I am very curious about how children and adolescents with divorced
parents or born out of wed lock are affected by their lack of
traditional parentage.   From my experience witnessing these kids I
know that there is something different about them, but I cannot seem
to put into words what I have actually seen.  Help me understand some
of the trends and characteristics about these groups, so I can
understand those that I am around.  I?ll add a tip of $10, too.

The mix of divorce, daycare, two-working parents and numerous youth
activities must contibute to the "diminishing attachment" phenomenom
found in our younger generation's personality. I think this "affect"
is a residue left by the continual flux of personalities experienced
by our children without the foundation of it's "traditional" or ususal
inhabitants. When the "traditional family" spends less and less time
with it's own members, it's own members become unfamiliar. They learn
to be amorphic or worse apathetic. I've seen this moving steadily
downward, reaching into the pre-teen years. And now we have parents
"outsourcing" parental responsibilities. This realitivly new practice
may obfuscate the situation even further. In fact, it may be the worst
example of the desanitization of "tradition" our generation has ever
seen.
I do not think that we can isolate or "blame" divorce entirely for the
somewhat detatched "affects" that our children today are displaying.
On a brighter note, I have also seen  the younger thirty something
"new" parents moving towards a more traditional stance on parenting,
including nixing the idea that daycare is "OKAY". Thank goodness. I am
counting on them and the refreshment of family values.

The thought that there is anything wrong with having a single parent
is obtuse. The problem with the child derives from a lack of support
from available relatives.

Check my website www.parentalalienation.co.uk for some of the answers.
Children from single parent families do not learn the problems of
relationships which involve give and take. With single mothers they
lose the games/imaginatiion aspect from fathers, and with single
fathers lose the care aspect of mothers. They commonly have
difficulties in their own relationships, and more likely to take to
drugs/alcohol/chemical abuse, be truants and dropouts, and lose their
sense of identity. This is different from children who lose a parent
through death, but retain contact with the family.
The idea of a 'traditional' family though is now outdated. Jamacia
(typical of the West Indies) has a single-parent rate of around 90%.
Afro-Carribean in the UK are involved in most of the gun crime and
drug trade according to police studies. The UK now has close to 50% of
unmarried families, and increasing, making it the norm in the near
future.
The children of single parents are highly likely to become single
parents themselves, and this is the basis for the increasing number of
underage 'parents' in the Western world.  One aspect of this (to be
taken in context) is that increasing power of women has enabled single
mothers to survive without the support of men, and taken away any
blame for single parenthood. In the UK the welfare support of single
parents is by far the largest amount of the health services, in excess
of £13 billion a year, and not counting the cost of the effects of
single parenthood, and the majority of these parents do not work,
which gives another side for the children to copy.
With science offering increasing methods of having children outside of
marriage, this century will see the end of 'marriage' as the start of
the family. Aldous Huxley predicted it about 80 years ago.

The differences depend on both the child and the situation. Some act
out more to gain the needed attention. Some may become more aloof.
Others may show little differences from other children. The biggest
factor is how the parents deal with the divorce or the general reering
of the children.

Actually, a number of studies done in the early to mid-80's showed
that such single-parent kids were 7 times more likely to go to jail;
to use drugs; to become unwed parents; etc. Virtually all mass
murderers were raised with only one parent, not both.

I was stunned when I read this. I asked a man who had been a
correction's officer if he had seen any such reality. He actually
laughed, and said no honest person who had anything to do with prisons
could ever say there was no difference in family structure. he said he
could not remember the last time he had seen a two parent   prisoner. 
However, national statistics at the time indicated there were perhaps
15%.

Yet, a strong "woman's movement" felt it was inappropriate to say
anything negative about single parenting, because it was offensive to
single parents who were doing their best, so such studies are no
longer allowed. The PC belief is that the problem is unpaid child
support, and if deadbeats would just pay up, these kids would do fine.
 But, some of those studies involved rich kids, such as divorced
Kennedy's and afte divorce, they used drugs and in general went to pot
just like poor kids.

Obviously, as questioner has shown, if you actually stop and look, you
can SEE the difference.

A mother once told me the reason kids need two parents if:

Mothers give kids unconditional love they need as small children.

Fathers give kids the conditional love they need to learn to fit into society.

The problem is, as implied elsewhere, that uninvolved parents, even in
the two parent families, may leave the kids with no parenting at all.

I'm afraid that my esteemed colleagues are really only describing the
negative consequences and effects of single parented children. I would
like to shed some light on the root of these "trends and
characteristics" so that you can really understand them. It really
comes down to the lack of proper role modelling from within the
single-parent or dysfunctional dual-parent home. Contrary to what
others in society might teach us, we have been told by our Creator
very explicitly that men and women must effectively play distinctive
roles as heads of their family. The male has been deemed the role of
protector, provider, and preacher (the three Ps) whereas the female
has been deemed central to securing an environment to raising
emotionally healthy individuals. Many people will overplay this due to
over-feminisim in our society, wishing to extend, abandon, or violate
their chief role in favor of "what I want to do". Child raising should
not be about "what I want to do", but always a continual sacrifice of
"what is best for them". The problem with deviating from such roles is
evident in the effects that my colleagues have already explained. Thus
these "trends and characteristics" arise. Two people are needed
because there are too many tasks to do for only one. Without an
effective father, there is no one to do the job of continually looking
out for any harm that may come to the family, to see to it that the
child is well fed, clothed, and educated, or to oversee spiritual
development. Without an effective mother, emotionally unstable people
arise of every variety imaginable and the sense of having or desiring
a stable "home" is lost in the child.

I am a 22 year old single parent of 2 young children. I felt compelled
to add a comment to this forum for a few reasons. First, regarding the
comments of henrycat concerning Jamaican single parent family rates
and his perceived corralation between these rates and the gun violence
and drug trade rates in Britain; THERE IS NO CORRALATION. There was no
mention of how many of these criminals were from singal parent homes.
These people are immigrants to a much more affluent culture than their
own. I suggest the crime rates among this population have more to do
with culure shock and poverty.
Second, still regarding henrycat's rant, I sincerely hope the sentance
containing the comment "...underage 'parents'..." was a typo, meant to
read "...'underage' parents..." The notion that one must not be an
effective parent if they are under a socially 'acceptable' age is
ludicrous. The concept of having your carreer in order before having
children is a modern phenomenon. A woman is in her peek physical
condition for child bearing in her late adolecence and into her 20's.
However, raising children should not be the responsibility of 1
person; or for that matter 2. Traditionally, in the truest sense of
the word, closely tied communities of like-minded individuals raised
their families interdependently. They were self-sufficient and taught
children invaluable life lessons, philosophies, and theological
beliefs. We have sacrificed much in our fast paced modern,
economically driven society. I feel this is the true cause of those
"trends and characteristics" that have been mentioned here.
I also feel, as did conduit, that too much emphasis has been placed on
the negative effects of single parenting. Well adjusted children from
single-parent homes (and yes, they do exist) may be more
self-reliant/independent and have a greater sense of responsibilty tan
children from two parent homes. These children are needed more to
'pitch in', and thus are less inclined to expect others to pick up
their slack in the real world.
Finally, being a 'young' single parent i'm sure some are wondering if
I came from a single parent home. I did not. My father was in the
military and my mother stayed at home. So stay open-minded on the
topic and sympathetic to those who do seem to have dysfunctional
family lives.

Not everyone that comes from a single parent home is corrupt. I'm a 23
year old male with a 17 year old sister. We were raised by a single
mother. My father left our family and the state when I was 7 years old
and paid a whopping $300/month for child-support. My mother worked
overtime to make sure she had enough money to support us properly. I
was a "latch-key kid" at the age of 11; meaning I had keys to my house
and went home by myself after school. I went to school, got decent
grades, went to college, and now have a respectable job. My sister is
about to graduate highschool, and is an exceptional student looking at
computer tech colleges in the area. I've seen my share of trouble, but
no more than any people my age that have both parents intact.

As far as single parents raising drug addicts, dropouts and children
with a lack of a sense of identity... maybe I represent a small
percentage, but I'm none of these things. If anything, having a single
mother forced me to grow up quicker and realize what needed to be done
to support myself sooner than most people my age.

Realizing that my father was not going to provide any type of male
role-model to set boundaries for my younger sister, I've somewhat
stepped into that role. Initially, this was not by choice, but after a
short while, you get used to it. Long story short... not all single
females raising children do a horrible job. You are a product of your
environment and if your environment and there ARE some loving mothers
and fathers out there that take care of their responsibilities. Good
luck with your research.

     - EP -