called Iraq Star Foundation that gives free plastic and cosmetic reconstructive surgery to soldiers wounded in the war because, after risking their lives for our country, they are severely discriminated against when they come home disfigured. Our society has become intolerant of ugly and disabled.

Are Abbie’s children too young to see their mother? NO WAY. Everything is new, strange, and normal to kids. Some form of a living mother, her body warmth, her breath, her tears will have deep meaning to her children.

I happened to have grown up with a mother had a chronic illness (Lupus.) Consequently she spent a big chunk of my childhood on the living room sofa, too weak to make dinner. Did I feel ripped off? No. This was normal to me. We snuggled under quilts on that coach and read books together. This is my version of a mother’s love.

Who are we to decide what these children will take away from a relationship with a living being? Could it be more injurious for them to live with an adult anger when they learn they were deprived of their mother? Would a lifeless Teddy Bear be more acceptable for comfort than a living, breathing, feeling, mother? And what about the healing benefits for Abbie? Losing one’s body and one’s children is a double loss.

My Teenager Wants to Get Married! Help!

Friday, July 9th, 2010

This week a frantic Mom called into Ryan Seacrest’s Los Angeles radio show with stunning query about what to do about her 17-year-old daughter’s engagement to her seventeen-year-old boyfriend. There’s no pregnancy involved just teenaged love hormones. So, what’s a Mom to do?

My answer is simple: Be a parent and say no. The good news is that the law is on your side. According to my research, all but one American state requires a parent’s consent for anyone to get married under the age of 18. Nebraska insists on that partners be 19 to get married with parental permission. So, grow a backbone, Mom, and put your foot down and say NO.

Of course, we all know how oppositional teens tend to react to parental authority, so be prepared to be hated. Use the time before your kid’s eighteenth birthday to impress upon your child the following statistics:

• The current media age that most people get married in the U.S. is 26.7 for men and 25 for women.

• Teen marriage has a dismal divorce rate. About one half of teenaged pregnancies will end in divorce within 15 years. But the younger the teen female the more staggering the rate with some studies showing a divorce rate as high as 70% for girls who marry below the age of 18.

• Teen fathers have incomes that steadily lag behind other males, even into their twenties and thirties. This could be related to the fact that they forgo educational opportunities in order to be a family wage earner in their teens.

• And let’s say a baby comes of that teenaged marriage and then the marriage goes down the tubes. For unwed mothers of all ages, marrying and then divorcing correlates with higher rates of poverty than never marrying.

For some teens, the desire for an early marriage is really a bid for autonomy. Teenagers want to be grown up and bolting from the nest feels very grown up. I would suggest that these parents explore with their daughter ways that she can feel autonomous without having to marry. Does she need a bit more freedom? How about more responsibility? A part-time job and some bills to pay can sometimes be a wake-up call to a teen craving independence.

Above all, validate your teens feelings of love and attachment. Her feelings are real, even if they are a bit premature and are prompting an unwise decision. Try welcoming her boyfriend into the family. If you exclude him and bar her from seeing him, you stand a good chance of making her run further into his arms. One technique for compromise might be to help your teenager plan a “down the road” wedding, say, one that takes place after post-secondary education is complete. Remember, if you like her lover-boy a lot that, in itself, may

Parenting a teen is no cake walk. This mother’s challenge is one that many parents fear. Try to remember that in terms of emotional development, teens are a lot like two-year-olds, with one big difference. Two-year-olds are mentally ready for action before their bodies can do it safely and this causes frustrating tantrums. Teenagers are physically ready for action before their minds have caught up. But both stages secretly crave boundaries. Boundaries help children and teens feel safe, even if it causes them to feel really angry. So be brave mama.


Breastfeeding is not Creepy. Think Like a Woman!

Monday, June 28th, 2010

Our highly sexualized culture has gone too far when women (read: nature’s nurturers) are claiming that breastfeeding is gross. When women begin talking like men in terms of sexuality and defile their own bodies then you know that this third-wave of feminism hasn’t done much to truly liberate femininity. Instead we have colluded with the boys club to masquerade as an equal. This is not equality. Sexualizing our breasts is fine. Breasts are beautiful. But enslaving breasts to all things sexual and sentencing them to a life without maternal power is sad, servitude to all things male.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Here are the facts that have me ranting over my morning coffee today.

Recently Kathryn Blundell, the editor of a leading British parenting magazine, Mother and Baby, wrote an editorial entitled  I formula-fed. SO WHAT? . In it, she said breastfeeding is creepy and called breasts “fun bags” and continued with “seeing your teeny, tiny, innocent baby latching on where only a lover has been before feels, well, a little creepy.”

And, on this side of the pond, that wise, sage Kim Kardashian — whose own boobs are limited to working the night shift –  tweeted this to her fans: “ew, some woman has her boobies out, she should cover up, yuck, blech, ugh”

I understand that eyebrows get raised by this public display of this natural beauty, for I once staged a research study for my psychology dissertation on breastfeeding and romantic attachment. While interviewing nursing mothers I learned that one of the most common reasons that women quit breastfeeding is embarrassment about nursing in public. All over Europe, paintings and statues of the Madonna (the real one, not the one who Vogues) depict her nursing, yet our American culture still can’t get past the idea that breasts are more than sexual objects.

The sexualization of the breast had very early beginnings. Back in our evolutionary past, when humans got up off all fours and became bipedal, women evolved to grow larger breasts for sexual attraction. Now that we were upright, our lovely derrieres couldn’t be seen from our front side, so breasts got bigger as a kind of, ahem, yes, frontal tushy. Men liked the view on both sides now, and all our lovely orbs signaled our fitness to reproduce.

But for hundreds of thousands of years, breasts still had a day job, and the sight of a nursing woman was commonplace in all cultures around the world. For millions of years, up until 1932, every human being was breastfed by their mother, auntie, or wet nurse. It was how humans survived before infant formula. During World War II, when women were needed in factories to build weapons, mostly male pediatricians convinced women that this new product made from whey (a cheese by-product) was better than human milk. It also allowed women to leave their babies for longer periods. Anyone who has nursed a newborn knows that feeding schedules are based on a child’s needs, not a clock. And, sometimes their need is to just suckle and be comforted, so working full-time is possible, though tough.

Even though breastfeeding is on the rise today, it is in an uncomfortable race with racy messages. Sexy women are hot. MILF’s are hot. Women who nurse are creepy. Fortunately, our increasingly sexual media is co-mingled with a powerful chant of a growing body of women who still think like women. Women who know that breastfeeding contributes to healthy attachments and good health all around. Women like, Bettina Forbes, who co-founded “Best for Babes” a group that normalizes breastfeeding and shows that nursing moms can be powerful, sexy, glamorous, and nurturing all at the same time. Thousands of women follow her on facebook and are the what I like to call, the real feminists.

When women hate the natural function of own bodies, they need to stop and think. Whose sentiments are being recycled? I’ll tell you who. Those of a dying, patriarchal culture whose boys club would prefer that you enslave the boobs to them.

And here’s some news to throw back in the face of anyone who thinks that breasts are only “fun bags.” According to one of my all-time favorite studies, guess which kind of woman is most likely to choose to breastfeed? The woman who is most comfortable with sex, erotica, and her body. Prudes don’t breastfeed. Hear that Kathryn and Kim? Sexy women can feed their babies.

Kobe Bryant: Can Warriors Kiss Babies?

Friday, June 4th, 2010

This morning I watched an interesting debate on ESPN News. The male anchors expounded psychological theories of gender roles, the warrior code, and men’s ability to compartmentalize. Of course, they thought they were just talking about Laker Kobe Bryant’s pause to kiss his daughters at half time during game one of the NBA finals last night.

Most of the ESPN talent chalked up Kobe’s “transgression” (an act of tenderness mid-war) to the privilege of celebrity. They argued that a franchise player without a camera on his heels would have been reprimanded by coach Phil Jackson and called “soft” by his team mates.

Then they went on to ask how Kobe’s head could be completely in the game if he took time to act like a loving father while wearing the armor of a warrior at battle. After all, minutes before hand, he’d been oblivious to Chris Rock’s monologue beside the Laker bench. And now he was kissing babies?!

Well, gentlemen, let me break it down for you. A male brain is unique. Men have a very unique ability to compartmentalize, that is, go so deeply into a mental compartment that they tune out other stimuli. Studies have shown that when men watch sports, their wife’s voice in the background sounds a lot like the adults in a Charles Schutz “Peanuts” cartoon, “Waw-aw. Waw-aw. Waw-awn.” One fascinating study asked men and women to listen to two audio stories simultaneously yet follow only one. One narration fed through a right earphone and the other a left. Women, who tend to be multitaskers, found their brains scrambling to follow both stories and often got confused. Men were more easily able to key into one story and tune out the other. Now that’s compartmentalization.

The other thing men can do is slip pretty easily from one compartment into another when they perceive that it is safe to redirect their attention. Thus, a man can juggle calls from work, his mistress, and his wife when there is little threat of being caught. Should his wife, mistress, or boss enter his office, however, he will be quick to focus and eliminate the two other stimuli.

So, while Kobe couldn’t hear Chris Rock during the game, his stress responses were lowered with the half-time bell and the Laker’s comfortable lead, making it was easy for him to morph into “Daddy” on his way to the locker room.

But the bigger question had to do with masculinity and tenderness. Can a warrior be tender? Of course he can. And he always has been tender behind closed doors. And now he can do it publicly. Thank you Kobe.

Can “Miracle Boy” Ever Truly Heal?

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

An eleven-year-old Dutch boy, the sole survivor of a plane crash, reportedly smiled at his aunt and uncle who flew to his bedside when they recognized him from television pictures. He hasn’t been told yet that his parents and brother died in the crash.

The boy, identified as Ruben van Assouw, suffered multiple fractures in his lower limbs when the Afriqiyah Airways Airbus A330-200 crashed Tuesday at Tripoli International Airport killing 92 passengers and a crew of 11. Ruben is the sole survivor.

So, what lies ahead for the young victim? The good news is that his body is projected to have a complete recovery, however, his psychological injuries may persist for the rest of his life.

The most obvious danger is persistent Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) when one is witness to death or potential death that can cause lifelong feelings of anxiety, depression, detachment, distressing dreams or “flashbacks”. In children repetitive play may involve acting out the trauma over and over.

One major symptom of PTSD is “Survivor’s Guilt” and it adds symptoms of depression and low-self esteem that follow the belief that somehow their survival caused the death of the others. The sad thing about survivor’s guilt, as seen in the families of Holocaust survivors, is that is can be a multi-generational disorder.

Finally, Ruben may suffer painful Attachment Injuries because his primary attachment figures were suddenly eliminated. The child can grow up to have a powerful mistrust of love and relationships, or in a very anxious way, cling to new attachment figures even when they don’t provide a healthy return.

The road back to mental health is long, though very possible. Intensive grief counseling might be combined with family systems therapy to help him bond and attach to his new caregivers. Once Ruben is able to view himself as a sufferer, not one who caused suffering, he can mourn and continue with life.

The most amazing thing about the human psyche is it’s ability to heal after trauma. His biological predisposition to anxiety, depression, and feelings of abandonment will be a major determinant of his future mental health. Some people recover from horrific events very well, while others can become dysfunctional by even minor emotional trauma. That’s the fascinating thing about psychology — it happens at the intersection of biology and environment. Our prayers go out to Ruben.

The Sex Lives of Your Children Are Written on the Wall

Monday, May 10th, 2010

Social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace can be a treasure trove of information for parents. Reading your kids’ status updates is a great way to check in on peer group dynamics, level of media exposure, and school politics. Now research shows that your child’s cyber “wall” can even be an eye-opening place to discover if your adolescent is going to be sexually active anytime soon.

A recent study published by the America Academy of Pediatrics, suggests that displays of sexual references on teens’ Facebook profiles is associated with their intention to initiate intercourse. The study followed 85 college freshmen with public Facebook pages and found a strong association between sexual references on Facebook and real-world intentions to initiate sexual intercourse. Although the study looked at college freshmen, a separate 2007 study conducted by the Center for Disease Control showed that by ninth grade, 33% of adolescent had sexual intercourse, so it’s not far fetched to assume that sexual material posted by younger teens could also reflect real-world intentions.

Prior to this Facebook study, the same researchers, Dr. Megan Moreno of from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Dr. Dimitri A. Christakis of Seattle Children’s Research Institute, found that 54 percent of MySpace profiles contained high-risk behavior information, with 24 percent referencing sexual behavior. Of course, these on-line postings might indicate real-world risky behaviors or simply adolescent grandstanding, but what parent wants to wait to find out?

By tenth grade, the percentage of sexually active teens is just shy of 50% and this number does not include middle schoolers who engage in oral sex, which apparently is not considered sex despite the fact that one can acquire a sexually transmitted disease from it. Oi! And, parents, if you haven’t caught your breath yet, here’s a sobering statistic from the Center for Disease Control: One-third of American teenaged girls get pregnant before the age of twenty. That’s one in three, ladies and gentlemen.

So when is the right time to talk to kids about sex? That answer is simple: As soon as they start asking. When I was pregnant with my second daughter, my four-year-old asked me how the baby got in my tummy. I briefly flirted with the idea of giving her the pat answer my mother had provided me as a child, that “God put the baby there,” and then decided to tell her the truth. The director of our preschool gave me a delightful children’s book that helped me tell the whole story — yes with artistic sketches that showed “the act.” From that point forward I became the source of sexual information for my kid. Now that she’s in the complicated world of middle school, I am thrilled that she keeps asking and I get to provide biological information laced with my own moral teaching.

So, is it ever too late to start taking about sex with your child? NEVER. Teens may roll their eyes or plug into their iPod but, trust me, they listen to any source of sexual information, even when it comes from a parent.

Social networking sites can be a helpful way to be a virtual parent. Make a family rule that parents must be “friended” on kids pages. Before you know it, you will become lost in your child’s sea of online friends and sooner or later they’ll forget that you are reading their wall. Take postings seriously and use them not as an opportunity to admonish but as an chance to educate.

Bottom line: Know your own sexual morals and messages and find a way to guide your children before our highly sexualized media does it for you.

Sandra Bullock Adopted a “Son” Without a Race?

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010

When the news of Sandra Bullock’s recent baby adoption broke with the morning sun, a smile as long as the Louisiana bayou broke out on my face. Here was little Louis’s precious face on the cover of PEOPLE and on every morning television show, nuzzling his glowing mommy. I know that feeling, that intoxicating smell of a milky baby’s breath and sweaty chick-fuzz. And the flip-flops of love and worry that tumble in a new mother’s stomach. My very first emotion was happiness for Sandra, especially in this time of pain over her husband’s bad behavior.

My next thought had to do with the sweet brown melanin in that yummy boy’s skin. How could one not notice how beautiful this baby was? (Aren’t all babies beautiful?) Yet, so many politically correct online bloggers, reporters, and comment posters ignored his race. Kudos to you, but by ignoring a physical trait completely draws attention to it. I mean, if Sandra’s baby had been a blonde tow-head with bright blue eyes, his physical attributes would have been mentioned. So, why the silence over melanin? It seems we are as progressive as we are confused. Afraid to say the wrong thing. Yet to create a race-less society would be to homogenize beauty. How sad.

Here’s what’s wrong. As a single mother of two biracial children the wrong thing is to not mention how cute my kids are. How fabulous their curls spiral. How their mocha complexion looks positively breath-taking in colors like bright orange and turquoise. How their strong brown legs shine in the froth and frolic of ocean play. To ignore human beauty, whether it be white, brown, beige, curly, straight, or frizzy, is to draw attention to race as an “unmentionable.”

Even Sandra, in her PEOPLE magazine interview failed to mention her baby’s appearance, simply calling him “perfect.” Perfect he is, as is every healthy baby, but Sandra, he is also exceptionally gorgeous, partly because of his racial mix.

The thing about beauty is that it is in the eye of the beholder. We are all attracted to a set of visual stimuli that created in our brains through a series of exposures in our formative years. My particular early life experiences happened in Nova Scotia, Canada, where I was born. Many Americans don’t know that the true end of the historical “underground railroad” was Nova Scotia, where run-away slaves sought refuge and safety north of the boarder. To this day there is a huge population of African-Americas (I’m told that title is preferred over African-Canadian) on the east coast of Canada, and when I entered elementary school I attended a fully integrated public school. My first crushes were boys with brown skin. Many of my playmates were black girls. Sitting at my school desk, behind well coiffed braided heads and high cheek bones wrapped in flawless glowing completions, I developed a penchant for that version of beauty. So, it was no surprise to me that I would fall in love with a man with dark skin and give birth to such beauty myself.

Like Sandra’s son, my babies are perfect. But they are also brown. Gorgeous brown. And to say I don’t LOVE they way they look — because of race — would be a lie. I’ll never forget the first time my then three-year-old compared her legs to my white legs in the bathtub. She wanted to know why her legs were brown. I didn’t even have to consider my answer. I quickly responded with, “Your legs are brown because your Mommy is smart. I found the most beautiful man on the planet to be your Daddy because I wanted you to be the most beautiful girl. And it worked.”

All babies are beautiful, but Sandra Bullock, don’t be afraid to scream it from the top of a mountain that your BROWN baby is beautiful.

Should I Stay or Should I Go?

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Five Questions to Ask Yourself Before Your Tear Your Family in Half

A recent report showed that since the recession, the divorce rate in America is the lowest it’s been in 30 years. Divorce is an expensive business and maintaining two households can get steep. So instead, couples are taking a closer look at their relationship flaws and asking themselves if their marriage is “good enough” to stay. If you are in that situation, here are five questions to ask yourself before you tear your family in half.

1. Am I leaving because of boredom or excitement about meeting someone new?

You should know your notions about marriage are up against a media that spins fantasies about youth, beauty, money and sex. If you believe in the family life created by TV and movies, all partners stay fit, youthful, happy and rich. Unfortunately in real life many partners grow chubby, bald, fall into depressions, and lose money in a recession. Sexual energy gets diverted to nesting energy and the excitement of your youthful love affair morphs into a the drudgery of married life. If you answered “yes” to this question, the answer isn’t a new partner, it’s a new system. And you have the power to charge your “good” relationship.

2. Am I leaving because it is finally time that I stop being an enabler of his/her substance abuse, alcoholism, or anger management problem?

If you answered “yes” to this question, then this is a good reason to leave. Families with violence and substance abuse do serious damage to children and spouses, so stop walking on egg shells and make a strong, safe exit plan.

3. Have we sought couples therapy and I have sought individual therapy and really tried everything possible to fix the relationship?

If your answer is “no” then you have to exhaust all possibilities before you bail. It’s only fair to your partner and kids. Even if your husband or wife won’t attend therapy, you can get some great insights into your role in the relationship system by going to individual therapy. For instance, if either of you is dismissive, withdraws, or stonewalls you better learn some conflict resolution skills before you take the dysfunction to a new relationship.

4. Am I putting my kids emotional needs first?

This is a trick question. Our current American culture focusses on individual rights and freedoms over “the group good,” so you will often hear people tell you that it is not right to stay in a marriage for the kids’ sake. I don’t always agree with this. If the kids have close relationships with both parents and there are no substance abuse problems or domestic violence issues, then you owe it to your kids to model a healthy, fulfilling relationship for them. Hopefully that means with their other parent. When people say to me that my kids happiness shouldn’t be more important than my happiness, I correct them and say, “My children’s happiness IS my happiness.”

5. Have I really researched and do I understand the financial, social, and family consequences of single parenthood?

Single parenthood is no cake walk. The financial stress alone can drive one to drink. Then there is the challenge of raising kids who are angry about their parent’s split, especially boys who can really use a man’s strength to help them control their physical impulses. The inconsistency of an EX-spouse who goes MIA just when you really need childcare. Add to that the loneliness where sometimes days go by without any adult contact except for the Mom’s at school drop off. Not to mention, the problem with romance and the tedious business of sifting through the MILF Hunters or Gold Diggers to find a good partner, all the while protecting your children from your heart breaks. Trust me, this life-style is not for the feint of heart.

So, think long and hard before you make the leap out of a salvageable relationship. The old adage that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side of the fence is particularly true here, yet a family with serious dangers is also not healthy for children.

Kate Gosselin: The Single Mother Double Bind

Monday, April 12th, 2010

How can single mothers prove to the courts that they are the better parent when they are being forced to work hard to provide for their kids?


Single mother Kate Gosselin  is sweating it out working on “Dancing with the Stars” and her husband, Jon, has filed for full custody of the kids saying she is working too much and not available for her children. Never mind that he has gone weeks at a go himself, not seeing his kids while he shacks up with a morphing string of girlfriends.

This tragic story reminds me attorney Marsha Clark’s similar crisis while she was working on the prosecution side during the OJ Simpson trial. Even through she had custody of her two boys, her husband used the demands of the trial as an opportunity to try to attain custody himself. So, what’s a single mother to do? Stay home and lose her kids because they are starving to death? This is a double bind where a mother is damned if she does and damed if she doesn’t.

The saddest part of this bind is that it is also a double standard. Tell me the last time you heard anyone admonish a divorced Dad for working too hard!

The problem is that changes in family law have all but eliminated alimony for ex-wives. And child support payments to her are based on a ratio of child custody. So, all single mothers are expected to at least support themselves and they rarely get a full 100% of child support if the kids bunk at Dads some of the time.  Funny thing is, even though kids of divorce may sleep at their Dad’s every other weekend, Mom must still pay the rent for the entire month.

While I am a professional who specializes in attachment issues and my heart breaks for the Kate’s kids who may be suffering attachment injuries while she spends weeks in Los Angeles training and competing for “Dancing with the Stars,” I believe that she is fortunate to have this choice available to her. Only the entertainment industry pays the kind of money that could keep a single mother of eight out of poverty. I mean, really, would people rather see her working for $12 an hour somewhere?

In fact, she recently told Access Hollywood:

“Maybe because I’m in front of the camera so much and people see where I am – I’m in LA. I’m in New York. I’m here or there – the bottom line is I’m just doing what every other mom is doing. They just don’t have cameras following them so people can’t keep tabs on how many hours a day they spend with their kids,” Kate told Billy. “I have to do it. I have eight kids. It’s not a joke, it’s the truth. I have to provide for them.”

You go girl! Dance your butt off for those babies. And then head on home to bond and repair.