Co-parenting. Good thing?

hansfrei

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/dec/15/meet-the-co-parents-modern-families

The newspaper article describes a three way relationship, set up in order to have one child between them. Goes on to say how popular this co-parenting malarky is getting. With people interneting each other with a view to going halvesies or thirdsies on a baby.

Odd is it? Or is it just me?

LOSTfan57

Mammy Daddy and ????

anncoates

A lot of kids are brought up in extended families with a lot of interaction with grandparents and other family.

If the kids are loved and looked after, it's surely better than neglect.

gramar

I thought single parenting was all the rage.

greenflash

LOSTfan57 wrote: »

Mammy Daddy and ????

Another mammy or I'm out

strobe

Depends entirely on the parents I'd say. Two/Three/One/Six good parents - good. Two/Three/Etc bad parents - bad.

ScumLord

Lick Mike Hunt. wrote: »

Yeah seems strange to me
2 parents is enough
Why would a child need a third parent?

Out of all the great apes humans share the parenting responsibility around the most. We are quite happy to hand off infants to other family members of even complete strangers as long as they have the right social standing.

That's where the phrase "it takes a village to raise a child" comes from. It would be more bizarre and damaging for a child to be restricted to just two people.

hansfrei

The lad in that threesome wanted a part-time child. The other two wanted a baby not a relationship with each other. All met up on the internet, downloaded a baby.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

this is a massive steaming truckload of nobody elses business

Dr Turk Turkelton

LOSTfan57 wrote: »

Mammy Daddy and ????

Uncle Dick.

Bog Standard User

crikey the white wan is a bit butch looking...

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

she looks like a masculine mark kermode

Teyla Emmagan

Realistically, being genuinely wanted and supported by 3 parents can only be a good thing for a child. Someone will always be feeling energetic and still have patience, and you have a huge variety of experiences and skill sets to draw from when it comes to raising that child. I would consider it myself. Like everything else though the difficulty is picking the right co parent.

Gatling

What happens when it all goes wrong ,
A three way battle in court
Followed by up to 6 sets of grandparents demanding access ,

Tasden

Gatling wrote: »

What happens when it all goes wrong ,
A three way battle in court
Followed by up to 6 sets of grandparents demanding access ,

Yeah this would be my worry too. Or making decisions they can't agree on, its bad enough when two parents can't agree but with three you risk having a two against one situation or three differing opinions to argue over.
But I suppose if they could overcome all that then an extra person to love the child couldn't be all that bad.

Gatling

Reminds me of the lesbian couple who used a sperm donor who they got to sign away his rights on paper ,all good no problem there ,
Couple then split up and end up in court where one is given sole custody of the child ,
Other parent who didn't get custody then takes the sperm donor to court to get him to pay child maintenance and get access he didn't ask for or want ,
Judge sided with disgruntled other parent and orders sperm donor pay maintenance and have access

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Gatling wrote: »

Reminds me of the lesbian couple who used a sperm donor who they got to sign away his rights on paper ,all good no problem there ,
Couple then split up and end up in court where one is given sole custody of the child ,
Other parent who didn't get custody then takes the sperm donor to court to get him to pay child maintenance and get access he didn't ask for or want ,
Judge sided with disgruntled other parent and orders sperm donor pay maintenance and have access

it's great to have sperm

hansfrei

hansfrei wrote: »

Odd is it? Or is it just me?

I just got a PM asking me to post on this thread

It depends on perspective and what you see as "odd" I guess. It certainly is not common by a long long way. But there are many people in such scenarios peppered around out there. Including myself. I live with two girls - we have one daugther so far - and another kid (sex yet unknown) on the way. And the younger of the two girls is slowly approching the age where she wants to start having two kids too.

However ours is a full relationship. From the sounds of this article the "parents" are not in a romantic relationship at all but it is more a relationship of convienience. But again is is becomming common enough to not easily be called "odd".

I guess there is a continuum. There are loving parents who are together raising a kid. There are parents who have divorced and have no love for each other who are raising a kid seperately. I guess this falls somewhere in the middle. It will certainly be interesting to see what the homopobic "But kids needs one mother and one father" crowd will make of it.

I guess one comparison which is not altogether unfair is that of arranged marriages in other cultures to our East. Kids at birth assigned to each other - who in some cases may never even meet until their wedding dates. They then marry and have children. Is this story _much_ different from theirs in many ways? Or is it a modern and slightly more unusual incarnation of something that is essentially the same thing?

Unintentional co-parenting has been common for some time too. While here the people get together before reproducing and then co-parent - what a lot of people in the past have been doing is ending up single parents and realising that moving intogether and co-parenting together gives an "economy of scale" effect on their time - energy - finances - and other resources that benefits all concerned.

Annasopra

Tasden wrote: »

Yeah this would be my worry too. Or making decisions they can't agree on, its bad enough when two parents can't agree but with three you risk having a two against one situation or three differing opinions to argue over.
But I suppose if they could overcome all that then an extra person to love the child couldn't be all that bad.

In theory I support the idea but in in practice I would share some reservations of what people have said above and think it could be very very legally messy. For example with the three people above - what happens if the guy dies and his boyfriend wants to continue in the childs life? Or what happens if the mother who gave birth decides she wants to move away and bring the child with her.

hansfrei

Deleted User wrote: »

I just got a PM asking me to post on this thread

It depends on perspective and what you see as "odd" I guess. It certainly is not common by a long long way. But there are many people in such scenarios peppered around out there. Including myself. I live with two girls - we have one daugther so far - and another kid (sex yet unknown) on the way. And the younger of the two girls is slowly approching the age where she wants to start having two kids too.

However ours is a full relationship. From the sounds of this article the "parents" are not in a romantic relationship at all but it is more a relationship of convienience. But again is is becomming common enough to not easily be called "odd".

I guess there is a continuum. There are loving parents who are together raising a kid. There are parents who have divorced and have no love for each other who are raising a kid seperately. I guess this falls somewhere in the middle. It will certainly be interesting to see what the homopobic "But kids needs one mother and one father" crowd will make of it.

I guess one comparison which is not altogether unfair is that of arranged marriages in other cultures to our East. Kids at birth assigned to each other - who in some cases may never even meet until their wedding dates. They then marry and have children. Is this story _much_ different from theirs in many ways? Or is it a modern and slightly more unusual incarnation of something that is essentially the same thing?

Unintentional co-parenting has been common for some time too. While here the people get together before reproducing and then co-parent - what a lot of people in the past have been doing is ending up single parents and realising that moving intogether and co-parenting together gives an "economy of scale" effect on their time - energy - finances - and other resources that benefits all concerned.

Strikes me that these people are keeping babies as pets. Who in their right minds meets strangers on the internet to become a part time parent?

And who lets them?

clairefontaine

It smacks of Internet shopping. I'd anticipate as logic buyers remorse.

Unfortunately children have become accessories like new handbags.

Daqster

All children need are fish fingers and cartoons. Anything else is mollycoddling I tells ya.

hansfrei

clairefontaine wrote: »

It smacks of Internet shopping. I'd anticipate as logic buyers remorse.

Unfortunately children have become accessories like new handbags.

Good summation. Baby pouch in handbag. Paris Hiltons dog style!

jimmycrackcorm

Double-barreled surnames are bad enough without adding triple...

Annasopra

hansfrei wrote: »

Strikes me that these people are keeping babies as pets. Who in their right minds meets strangers on the internet to become a part time parent?

And who lets them?

"These people"?

Are you talking about the poster you quoted or someone else?

It strikes me that some people in this thread can't handle difference so they resort to name calling.

Seaneh

Know a girl who is 24 with a 4 year old son from a previous relationship. Father isn't around and has no part in their life.

She is now living with couple, they all raise the kid together, he calls both her and the other woman mom and the man dad.

She is also now pregnant again with the guy's kid. They are all over the moon about it. They all got "married" a few months ago in a ceremony with all their family and friends there.

It's weird, and it's not for me. But they are happy, the kid is happy and it works for them so **** it.

Pretzill

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I just got a PM asking me to post on this thread

It depends on perspective and what you see as "odd" I guess. It certainly is not common by a long long way. But there are many people in such scenarios peppered around out there. Including myself. I live with two girls - we have one daugther so far - and another kid (sex yet unknown) on the way. And the younger of the two girls is slowly approching the age where she wants to start having two kids too.

However ours is a full relationship. From the sounds of this article the "parents" are not in a romantic relationship at all but it is more a relationship of convienience. But again is is becomming common enough to not easily be called "odd".

I guess there is a continuum. There are loving parents who are together raising a kid. There are parents who have divorced and have no love for each other who are raising a kid seperately. I guess this falls somewhere in the middle. It will certainly be interesting to see what the homopobic "But kids needs one mother and one father" crowd will make of it.

I guess one comparison which is not altogether unfair is that of arranged marriages in other cultures to our East. Kids at birth assigned to each other - who in some cases may never even meet until their wedding dates. They then marry and have children. Is this story _much_ different from theirs in many ways? Or is it a modern and slightly more unusual incarnation of something that is essentially the same thing?

Unintentional co-parenting has been common for some time too. While here the people get together before reproducing and then co-parent - what a lot of people in the past have been doing is ending up single parents and realising that moving intogether and co-parenting together gives an "economy of scale" effect on their time - energy - finances - and other resources that benefits all concerned.

Co parenting isn't a new thing - many children have been raised by their extended family and shared the benefits that go along with that - It is my experience that children of single parents are often surronded by a bigger group even extending outwards to include family friends. Wanting to have a child part-time would worry me if you are legally putting yourself in a parent role.

What you are describing in your personal life sounds more like a poligamist set-up (please don't be offended by that - I know it's an ancient term) where more than one relationship continues happily with all parties in agreement and children are raised within that - here co-parenting happens naturally within this relationship as I'm sure it does with any be it male/female or single parent or gay parents.

I take offence to your general and sweeping comment calling someone who thinks a children should be raised by a male female combination a homophobic - this is wide of the mark when it comes to describing a homophobic - it is just someone with a differing opinion to yours a good thing to teach the children is to not be afraid to express opinion for fear of name calling.

My overall opinion of co-parenting is if the child recieves more love it can't be bad.

hansfrei

mango salsa wrote: »

"These people"?

Are you talking about the poster you quoted or someone else?

It strikes me that some people in this thread can't handle difference so they resort to name calling.

Can you handle "different" ? Are you prejudiced against people with a different view? What kind of phobia is that?

The people in the article were/are clearly crazy. If you can't resolve that, thats your issue.

keith16

I don't know, what if the kid starts developing a stronger bond with one of the parents? Won't that hurt the other parents emotionally?

December2012

That happens anyway from time to time.

Friend Computer

hansfrei wrote: »

Can you handle "different" ? Are you prejudiced against people with a different view? What kind of phobia is that?

The people in the article were/are clearly crazy. If you can't resolve that, thats your issue.

Sounds like you're the one who's prejudiced.

Pretzill

Friend Computer wrote: »

Sounds like you're the one who's prejudiced.

Why is it that people can't express an opinion in a discussion forum without the opposition to that opinion having to resort to this example. There are words that are bandied a bout in many a discussion that are used in completely the wrong context - and do nothing but reduce both sides of a discussion.

Homophobic and Predjudice are strong words and people fought hard to make tthem have a meaning not to be used lightly and descend to some sort of kneejerk insult - using them in an uneducated way only shows the speaker in the wrong light and does nothing for open discussion imo.

hansfrei

Friend Computer wrote: »

Sounds like you're the one who's prejudiced.

Rightly so. This kind of thing isn't justifiable by anyone.

hansfrei

hansfrei wrote: »

Rightly so. This kind of thing isn't justifiable by anyone.

So, your question in the OP "is it odd or is it just me" is meaningless and only posted in order to mask this as a discussion topic?

keith16

keith16 wrote: »

I don't know, what if the kid starts developing a stronger bond with one of the parents? Won't that hurt the other parents emotionally?

Is that not a bit of a non-point given the same thing could be said of _any_ parental configuration even the one our society would currently consider the "standard"? Do children not often favor one parent over another? Often fludily - changing their favor from one to another at different stages in their life and development?

It would be somewhat mentally unhealthy to be "hurt" by this. Each relationship should be considered on it's own merits. If any parent - in any configuration of parenting from "standard" - to co-parenting - to gay parenting - is comparing their relationship with their kid to the other parents to work out who is getting the "more love" - then they have issues that could likely do with addressing.

hansfrei wrote: »

Strikes me that these people are keeping babies as pets. Who in their right minds meets strangers on the internet to become a part time parent?

And who lets them?

Who is to stop them exactly? Perhaps we are using different meanings of the word "let" here? What political state do you think we live in here exactly?

But the urge to reproduce is strong. The urge to rear a child is strong. And in an increasingly busy and insular and modular world - more and more people struggle to meet someone to settle down with and make a family.

As I said in the post you quoted but replied to little of - in how many ways _readlly_ is this any different from arranged marriages where the kids do not even meet until their wedding - and they then proceed to make a family?

An argument that comes up in homophobe debates often is that "At least gay parents, jumpting through all the loops they have to jump through to adopt, actually _want_ and _love_ their children. Compared to the many people who have Accidental Babies while shagging around who are then lumped with unwanted off spring."

I would make the same point here. At least the people going to this effort are doing so because they actually do want to have and rear and care for children.

hansfrei wrote: »

Rightly so. This kind of thing isn't justifiable by anyone.

I see nothing at this time that needs to be justified. Let alone to you. Why should they be justifying themselves to anyone in your mind?

Pretzill

Pretzill wrote: »

Co parenting isn't a new thing

Nor did I suggest it was.

Pretzill wrote: »

I take offence to your general and sweeping comment calling someone who thinks a children should be raised by a male female combination a homophobic

Then you are taking offence to something that was not even said.

I simply said it is a common argument used by people who _are_ homophobic. You have simply reversed by statement in your own head - and taken offense to your own version of it.

Saying soccer players usually own round balls is not the same as saying anyone who owns round balls is a soccer player.

Pretzill wrote: »

My overall opinion of co-parenting is if the child recieves more love it can't be bad.

Here we entirely agree.

Annasopra

hansfrei wrote: »

Can you handle "different" ? Are you prejudiced against people with a different view? What kind of phobia is that?

The people in the article were/are clearly crazy. If you can't resolve that, thats your issue.

Who gave you a psychiatrc qualification?

Seaneh

Seaneh wrote: »

Know a girl who is 24 with a 4 year old son from a previous relationship. Father isn't around and has no part in their life.

She is now living with couple, they all raise the kid together, he calls both her and the other woman mom and the man dad.

She is also now pregnant again with the guy's kid. They are all over the moon about it. They all got "married" a few months ago in a ceremony with all their family and friends there.

It's weird, and it's not for me. But they are happy, the kid is happy and it works for them so **** it.

Wow, how unusual! But like you said, who actually cares? As long as everyone is happy and the child is treated well and brought up right, then it's none of our business. Plus it'd come in extra handy at Christmas - you get a presents from Mum and Mum/Dad and another from Mum/Dad. Score.

hansfrei

mango salsa wrote: »

Who gave you a psychiatrc qualification?

lol.

hansfrei

Deleted User wrote: »

Is that not a bit of a non-point given the same thing could be said of _any_ parental configuration even the one our society would currently consider the "standard"? Do children not often favor one parent over another? Often fludily - changing their favor from one to another at different stages in their life and development?

It would be somewhat mentally unhealthy to be "hurt" by this. Each relationship should be considered on it's own merits. If any parent - in any configuration of parenting from "standard" - to co-parenting - to gay parenting - is comparing their relationship with their kid to the other parents to work out who is getting the "more love" - then they have issues that could likely do with addressing.



Who is to stop them exactly? Perhaps we are using different meanings of the word "let" here? What political state do you think we live in here exactly?

But the urge to reproduce is strong. The urge to rear a child is strong. And in an increasingly busy and insular and modular world - more and more people struggle to meet someone to settle down with and make a family.

As I said in the post you quoted but replied to little of - in how many ways _readlly_ is this any different from arranged marriages where the kids do not even meet until their wedding - and they then proceed to make a family?

An argument that comes up in homophobe debates often is that "At least gay parents, jumpting through all the loops they have to jump through to adopt, actually _want_ and _love_ their children. Compared to the many people who have Accidental Babies while shagging around who are then lumped with unwanted off spring."

I would make the same point here. At least the people going to this effort are doing so because they actually do want to have and rear and care for children.



I see nothing at this time that needs to be justified. Let alone to you. Why should they be justifying themselves to anyone in your mind?

Do we have child protection legislation?
Did we just have a "vote yes for children" referendum yoke?
What state do you think we live in?

Annasopra

hansfrei wrote: »

Do we have child protection legislation?
Did we just have a "vote yes for children" referendum yoke?
What state do you think we live in?

I'm not sure what your point is; you don't seem to be addressing any points made by Taxahcruel

hansfrei

mango salsa wrote: »

I'm not sure what your point is; you don't seem to be addressing any points made by Taxahcruel

He? asked who. I said who. I also put it to him? that the state we live in is this one.

hansfrei

hansfrei wrote: »

Do we have child protection legislation?
Did we just have a "vote yes for children" referendum yoke?

None of which has any relevance to anything in this thread that I know of. Perhaps you can explain how they are linked.

If two people come together and decide to reproduce - who are you to "let" them - and who are they to have to justify their decision to you - and what has current legistlation got to do with any of it?

Or do you just read the title of any block of legislation - and decide for yourself what the content is?

hansfrei

Deleted User wrote: »

None of which has any relevance to anything in this thread that I know of. Perhaps you can explain how they are linked.

If two people come together and decide to reproduce - who are you to "let" them - and who are they to have to justify their decision to you - and what has current legistlation got to do with any of it?

Or do you just read the title of any block of legislation - and decide for yourself what the content is?

Who am I? A responsible adult! Who are you?

Also the OP is a specific story about about a group of crazies essentially keeping children as pets. As I said thats not justifiable.

loubeelou

Can't stand the term Co-Parenting.
Whatever the circumstances of the family, if you are a parent or are acting in the parental role, then you are a parent, not a Co-Parent.
Why do we have to have different terms for everything that is not conventional?

manonboard

I'd love to try this form of parenting.

It's unlikely I'll be in a monogamous relationship long term, and I very much want children so this is always a consideration of mine.

I see far more advantages with the extra emotional, time, and financial support for the children. Life is big enough that many different skill sets and ways of thinking are a very desirable support that children should have.

As we've moved away from community upbringing in many ways, I believe 'co-parenting' is a great step at saving the best parts of that as we become more distant to those around us.

hansfrei

hansfrei wrote: »

Who am I? A responsible adult!

Again what has this got to do with people who themselves decide to come together and reproduce? Who are you to "let" them? Do your neighbours have kids? Did you "let" them do it too? Your magnamity clearly knows no bounds with the amount of people in Ireland you have "let" procreate.

Why do they need to justify themselves at all - let alone to you?

I am not sure what pedastal you think you are on kid - but you arent.

Tasden

loubeelou wrote: »

Can't stand the term Co-Parenting.
Whatever the circumstances of the family, if you are a parent or are acting in the parental role, then you are a parent, not a Co-Parent.
Why do we have to have different terms for everything that is not conventional?

I dunno, as someone with a child seeing someone else with a child, both from previous relationships, its kind of a tough one (and we arent anywhere near living together as a family or anything) theres so many things to consider when it isn't a conventional family set up- the child's confusion, the parents' feelings, etc. Lots of step mothers will refer to the child's mother as the biological mother, which I personally think is insulting to the actual mother, others think that a step mam has a parenting role but will never fully be considered a parent. It all depends on the family. I know that co parenting in this thread is obviously different to blended families and step parents but if you take the whole " parental role is still a parent" then where do you draw the line?

clairefontaine

Tasden wrote: »

I dunno, as someone with a child seeing someone else with a child, both from previous relationships, its kind of a tough one (and we arent anywhere near living together as a family or anything) theres so many things to consider when it isn't a conventional family set up- the child's confusion, the parents' feelings, etc. Lots of step mothers will refer to the child's mother as the biological mother, which I personally think is insulting to the actual mother, others think that a step mam has a parenting role but will never fully be considered a parent. It all depends on the family. I know that co parenting in this thread is obviously different to blended families and step parents but if you take the whole " parental role is still a parent" then where do you draw the line?

I agree. I think the term is appropriate when the mother didn't raise the child tough, like in cases of adoption, and not when step moms try to elevate their own status within the family.

Co parenting usually refers to divorced parents who work together regardless, though some say, this is actually a bull**** term and the dynamic doesn't actually exists.

Parallel parenting is when you can't agree or get on and there is no collaboration at all.

Honestly if this stuff is coming out the the US, there is a streak of a terrible attitude that around children and acquisition. I want it there fore i will get it. is be scared for fhe family courts once this catches on. I don't blame Putin from banning Russian children being adopted in the US.

Tasden

Yeah I always thought co parenting was a term for two parents parenting separately but as a team kind of thing.

jimgoose

clairefontaine wrote: »

...Co parenting usually refers to divorced parents who work together regardless, though some say, this is actually a bull**** term and the dynamic doesn't actually exists.

Parallel parenting is when you can't agree or get on and there is no collaboration at all....

It is a bull-shyte term. Anyway, as evry fule no, Symmetric Multi-Parenting delivered as-a-service via the Cloud is the only job. :cool: