(no subject)
Dec. 27th, 2003 11:36 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mrsbrownI'm fed up with marriage breakdown being the bogey which causes child abuse and increases in child delinquency.
An article in yesterday's "Age" blames marriage breakdown, and serial relationships, for the increase in child abuse in Australia.
The article also asserts that child abuse was previously caused by intense poverty, slums and poor educational and health services which are now "largely relics of the past." Marriage breakdown is just a new cause of poverty, and poverty, what ever the cause, changes your perceptions of the world and makes it easy to lose focus on your role as a parent, be angry with the world, and blame your children for your state. If you don't have children, you may not be, or more importantly, feel poor
I've been poor twice in my life. The first time, I was with The BastardTM, which made the whole experience worse, but I was astonished with the way my attitudes changed. I spent a lot of time worrying about how much money I didn't have, and how I couldn't afford to do things. Because the things I couldn't do were at the top of my awareness, when I did have money I would do those things ( upgrade the computer, go out to dinner) instead of carefully squirreling away my money to spend on the things I really needed, like electricity or gas. I knew I was doing it, but the worst thing about being poor is being poor, and I needed to get away from it for a while.
The despair we felt made parenting much harder. Our emotional energy was focussed on our survival and the kids emotional needs got in the way. I had to consciously force myself to behave like the parent I wanted to be, and I was very aware that my ability to observe my behaviour helped me to "keep it together" in a way that maybe other families wouldn't. Of course M didn't handle the stress of poverty. He spent days lying in bed or playing computer games, and was more likely to lose his temper and frighten the family. I saw his response to the stress we were under and understood how people who didn't have our emotional resources could hurt their children.
The second time I was/felt poor was when I had my marriage breakdown (even if I wasn't married). My back was against the wall and my focus was on getting the money to maintain what I thought my kids needed; to stay at their school, to keep the house they lived in. I wasn't really poor, but I certainly needed more money than I had. So I made emotional decisions on financial grounds. In today;s "Age" I read:
Luckily, I had enough money coming in that meant I didn't need to do what the mother above did. But I remember contemplating it. Their father and I don't have the financial arguments we used to. We don't need to, I'm earning enough money. (minor brag; 4 years ago I earned half what he did, now I earn more)
So; Marriage breakdown doesn't cause delinquency, or increased child abuse; it causes poverty and a reduction in the choices people have. By blaming marriage breakdown, we encourage women to stay in bad relationships, we typecast children of separated families as future delinquents, and we make the issue too complicated to be dealt with by government policy.
I am the child of a broken marriage and I have inflicted marriage breakdown upon my children. I have never abused my children or been abused myself. They, and I, are at the extreme end of non-delinquency. We have always had enough money, or education, to feel in control of our destiny. Ergo, it is poverty that is to blame.
An article in yesterday's "Age" blames marriage breakdown, and serial relationships, for the increase in child abuse in Australia.
The article also asserts that child abuse was previously caused by intense poverty, slums and poor educational and health services which are now "largely relics of the past." Marriage breakdown is just a new cause of poverty, and poverty, what ever the cause, changes your perceptions of the world and makes it easy to lose focus on your role as a parent, be angry with the world, and blame your children for your state. If you don't have children, you may not be, or more importantly, feel poor
I've been poor twice in my life. The first time, I was with The BastardTM, which made the whole experience worse, but I was astonished with the way my attitudes changed. I spent a lot of time worrying about how much money I didn't have, and how I couldn't afford to do things. Because the things I couldn't do were at the top of my awareness, when I did have money I would do those things ( upgrade the computer, go out to dinner) instead of carefully squirreling away my money to spend on the things I really needed, like electricity or gas. I knew I was doing it, but the worst thing about being poor is being poor, and I needed to get away from it for a while.
The despair we felt made parenting much harder. Our emotional energy was focussed on our survival and the kids emotional needs got in the way. I had to consciously force myself to behave like the parent I wanted to be, and I was very aware that my ability to observe my behaviour helped me to "keep it together" in a way that maybe other families wouldn't. Of course M didn't handle the stress of poverty. He spent days lying in bed or playing computer games, and was more likely to lose his temper and frighten the family. I saw his response to the stress we were under and understood how people who didn't have our emotional resources could hurt their children.
The second time I was/felt poor was when I had my marriage breakdown (even if I wasn't married). My back was against the wall and my focus was on getting the money to maintain what I thought my kids needed; to stay at their school, to keep the house they lived in. I wasn't really poor, but I certainly needed more money than I had. So I made emotional decisions on financial grounds. In today;s "Age" I read:
And a motive for the mother to minimise the father's contact, he says, is money. "The more contact the father has with the children, the less child support the mother would be entitled to. I have personally heard a mother say: 'You will never get more than 109 nights per year contact because that will then cost me money'."Boy, can I identify with this.
Luckily, I had enough money coming in that meant I didn't need to do what the mother above did. But I remember contemplating it. Their father and I don't have the financial arguments we used to. We don't need to, I'm earning enough money. (minor brag; 4 years ago I earned half what he did, now I earn more)
So; Marriage breakdown doesn't cause delinquency, or increased child abuse; it causes poverty and a reduction in the choices people have. By blaming marriage breakdown, we encourage women to stay in bad relationships, we typecast children of separated families as future delinquents, and we make the issue too complicated to be dealt with by government policy.
I am the child of a broken marriage and I have inflicted marriage breakdown upon my children. I have never abused my children or been abused myself. They, and I, are at the extreme end of non-delinquency. We have always had enough money, or education, to feel in control of our destiny. Ergo, it is poverty that is to blame.
