...
written by travhops , September 11, 2008 (08:18:47 AM)

With all that is known about this Syndrome, I am shocked to see it increasing. It's not as if mothers are unaware and to me that is the heighth of selfishness and ignorance.

"If anything, the situation is growing worse …” "Young people today just want to live in the moment. It's hard to understand why," Hay said …
written by Sojourn , September 11, 2008 (12:39:56 PM)

Well, if you were to ask my opinion I suggest that since the rise in the women’s liberation movement there’s been big changes in the values of our society.

How can people on the one hand claim that a fetus is nothing more than a blob, and yet claim that women are harming their children by consuming alcohol while pregnant?

It’s no wonder the younger generation’s disregard for the unborn children is on the rise. What with our government’s handing out medals for doing away with unborn children, what do you think our young impressionable minds are going to think?

Then there’s the change where woman now pursue careers. The all mighty dollar and material wealth over their home and family.

Let strangers raise their families, and the governments are biggest culprits. Promoting the idea of separating families all in the pursuit of material wealth.

Generates more taxes for it though.

They could...
written by Ken Berry Media , September 11, 2008 (01:17:15 PM)

always get the Christ for First Nations to exorcise this problem in a noble manner. I'm sure the success rate should be much higher than with organized crime.

Arts and Culture is an partial antidote to this societal problem - but on a long term basis.

...
written by Mike S , September 11, 2008 (01:30:25 PM)

Sojourn let me help bring you up to speed. Women having careers is not a 'change' as you say, unless you are going back to the bare-foot and pregnant days of long ago.

Are you actually -even remotely - suggesting women having careers is a negative thing? I thought that kind of misogynist thinking was a thing of the past.

Maybe when a child is first born, it may be convenient, especially if breast-feeding, for the mother to stay home. Not always though. And that is her choice. After that is there a better reason for the mother to stay at home instead of the father? (assuming a two parent family).

...
written by Buzz , September 11, 2008 (01:44:31 PM)

Legalized abortions = an increase in Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, apparently.

This comment, I assume, was written using good old fashioned Christian logic.

Move over Hay ----- you’ve got company. More people that can’t seem to figure it out either.
written by Sojourn , September 12, 2008 (09:52:20 AM)

.
Two stooges with no opinion of their own about what’s causing the increase in FASD, and yet, they do not refute anything I’ve said. They simply resort to numbskull comments like Mike’s - “go back to bare-foot and pregnant days”

So that’s your opinion aye Mike?

Just make a vitriol condemnation of stay at home mothers-homemakers. They’re nothing but bare-footed pregnant women huh?

Now that’s what I would consider misogynist thinking.

Mike, it’s people like you and the governments that have systematically undermined the value of stay at home mothers-homemakers.

========================

And then there’s another buzz-brain comment.

“Legalized abortions = an increase in Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, apparently.”

Well apparently it would seem so!

They (legalized abortions for birth control) are part of the reason for the moral breakdown in society.

But Buzz, our resident antichrist has a hate on for anybody with a differing opinion than Buzz about the decaying morals in society. Someone makes a comment and Buzz jumps up, puts a knife to their throat and accuses them of being one of those evil Christians.

Buzz, you otta try going to the church of common sense sometime. It’d do you some good you know.

Now you two get back to your government jobs and study groups. Put in your time until it’s quitting time and, quit playing on the computer. Ya hear!

...
written by Mike S , September 12, 2008 (10:07:02 AM)

Sojourn your pathetic attempt to accuse me of the very thing you are guilty of (misogynist thinking) is the most blatant case of 'projecting' I have seen lately. Nowhere did I condemn women, or anyone, who wants to stay home. You may have trouble following logic - but my simple point was that your archaic views on 'women's liberation' and their 'pursuit of careers', harkened back to the days of people like you wishing women to be bare-foot and pregnant and to 'know their place'. Try to keep up.

You accuse career women of valuing the 'all mighty dollar over their home and families'. Ridiculous. You can judge strangers? Do you know everyone's situation?

You never did answer my one simple question. Why do you single out women to stay at home? Are you suggesting men are somehow less capable? You are truly a dinosaur.. aye?

Damn pirates....
written by tombstone81 , September 12, 2008 (10:26:00 AM)

Aye? Aye? Nothing like a swashbuckling seadog to ruin a good debate...

ARRRRRRRRRR.....

...
written by Mike S , September 12, 2008 (10:36:55 AM)

Also sojourn, as to your childish comments about Buzz and I having government jobs. Unlike you, I can't speculate about Buzz's job - but he seems quite intelligent so I'm sure he is happy with it, whether it is with the government or not. Also, I find it sad that you not only ridicule women, you now imply that government jobs should be singled out as allowing people time to 'play on the computer'.

...
written by allniter , September 12, 2008 (10:38:49 AM)

I personally don't think women out working has anything to do with Fetal Alchohol Syndrome. Also, people have to remember that one-income families are often unable to meet basic needs--there is often no choice other than for both parents to be working.

I think it has more to do with the lack of education and accountability that is ofen prevalent in a society plagued by poverty, and the hopelessness that can come with it. The consequences of one's actions are not being taught now; rather, we are bombarded by armchair psychologists and psychobabble peddlars about "understanding the addiction" and excusing the behaviour.

Kids have been growing up without the awareness of consequence for two or three generations too long, and that includes what happens when you drink or do drugs while you're carrying a fetus. Kids oare not being taught about what can happen when you screw up in ANY situation, including this one.

...
written by Mike S , September 12, 2008 (10:56:36 AM)

Allniter you are bang on. Education, poverty, employment opportunities...etc. are all factors in this issue.

...
written by Reality , September 12, 2008 (11:35:23 AM)

Mother of 3 here - working full time to put food on the table. I have a good career. Therefore, according to Sojourn, I value my career over my family? What a ridiculously offensive statement.

...
written by Mike S , September 12, 2008 (12:14:17 PM)

Reality I think 'offensive' is the best word. For some reason, Sojourn seems to want to regress back to the days of "Father knows best', when women were treated even less equal than today by some. While he cannot grasp the concept, many like it seems with you, are able to value family AND career.

Apparently, if your career is with 'the government', he will have even less respect for you.

Reality
written by tombstone81 , September 12, 2008 (12:16:09 PM)

I'm not necessarily in agreement with Sojourn's original rant, but I think he/she might be getting somewhat unfairly misinterpreted here. I read the original suggestion as being that women who "pursue" careers (presumably unnecessarily, in some cases) might be putting wealth over family...or the choice to even START a family.

Your statement reads differently, in that you appear to be working for the sole benefit of your family, so they are fed and clothed. An admiral effort, and I have the utmost respect for working mothers...single or otherwise. Big difference though between "working full time to put food on the table" and "pursuing a career". I guess the question is, if your situation could support it...would you continue to work or spend full time with your three kids?

Bait & switch gag Mike?
written by Sojourn , September 12, 2008 (12:38:52 PM)

"value family AND career?"

Unfortunately there’s always sacrifices to be made when choosing a career by necessity or, otherwise.

Reality : "Therefore, according to Sojourn, I value my career over my family?"

That's a question right Real…? Well my dear, you have answered it yourself.

"... working full time to put food on the table."

That’s an easy concept to grasp. Even Mike should be able to understand it.

But for Mike it’s confusing to think that some women prefer to choose family before career. Those are archaic days of long ago he says.

And this sad untruth from him, reaching for anything.

“Sojourn seems to want to regress back to the days of "Father knows best', when women were treated even less equal than today by some.”

What about Mother knows best?

A quick reveiw. I forgot to A your ?
written by Sojourn , September 12, 2008 (01:09:26 PM)

Mike your question was.

"Why do you single out women to stay at home? Are you suggesting men are somehow less capable?"

A. Less capable? No. Men lack a maternal instinct.

By the way, I can comprehend that you’re making fun of me.

And after all the times I helped bail you out of your misconstrued opinions. :(

...
written by Mike S , September 12, 2008 (01:43:16 PM)

What does maternal instinct have to do with staying home? Are you really suggesting a woman should be limited in careers because of biology? If a woman chooses to work outside (as well as inside), the home then that is her choice. Are you being so presumptuous as to suggest she is somehow suppressing that instinct and somehow 'suffering' to have a career? Again, if men and women are capable of staying home with children, why do you single out women? I think your condescending tone to Reality ("my dear"?), speaks volumes.

Again let me clarify since you seem desperate to back pedal from your obvious misgognist comments and somehow accuse me of the same. I think it neither archaic, nor in any way 'less' of a career for anyone to stay home with children. What is archaic is for women to not have a choice. Or, if making the choice to work outside, to be made to feel somehow 'wrong' or guilty, as you have stated. (Sojourn: "Then there’s the change where woman now pursue careers. The all mighty dollar and material wealth over their home and family...")

Shame on you Sojourn for your lack of respect for women, and people who work for governments.

...
written by travhops , September 15, 2008 (08:33:41 AM)

I was a working mother who raised two children quite successfully. What, pray tell, does a working mother have to do with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome? That is caused by the selfish choice of drinking alcohol while pregnant and in a day and age where there is so much education about no alcohol, women are still continuing to drink.

Mike’s conjecture.
written by Sojourn , September 15, 2008 (09:45:08 AM)

Mike, can you or anyone else say for certain that my opinion concerning the increase in FASD is 100% wrong?

And stating the obvious is no an answer to the problem. “ …caused by the selfish choice of drinking alcohol while pregnant …”

Why are they making the selfish choice? Was it something from their childhood that affects their reasoning? I.E. absentee parents - latchkey kids.

Mike you’ve had no opinion of your own on here as to the increase in FASD, other than to summarize another’s opinion. You’ve digressed to the point where you somehow believe the news article is about women’s rights and the choice to have a career outside the home, and whether women are suffering (“…she is somehow suppressing that instinct and somehow 'suffering' to have a career?”)

If you would quit your blathering and pay attention, stick to the topic you would notice the article isn’t about whether women are suffering because they choose to have a career outside the home. It’s about an increase in FASD.

News flash for you Mike. Education levels are higher nowadays than in my dinosaur days, there’s less poverty and more jobs and yet there’s an increase in FASD. Mikes answer to the problem, more education, less poverty, more jobs.

Mike’s answer to all social problems. Same old government song and dance.
===================
What is a troll?

Was the person you are responding to trying to get attention or provoke angry responses from others? (This is usually called "trolling".)

Mike says: “Shame on you Sojourn for your lack of respect for women, and people who work for governments.”

Me lack respect for women? Not so. And as for people who work for governments?

Here’s where I have to bail you out again from your senseless comments/opinions…

I have no objections to anybody working for the government but I’ve been around long enough to know the truth in what I’ve said. Public servants “Putting in time until it’s quitting time … playing on the computer.”


TROLLs….! Mike are you reading this?

...
written by Buzz , September 15, 2008 (10:46:22 AM)

I think FASD is increasing because some people are selfish, self centered, combined with being somewhat dumb. It's both a male and female problem...women are dumb to put their future children at risk, and men are dumb when they don't assist their wives/girlfriends in avoiding substance abuse when pregnant. (that's assuming that the father of the fetus is even in the picture of course...yet another selfish problem)
To suggest that FASD is linked to women having careers is baseless... it's all about the fact that we're in an extremely selfish/self centered generation, at least in the Western World. Whether a woman works or not is not the point, as there are plenty of good/bad parents who do/don't have careers...it's not the career choice, it's about living for yourself instead of having empathy and understanding for our whole community/planet. Just because Sojourn says "you can't prove my hypothesis isn't true, therefore it must be true", does not make that logical thinking. (A bit like the Christian argument that just because science can't disprove God, therefore there must be a God, but that's another topic)

Why do these discussions turn into children slinging insults at each other? Why is everyone so quick to make gross assumptions and "truths" about people you don't have a clue about.

Sojourn, why I bother to justify myself to you is escaping me at this point, but here's a couple of facts just so you know:
-self employed business person for the past 25 years
-my wife is a stay home to raise our children
-while I've disclosed being an athiest, I live more of a so called "christian" life that most christians.

...
written by Mike S , September 15, 2008 (10:58:19 AM)

Travhops you sound like a productive woman, who, in complete disbelief to some here, is capable of working outside the home, while also successfully raising a family. It is a shame in this day and age, that disrespect, ignorance, and stereotypes still exist towards specific groups such as women, and apparently, many hard-working public servants.

I agree with you - there is hardly a link between working mothers and fetal alchohol syndrome. I think when there are no clear answers, or solutions, to complex problems, some people will take that opportunity to make scapegoats out of a particular group. Hard-working mothers seem to be that target here. Governments are also the target - but it's easy to see that some people have an irrational, prevalent (almost paranoid) mistrust of any and all government programs or research and turn every conversation into their 'anti-government' soapbox. Having an attitude of questioning governments, and making them accountable seems healthy. Some take it well beyond that.

I'll try to focus on the topic (FASD), despite one of the first responses which tried to go off on the tangent of blaming working women. Research and education (nasty words to some), are key as with most problems. While education may be higher today than in the past, what some fail to grasp by making simple comments like that, is that there are still many out there with very limited education. We are talking about the exceptions and not the norm. The same goes for income levels. While FASD can occur in any socio-economic group, statistically it is more prevalent among low income groups and those with less education. Kinda contradicts the 'working mom' theory really.

Nevertheless, that’s nothing more than your own opinions, and in my opinion there are links.
written by Sojourn , September 15, 2008 (12:31:41 PM)

“…students left home alone for more than three hours a day reported higher levels of behavioral problems, higher rates of depression and lower levels of self-esteem than other students.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latchkey_kid

Not to mention others.

===========================

“Kinda contradicts the 'working mom' theory really.”

Now wouldn’t that depend on the income?

========================

Mike you said, “…tangent of blaming working women ”

Nobody is trying to affix blame as you say. TIt's my opinion about the possible causes.

Now remember what a troll does?

...
written by Mike S , September 15, 2008 (12:49:48 PM)

Some quotes conveniently overlooked from the very website just posted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latchkey_kid

".. In 2000, a German PISA study found no significant differences in the scholastic performance between "latchkey kids" and kids in a "nuclear family"...".

"..Children from lower income families are associated with greater externalizing problems (such as conduct disorders and hyperactivity) and academic problems, while children from middle and upper income families are no different than their supervised peers..."

"..Positive effects of being a latchkey child include independence and self-reliance...".

Stop the 'blame game' against women, who have as much right to choose careers outside the home, as any man.

Not overlooked
written by Sojourn , September 15, 2008 (01:16:07 PM)

"...no significant differences in the scholastic performance..."

What, can you not read? That's scholastic.

"..Positive effects of being a latchkey child include independence and self-reliance...".

What percentage is that Mike?

=================================

"'blame game' against women"

Trolling again Mike?

If anything I am confirming my belief in the importance of mother's who choose to stay home. Unfortunately that is not always possible in a lot of families.

And Buzz, thanks for the tidbits about yourself, although it wasn't necessary.

However, your version of success is not necessarily the same other people's.

...
written by Reality , September 15, 2008 (01:23:04 PM)

Well, "my dear", I enjoy my career. At this point it puts food on the table. If I were able to quit and be a stay at home mom, would I? Probably not. (unless of course there was a deep rooted issue that required me to – of course I would choose my family first). I did that when they were toddlers. I'm good at what I do and I'm very successful at it. It is a part of who I am. My kids are all in school full time. Having them go home after school and do chores, homework and start dinner teaches them responsibility and instills self worth and confidence. It teaches them to work as a team and to be contributing members of the household.

Your opinion surrounds working moms and I don't think it's an issue about whether both parents work or not - it is how they choose to educate their children, how involved they are in their children's lives, how much they communicate and how "in their face" they are when their kids are out and about. It is about the values and morals taught and demonstrated within the home.

Blaming FASD on working mothers is a cop out. I know plenty of stay at home moms who aren't doing that great of a job and have selfish brats for children who don't know how to do anything for themselves, let alone for anyone else because everything is done for them. I know of a few who have no clue what their preteens are up to on a Saturday night. Am I going to blame all stay at home moms for the increase of FASD? No, of course not - there are just as many who do a great job.

It's about being involved, it's about taking care of your children, teaching them right from wrong, staying on top of them, knowing where they are and who they're with, expecting the very best from them in everything they do, it's about expecting A's and constantly encouraging them to get there, it's about supervising them, educating them, instilling self worth and pride.

We live in a society where medicrity is the expected norm and it does nothing for our children. Some will rise above this and others will not and will find other avenues to find themselves – many in destructive ways.

Long----winded opinion.
written by Sojourn , September 15, 2008 (03:54:04 PM)

"It's hard to understand why," Hay said.."

Looks like you've solved the problem. Pleas inform Dr. Hay!!!

====

“Blaming FASD on working mothers is a cop out.”

That’s not you trolling in disguise is it Mike?

...
written by Katie McLeod , September 15, 2008 (05:37:16 PM)

Here's how it happens. Girls and boys at a party drinking and getting drunk; having sex; not using protection because it's just this once. Then next weekend the same again. Then the girl is pregnant and doesn't even know it and continues to party and drink. That's how a lot of FASD happens. Of course this is not the only scenario but it is one. The solution is the kids either need to "keep their clothes on" or use protection.

...
written by Mike S , September 15, 2008 (05:45:21 PM)

Well Sojourn you have displayed some incredible examples of double standards and irony. I use the website YOU choose and you ask me to quantify percentages. A double standard since, somehow you don't attempt to quantify anything with your (partial) quote (you forgot the socioeconimic factor at the start of the sentence). What exactly are the levels of behavioural problems? What about "higher rates of depression and lower levels of self-esteem"? More rates and levels... but just how much? Got any of the percentages for those? Next time you ask for something, at least have the integrity to have provided the same - it would look less.. hmmmm..desperate.

Double standard that apparently only men, according to you, can pursue careers with out somehow de-valuing families.

Double standard that you tell others to stay on topic - yet the majority of your comments continue to have nothing to do with it.

When you continue to simply blame women and governments it indicates your outdated bias and simple thinking. Sadly... nothing new.

...
written by Mike S , September 15, 2008 (05:50:26 PM)

I suppose one last irony is your use and accusation of 'trolling' (wherever you found that)...

I can only think of two possibilities for your public servant bashing and misogynist comments. Either you really are that ignorant and out of touch with reality... or you are trying to anger those groups, (not that I'm sure either group cares what a stranger thinks). Take your pick.

...
written by Sojourn , September 15, 2008 (07:13:31 PM)

Well Mike, you still haven’t proved my opinion to be wrong. Just because you and some others may not like my opinion, doesn’t prove it wrong.

The fact is there are more women in careers and there’s increasing FASD.

You can call it a double standard if you wish but men will never be able to take the place of a young girls mother's advice. It’s the pregnant young women that are doing the damage to their unborn children.

As for me being ignorant and out of touch with reality, ditto. I feel the same about you. It’s the lemming effect within you.

You said, “What exactly are the levels of behavioral problems? What about…bla, bla, bla,.” .

Mike, I gave you a link, now you do your own homework.

Buzz is partly right, “…increasing because some people are selfish, self centered, …”

But, he forgot to add in a part about governments (public servants), corporations, etc. … doing the same. As I stated above, I blame much of it (increasing FASD) on governments and its objectives and its brainwashing of the masses.

Whether groups or individuals like you dislike my opinion does not concern me at all. My beliefs are not swayed by such things as, will I be disliked or not by so & so, or such & such a group. Also, I seriously doubt that anybody really gives a rat’s arss what you think, or about your opinions, or even if you quit posting here. Like island plans did.

Now try to remember this when you sit at the keyboard again. Repeat this to yourself: I must not troll, I must not troll, I must not troll, …

...
written by Mike S , September 15, 2008 (09:32:38 PM)

Relax sojourn.. you're sounding a little defensive - going on about "..proving your opinion.." and '..liking your opinion..". (Methinks thou doth protest too hard...). You're entitled to your opinion which includes treating women as unequals and making disparaging remarks about many in the public service. It's not a case of 'liking' or 'proving' - it's just that I expect your opinion would get zero respect or credibility among the vast majority given it's ridiculous and offensive nature. It seems to on this PG forum.

You summed your (non)logic driven opinion perfectly with your recent statement:

"..The fact is there are more women in careers and there’s increasing FASD..".

Amazing how you can nail that cause and effect so perfectly. How can that not be so obvious to all the educated people researching and studying this issue. Phone in your solution and save countless lives. Oh oh... wait a minute. I just thought of a few things...

The fact is there are more women in careers and there’s increasing...fuel prices.

The fact is there are more women in careers and there’s increasing... global temperatures.

The fact is there are more women in careers and there’s increasing...internet usage.

The fact is there are more women in careers and there’s increasing...population

You've grown wearisome (yet again) sojourn.
I had hoped, despite the odds, of helping the poor confused soul, but I apologize to the other readers here. I won't take any more time on this 'back and forth'.

"sounding a little defensive "
written by Sojourn , September 15, 2008 (11:24:57 PM)

"The fact is there are more women in careers and there’s increasing...fuel prices. The fact is, The fact is, The fact is, ..."

And who is being defensive?
=============

"...zero respect or credibility among the vast majority given it's ridiculous and offensive nature. It seems to on this PG forum."

Vast majority? That's in your deluded opinion!

"This PG forum."

All 4 posters? :)

I have more members in my immediate family, and, the consensus is in, I'm hitting right on the money. It may be a sore spot for some though.

Happy trolling mIKE ^

...
written by Katie McLeod , September 16, 2008 (06:21:24 AM)

I don't see how women working can have an impact on whether mothers drink while pregnant. It just doesn't make sense. Women work for many reasons and it's their business if they work or not. Children benefit from going to daycare where they socialize with other children. Don't make women feel guilty for working. It's like blaming men for women havng to work because the man can't make enough to support the family or he's such a jerk that the woman has to leave him and become a single mother and then work to support the children. So, I think it's all the mans fault for FASD.

...
written by allniter , September 16, 2008 (07:11:11 AM)

If anything, if a woman has such a drinking problem that she can't even abstain during pregancy, chances are she's too out to lunch to be working at all. Would you hire someone who comes to the interview smelling like a brewery, or retain someone who consistently comes in with an obvious hangover, or dtill drunk? I wouldn't.

Mothers who are working are usually working because they need to. The cost of living has far outstripped what wages are worth. If a career is in the making because of the obligation to work, more power to her--beats the hell oout of wasting that time in a McJob--may as well advance if possible. The idea that there is a correlation between mothers working and FAS is so 20th century it's no longer funny.

There is only one correlation: Drinking during pregancy can cause FAS. End of story. Demonizing women because they seek careers is naive and alarmist, and it's truly astounding that there are STILL people out there that insist on this line of thinking. Get out of the Cretaceous period, already!!

WOW
written by Mom1 , September 16, 2008 (08:30:28 AM)

Sojourn, I have read comment after comment posted by you... I am glad that your family supports you because you sound like an idiot on here. I am a mother, I have a career, I didn't drink during pregnancy, I work harder at home than I do at work... so don't EVER tell me that I am taking away from my family by having a career. I do what I need to, to support my family, to raise a happy and healthy child.. and then someone like you preaches to me that I am less of a person, less of a MOTHER because I have chosen a career... I have never read anything so IGNORANT in my life. I am happy that I will never have to meet you and that my child will never be raised around a person like you.. the best place for you is sitting inside, sitting behind a computer, typing up non-sensical babble...

Mike S... thank you for defending us working mom's against this arogant prick.

Preaches?
written by Sojourn , September 16, 2008 (09:06:50 AM)

You can bang and slam all you want. I won’t retract my opinion because of your flame. If people choose not to see the correlation then that is their problem. You can throw up your hands and join the experts whom don’t have the answer either. Simply stating it’s stupid to drink is the cop out. It’s nothing butt stating the obvious.

Mom1, right back at ya. I’m damn sure glad my kids were not raised around a person of your caliber.

It seems to me at one time the government felt that it was best to put children in an institutionalized setting. And we all know how that worked out. If people want to send their children to daycare at 3 yrs old that’s their choice. But did anybody ask them what they want. They are little people too.

Sojourn, YOU HAVE KIDS....
written by Mom1 , September 16, 2008 (02:00:34 PM)

where is a social worker when you need one????

...
written by MustBMe , September 16, 2008 (03:49:34 PM)

But even though time and again it is proven that irresponsible drinking costs the taxpayers tons of money in medical costs, insurance costs, etc..you can bet your butt they wont start curbing its use like they have done with cigarettes. Only because drinking is still considered socially acceptable and half the politicians are probably alchoholics.

Reality
written by travhops , September 19, 2008 (07:18:23 AM)

You said it best, my compliments. How can any pregnant woman lift a glass, knowing she is harming her unborn child? It's true it is more common in lower socio-economic classes, but happens in all classes. I remember once hearing a pregnant co-worker bragging once about being so drunk the weekend before she was dancing on the tables at the Generator. I asked her if she wasn't concerned about FAS and her reply was "My mother drank when she was pregnant and it didn't hurt me." (A matter of opinion!) This woman was a Psychiatric RN. It's about selfishness, commitment to give your child the best start in life possible. Not all mothers have maternal instinct.

...
written by travhops , September 20, 2008 (06:21:31 AM)

Here's another point to digest Sojourn. There are many mothers (I was one of them) who have to work to support their families because of worthless deadbeat dads. My husband was making 150 grand a year in the early 80's and one of his biggest accomplishments in life (in his little mind) was that he was never forced to pay a dime of child support. I have the love and respect of my children - he had money. A working mother can have quality time with children, be succesful in a career, be both mother and father. It's called love.