Anti,
TPP sent me this it may help us to understand a little in relation to Attachment and non-Attachment and our need to build a secure family base with one parent at home

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/915447-overview


Preferrably I say the woman stay at home to build that base for the child and the man sacrifices some of his Attachment with the child to go out and work so as to provide the funds so that women can have the secure base for the mans child
SAHM's should NOT be under-estimated as to the importance that they are to, first the child, then the man then to all of society.
Man then instead of going to the pub after work like they used to and some still do come home to the child to make up for time spent away from his children also assist then the woman with the child
People have to understand (both male and female) that to bring a child into this world is a life long committment and if either are not ready for this committment then DON"T play at the games that has a child as its end result
Thanks All have a good life from Dave

Anti:The children you see may all be damaged in some way, but they represent a very small subset of children. Biology matters a whole lot.”

Nup doesn’t. But we’re coming from different perspectives. As mum I know the depth of feeling I had and have for my own children. I know that bond and those emotions are the same with someone elses child… adopted or fostered. For my kids having an amazing man parent them from very young who was not a biological parent has helped them realise what importance DNA has; zero.

Corn:“Why don't you want them to have their own children but it is OK to parent (does that mean adopt)? That makes it sound as though biology matters but in a negative sense in their case.”

Adopt or foster (you can adopt a foster child after two years in your Long Term care), plenty of children already here that need good parents.

“Or are you thinking that our children should be childless to make up for the excesses of others abroad? Maybe their right to have children is being taken away from them by governments who through pursuing reckless record immigration numbers year after year, have made Australia's population growth higher than criticised Asian countries.”

No wasn’t thinking about children abroad, more about the 30,000 Australian state wards already here. But interesting point.

“In Brisbane it is said that two suburbs supply the vast majority Queensland's criminal population. It wouldn't be a stretch to suggest that the same suburbs probably also supply many of the at-risk children for you and others to foster. Of course these suburbs also have high unemployment and family traditions of unemployment and welfare dependence that go back generations.”

Yep – more to do with environment the parents are in and raised in. This is where stats come from aye

Pied
I would argue that biology does matter and means a lot to many people - but it is not everything.

In the case of adopted children there is often a very strong need to understand one's roots or where we come from. I am not sure if this is a natural biological or evolutionary need or whether it is a social construct. And this matters to many adoptees despite being raised by loving and caring parents.

I tend to lean on the side that we do have an inherent need to know about our 'genes' even though on a pragmatic level we know that genetic links alone do not necessarily make a good parent nor that our genetic code dictates who we are in isolation from other factors.

This does not mean that biology should win over other considerations. It would appear in custody or care arrangements too much might be made of parent rights instead of the rights of children to live in a continuous safe, harmonious and loving environment.

Biology does matter. Most biological parents of both genders never harm their child. Have a read of Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene" for a pretty good explanation of why it's important.

I'm sure that while the rate of neglect and abuse is high among single mothers it would be higher still if the children were in the care of someone unrelated. Think of huffnpuff's lament.

It is precisely because we have the biological drive to protect our own children that we are so shocked and perhaps even in denial about the fact that some people seem to have either missed out on that drive or have been forced into situations in which it becomes less importent to them.

TPP may do a good job - we've only her word for that, but whether she does or not, it's London to a brick that the kids she sees would be better off with a loving, responsible couple of parents.

Hey Anti, This is a turn around for you – most mums never harm their child? That would be “significant harm” – I agree and same with dads.

“I'm sure that while the rate of neglect and abuse is high among single mothers it would be higher still if the children were in the care of someone unrelated. Think of huffnpuff's lament.”

NSW is happy to continue the treatment of children that created huffnpuff’s lament. And ProffesorAu and Gypsy, there is a few around aye.

“It is precisely because we have the biological drive to protect our own children that we are so shocked and perhaps even in denial about the fact that some people seem to have either missed out on that drive or have been forced into situations in which it becomes less important to them.”

Oh see I don’t have that block, if I think back I probably used to be more shocked. They might be forced or just raised to not see a better way. But I am surprised at you Anti – I thought many men in this thread just thought women were in general innately programmed to neglect and batter their children.

“TPP may do a good job - we've only her word for that, but whether she does or not, it's London to a brick that the kids she sees would be better off with a loving, responsible couple of parents.”

Oh yeah they do need a loving, responsible couple of parents… cause some their biological ones often did bad things to them. Would have been better if nothing bad every happened, would have been better if the foster care system in this state/country worked better and kept the kids safe.

And you hit the nail on the head – you only have my word for it – cause no one comes to check foster kids or the foster homes. It is appalling. Same as being clear about where the money goes, foster homes should be inspected.

"This does not mean that biology should win over other considerations. It would appear in custody or care arrangements too much might be made of parent rights instead of the rights of children to live in a continuous safe, harmonious and loving environment."

Changes in law should revolve around this one paragraph Pelican.