Pregnancy out of wedlock and perception of disgrace.

saabsaab wrote: »

In my experience it was most even the most qualified men.

How far back are you talking?

political analyst wrote: »

That was a dodgy commissioner's doing. An office error at Tusla meant that McCabe's details were wrongly applied to another child's case files.

?

mrslancaster wrote: »

No such thing as a fatherless child @irishproduce.

There's an awful lot of shock & discussion now from the report released yesterday. Everyone is talking about the role of those who ran mother & baby homes, how the government didn't provide care or help & the attitudes of families and society at the time.

yes they all failed & it is truly horrific what happened & so upsetting to hear all of the terrible stories.

but there is a deafening silence about the men who fathered those babies.

Why did so many men abandon their children? Why did they think it was ok to walk away from the mothers & their responsibilities?

I don't know the answer to that but it is still happening today. Even though women have more options today, many still find themselves abandoned & alone. We can't blame the church or societal attitudes now.

Shame on every one of those fathers who walk away.

Yeah I agree with you.

Also I should have said "dadless" children.

Kevin Irving wrote: »

The only way discussion forums like this work, is if people are taken at face value for their contributions.

That’s not a discussion though, that’s just an echo chamber. If people are going to offer testimonies of their own volition, they should expect to be questioned rather than their testimonies being taken at face value. That’s how a discussion works.

BloodBath wrote: »

Power as in controlling state apparatus like education and healthcare which they still have a strong hold of.

...

Maybe we can evolve more before it's too late. Removing power from the RCC was a big stepping stone in that direction.

If your first statement is true, then your second statement can’t be true. In any case, the State simply doesn’t have the power to remove power from the Church. The Church has a strong hold on education, healthcare, welfare and culture in this country because it was given to them by Irish society and is still given to them by Irish society and there is no apparent will in Irish society to deprive Church Institutions of that power. It could easily happen again in a heartbeat because the Church is more than just the Hierarchy, it is largely perpetuated by it’s congregation and moulds itself to their moral standards and values. That’s how the State was formed after Ireland gained Independence from the British Government - the State hadn’t a pot to piss in, and Irish society generally had no issues with religious orders doing their dirty work in ridding Irish society of ‘undesirables’. Irish society wasn’t quite as backwards as some people’s romanticised notions that Irish society were in thrall to the RCC.

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

Theres a difference between someone in need of help, and someone playing the system, as a deliberate "career" choice.

Yes there were girls treated brutally by their family, the church the state. People should be held to account.

There are also multi generational welfare dependants who have no intention of ever providing for themselves, but no such reticence when it comes to reproduction.

I think that’s exactly the point the poster is making - it’s exactly that sort of attitude which is just as prevalent today as it was then, that led to the institution in Ireland of the Poor Laws, the Workhouses and the Bastardy Act -

A sexual revolution in the west of Ireland

The Amendment of the Law in Ireland as to Maintenance of Illegitimate Children


The Government at the time didn’t particularly care for the poor or impoverished in the same way Irish society didn’t particularly care for them then either, but 100 years later the RCC becomes something of a scapegoat when they were doing society’s dirty work, and it’s obviously not for nothing they were doing it either, but people at the time didn’t care - “out of sight, out of mind”, pretty much the same as it is today.

mariaalice wrote: »

It precisely that attitude that leads to a woman going into a mother and baby home or giving up her baby.

Its amazing going right back to the invention of written communication, you will find evidence of pamphlets and written records ranting and raving about the 'poor'.and how much they cost.

https://www.open.edu/openlearn/society/short-history-misrepresenting-poverty

Anti-poor language and constructing important sections of ‘the poor’ as a distinctive and pathological underclass carries with it anti working class prejudices and it is also highly gendered in its construction of particular groups of disadvantaged women as particularly culpable in the reproduction of disadvantaged populations (single parents, illegitimacy, family breakdown and so on).

Grand, so far as it goes, but what's your point?

Certain behaviours are unsustainable. Men are equal partners in the creation of children.

Where does that leave us? What alternative actions do you envisage, or think should have been envisaged?

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

Grand, so far as it goes, but what's your point?

Certain behaviours are unsustainable. Men are equal partners in the creation of children.

Where does that leave us? What alternative actions do you envisage, or think should have been envisaged?

There's lots of things we could do. Better interventions for families who are struggling - often the young parent is from an unstable background and it shouldn't be too hard to identify those families when their kids are young and give them support.

We could have more direct support where its needed. Speaking from my own experience as a teenager with a child, going to full time education was almost impossible. I got the grant, I got my fees paid but childcare wasn't available so I had to rely on a family member. Only for that family member I wouldn't have been able to go and would have been stuck in the welfare system. Childcare in Ireland is one of the most expensive in the world and only fits a 9-5 workday model. If a young parent wants to go to college or has a low paying job or one outside normal hours lack of childcare options makes it very hard for them.

Better sex education, more access to contraception, more empowerment of young people so they don't see sex as something they have to do. Sexual education is still very much focused on the biology of sex, how a baby is made and not so much on the emotional side of it or the impact of it mentally.

We will always have people who have no desire to support themselves and that's never going to change. We could start helping the people who want to better themselves. If a girl of 19 has a child and has dropped out of school and is now living at home with her baby but wants to return to education, maybe go to college and start working but doesn't have a support network she has very little options and that has to change.

eviltwin wrote: »

There's lots of things we could do. Better interventions for families who are struggling - often the young parent is from an unstable background and it shouldn't be too hard to identify those families when their kids are young and give them support.

We could have more direct support where its needed. Speaking from my own experience as a teenager with a child, going to full time education was almost impossible. I got the grant, I got my fees paid but childcare wasn't available so I had to rely on a family member. Only for that family member I wouldn't have been able to go and would have been stuck in the welfare system. Childcare in Ireland is one of the most expensive in the world and only fits a 9-5 workday model. If a young parent wants to go to college or has a low paying job or one outside normal hours lack of childcare options makes it very hard for them.

Better sex education, more access to contraception, more empowerment of young people so they don't see sex as something they have to do. Sexual education is still very much focused on the biology of sex, how a baby is made and not so much on the emotional side of it or the impact of it mentally.

We will always have people who have no desire to support themselves and that's never going to change. We could start helping the people who want to better themselves. If a girl of 19 has a child and has dropped out of school and is now living at home with her baby but wants to return to education, maybe go to college and start working but doesn't have a support network she has very little options and that has to change.

Even with all that, there would still be people who take a different path because the cultural milieu around them supports that path. There has been a huge drop in teenage pregnancies and it is only minorly because access to contraception is there, it has come about because of cultural changes in society.

Fred Cryton wrote: »

The last taboo in ireland is to question the accommodation by the State of single mothers to the point where they don't have to work. Whether you like it or not single motherhood is at the very core of almost ALL social problems in ireland - anti-social behaviour, crime, low education attainment...the list goes on.



Instead of rewarding women with a free house if they get pregnant early, how about building their self esteem and preventing them from going down the poverty path and the looking for a handout route in the first place.

I don't think it necessarily down to single mothers, probably those things you describe have a root in poverty as well and parental alienation. Its a lot easier to parent when you have another person sharing the role. People who blame single mothers for everything wrong with society forget that there is also a father in the mix and if he isn't involved we need to look at that too.

You can also make support conditional. Give accommodation to those who are willing to engage in education or training so they can eventually get out off welfare.

eviltwin wrote: »

People who blame single mothers for everything wrong with society forget that there is also a father in the mix and if he isn't involved we need to look at that too.

I think you are making a sound point there, one that many are making in relation to the Mother and Baby Homes Report.

It's like the path of responsibility goes to the mother initially, then to be passed on to the nuns, then to State, then to society in general.

Without much of a pause for "hang on, was no-one else involved"?

fantaiscool wrote: »

The single mother is the one who chose to procreate with the "deadbeat" father at the end of the day. That was a bad decision on her part which probably wouldn't have been made had the supports not been there. I know a few girls who had kids with guys who were very clearly not going to be good fathers.

That's all well and good

But don't you know, personal responsibility is a no no these days....

It's always society as a whole that is at fault....

Or the daddy's fault......