A long time ago, before my husband and I were married or even dating, I told him that if I wasn't married by the time I was 35, I was going to go ahead and have a baby on my own.
He felt this was a totally ridiculous concept and still mocks me for having said it. He doesn't necessarily think a single woman who gets knocked up should have an abortion, but he's horrified that someone might plan to be a single mother.
I still feel like I was justified in saying that. If a woman wants to be a mother and she hasn't found a partner yet by an age where her reproductive time is coming to an end, why shouldn't she go ahead and have a baby on her own? What is so wrong about that?
This is still being hammered out in the literature, but most sociologists tend to agree that children in single parent homes do worse (i.e., developmental outcomes, long-term adult outcomes etc) than children in two-parent homes. If that is true -- and that is a big 'if', because it assumes that all of these studies have accounted for unobserved confounding particularly by socioeconomic status -- then _planning_ on single parenthood is a remarkably selfish act. Having a kid isn't about you (or whatever hypothetical planned single mother we are talking about here). It's about the kid.
ReplyDeleteAs you said, it's a big "if".
DeleteThere are tons of people who have kids under less than ideal circumstances. If a woman had a supportive extended family and lived close to them, and had a job that provided a lot of financial security yet reasonable lifestyle (like, I don't know, PM&R), then you could argue that woman could provide a much better life for a child than parents that are destitute. Or what about all those families where one or even both parents work so hard that the children never even sees them? I know tons of those.
Considering half of all marriages end in divorce and a lot of people have kids even knowing their marriages is already strained. You can only guarantee so many things for your offspring--I think one loving parent is pretty good.
That's because most single parent households are marked by poverty and other factors that are also detrimental to child outcomes, not by the existence of a single mother.
DeleteOtherwise America would be a lot more screwed than it already was.
Actually, having a kid is ALL about the parents. Parents justify all sorts of stupid decisions based on it being good for the kid, but in reality they often are just trying to rationalize doing something that they wanted in the first place.
DeleteI see nothing wrong with it. A few people in my social circle plan on the same thing.
ReplyDeleteI would think the challenges that tend to face kids coming from single-parent households generally have to do with the economics involved. Single parent households are far, far more likely to be below the poverty line. Someone who pursues intentional single parenthood is probably at least financially stable, meaning one of the biggest factors influencing the future of their kid(s) is already no longer an issue.
It would seem to me that the wanted child of a financially stable person is probably not going to be overly hampered by the lack of a second parent, but I doubt there are really enough of them to study particularly well.
I know two of them, one with one an adopted kid and another with two (although I don't think they had a 35 deadline but were in their mid-30s). Still single ladies. Kids are doing fabulously. I can't imagine that the alternatives working out that well, say you just keeeeep waiiiting until what, 40? 45? 50? to find the right partner? How exhausting! One of the above ladies I mentioned? Just got a hysterectomy at 41. Say just never becoming a parent because it is as a partnered parent or not at all? That could set someone up for a lifetime of regret. Maybe marrying an idiot because hey, you gotta marry someone to have a kid? That should work out well, when you divorce them.
ReplyDeleteNo, I think it is reasonable plan if you know you want kids and can imagine that a partner may not be part of the picture.
Exactly. How many women marry terrible guys just because they want to have kids before it's too late? Then you've made your child have unhappy parents likely to split up.
DeleteMy parents absolutely hated each other but refused to separate because of cultural expectations and the stupid illusion that it was better for the kids to be in a two parent household. I can't even begin to describe how awful that was for myself and my brothers. Kids do well in a home or homes with little to no strife in it, whether its a:
Deletesingle parent home,
the homes of divorced parents who act civilly towards each other,
a joint parenting home of opposite sex couples, or
joint parenting home of same sex couples.
In all honesty, I know people with incredible extended families whose kids probably get a lot more attention than my kids, who have two working parents.
DeleteI used to completely agree. And then I had a daughter with autism. This is by far the hardest thing I have ever done; I can't imagine what it would be like going it alone. Few people ever expect there to be any outcome other than a perfect, healthy baby. That doesn't always happen.
ReplyDeleteSo if you're a physician and married to another physician and both of you have busy practices, maybe that's also a reason to avoid having kids. Or if you don't have the income to support taking care of a child with special needs. Maybe only independently wealthy couples with large supportive families should procreate.... just in case.
DeleteI have single friends who sought out "throwaway" kids to adopt. These are kids who have physical / mental / behavioral / learning problems stemming from their rough backgrounds (mom being on drugs during pregnancy, parents being abusive or neglectful, etc). I completely agree that my friends' lives are harder than they would have been if they had adopted children without these problems, but they somehow manage to make things work anyway.
DeleteWow... That was not a thoughtful reply, Fizz.
DeleteSomeone disagrees with you, shares their trouble. And your reply is sarcastic
I wasn't being sarcastic and I'm sorry you chose to read it that way. What was I supposed to say? "Yes, you're right. Never mind." I posed a number of scenarios that are just as detrimental to a special needs child as a single parent household, and asked to know if these people should be exempt from procreation as well. I think it's a worthwhile discussion.
DeleteOriginal Anon here - I didn't find your response sarcastic. Defensive, maybe? This isn't a question of financial resources. We aren't wealthy by anyone's standards. We live very simply on one modest income because our daughter needs full time care that we cannot afford even when I'm working, so I provide it. No local school can give her what she needs (they've been VERY clear on that), so I homeschool. I love her, I often find great joy in being with her, but that doesn't erase the fact that life as a mom is far, far different than I thought it would be. You need to look at the overall picture of what resources you bring to the table. Aside from money, do you have the time, the emotional stability, the support of friends and family? If you end up with situations you don't anticipate you need to be able to deal with it all without undue damage to your or your child's well being. Having a decent, loving partner there to share in the hardships has saved my sanity and given me a little bit of breathing room.
DeleteI am not saying a single woman should not ever take on parenting alone. Maybe you have all of your ducks in a row - good on you. Go for it. And obviously, if you are out there searching for "throwaway" kids you know (at least theoretically) what you're getting into.
I do think some parents wait to have "all their ducks in a row" before having kids, but I'd say the vast majority of parents don't. Even the ones who think they do very well might not. And if you're really waiting to have a moment when everything is perfect, you're likely to be older. If you have a baby at 45 rather than 25, you've just deprived your child of 20 years of having their mother no matter how you look at it. You're more likely to have a child that's going to have to deal with your health problems when they're still very young.
DeleteIf everyone waits until the absolute perfect moment to become a parent, then most parents are going to be a lot older or people who have had "oops babies." Neither is ideal. I think having a stable, flexible career with a supportive family if not a spouse is good enough.
If I was defensive, it's because I think the ability of women to have a child on their own is empowering to women. We don't NEED a man. I would hate to shame women who make this choice by saying they are selfish.
DeleteI'm not sure whom you're arguing with at this point, but it's not me. I said nothing about being selfish. "Ducks in a row" doesn't necessarily = heterosexual marriage. It means being emotionally healthy. It means some level of financial stability. It means having at least one someone else with a vested interest in the child, who can be counted on to be there. We may not need a man, but we do need reliable people around. Under the best of circumstances parenting can be challenging, and much too important to deliberately take on with a maverick, independent-me-against-the-world attitude. My original point, way back, is that most folks expect everything to just work out, to be lovely and wonderful and full of rainbows. But as you pointed out, there are no guarantees. Why not stack the odds in your favor as much as possible? Build a support system before you need it.
DeleteI can't argue that it's not important to stack the odds in your favor before having kids. I think it's just more a matter of feeling that it's literally almost impossible to wait for that perfect time without risking going through menopause first. But no, I wouldn't say that a single women with no family or support system or money should go ahead and have a baby on her own. Although plenty of women do get accidentally knocked up under those circumstances and still make it work.
DeleteBut accidentally getting knocked up isn't what we're discussing. It's saying "ok, I've just turned 30/35/40, so better do it before it's too late". That alone isn't justification for having a baby, married or not. I think our society still paints being childless as being defective somehow, and that can push people into making decisions they sorely regret.
DeleteI was just pointing out that plenty of women are single parents accidentally and their children turn out fine.
DeleteIf I had done this, I definitely wouldn't have done it because of societal pressures. I have always loved kids and wanted one as long as I can remember. If I somehow wasn't able to find any luck in a relationship, it would have been doubly devastating to be deprived of motherhood as well. I doubt many women regret having a child versus being childless.
I believe there's more regret out there than you're willing to acknowledge. There are an awful lot of lousy parents in the world, and not just of the "accidentally knocked up" various variety.
DeleteDo you genuinely think most professional, late 30s, single women who have wanted kids their whole life but never found the right guy would be likely to regret becoming a single mom over spending her life alone? There might be moments when she'd regret it, but down the line? I doubt it. My neighbor growing up was a single mom (knocked up) and her daughter was her entire universe.
DeleteAnd yes, there might be more regrets if the child had special needs. But that would be true of ANY parent. You can't not do anything your whole life just because there's a small chance of a bad outcome.
I think that some professional, late 30s, single women panic, jump on board the mommy wagon, and then realize how profoundly everything changes after there's a baby (special needs or no) in the picture. For some folks, yes, it's a wonderful, fulfilling experience, but others? To go from important career woman who commands a certain amount of respect and attention in the workplace to being caregiver to a young child can be a rude awakening. There are those who don't respond well to becoming a supporting cast member in their own lives.
DeleteYes, having a child is a hard transition for anyone. Absolutely. But saying you *regret* having your child, who you probably love a whole lot, if not more than anything in the world... well, I think that's much more rare. Regret it on the bad days? Maybe.
DeleteI work with an elderly population too. The easiest decisions on placement are for childless people. No visitors, nobody remotely interested in taking them in. Straight to nursing home.
On the subject of regret. And no, I didn't go looking for this - just popped up on another forum. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2303588/The-mother-says-having-children-biggest-regret-life.html#ixzz2PuPJefdS
DeleteI'd actually seen that earlier and posted about it earlier on facebook (https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Cartoon-Guide-to-Becoming-a-Doctor/400860063303345). The article I linked to was about how extremely rare it is to say what this woman said and most women (and men) say the opposite: that they regret not having children. It could very well be a hoax. In any case, whether this woman is for real or not, we can all agree that she's a pretty awful person for writing in a public forum that she regrets having her kids.
DeleteHow can you say that you don't need a man when the dude provides the sperm?
ReplyDeleteIt is ideal for the child to have both a male and a female parent to help define gender roles. Also, if you are trying to have a child without a man good luck. On our busy physician comments: If both parents are going to be working 100 hours a week non stop then you are right they should not have children.
ReplyDeleteUm.... thanks to the above two guys for weighing in with some totally intelligent comments. I can't imagine what we'd do without your wonderful influence on our children...
ReplyDeleteAre you going to deny this one as sarcasm?
DeleteWhat? Are you saying you didn't think those were intelligent comments??
Deleteto the anons: 1. Artificial insemination or irresponsible boyfriend (you wont have to much trouble finding one of those.
Delete2. why would you want to perpetuate limiting gender roles?
anonymous 2(is me)
DeleteI really don't support limiting gender roles, but I do think most boys know they are boys and most girls know they are girls. You need a role model of your own gender to look up to. I also think that seeing how your father treats your mother and vice versa influences how you will behave in a relationship down the road. And to answer for anonymous 1- the guys is still needed somewhere there was the point (i think?), the sperm donor or irresponsible boyfriends are still men (on the second using the term loosely)
Yes, but you can find role models in aunts/uncles, grandparents, teachers, friends of your parents, etc. It doesn't have to be your actual parents. Some parents are horrible role models. Frankly, I wouldn't want to use either of my parents as a role model for how to act in a marriage.
DeleteAnd yes, a man is needed to donate sperm. But that's kind of like saying I need a pig to make a ham sandwich for lunch.
I still mock you because it's obviously a hard job taking care of our kids with two parents working. I can't imagine how hard it would be just one of us.
ReplyDeleteMy mother would just watch the kids in-between blindness attacks.
DeleteI'm just happy you didn't write one of those two idiotic comments above :P
Well, technically it's true that you need a guy to provide the sperm :P
DeleteI am surprised they don't teach that in medical school.
DeleteI don't know that it's ridiculous, but in some ways I think it's a bit strange. There are a lot of reasons for having children, but hearing that you would have one whether you were married or not near the end of your biological "safety limit" makes me think that you wanted a child for the sake of having a child. That's not meant to be an accusation or a judgment on you as a parent now, it's just what I would think if someone told me that. I view it negatively because I don't think that's what having a child should be about. (Says the married man with no children yet.)
ReplyDeleteI'm not coming from a view against women, either. Thinking about it for myself, if I were single, would I adopt and/or try to find someone to bear my children and then be uninvolved (if such services exist)? Views can change with time, but I don't think I would. Single-parent households can be successful, but from a statistical and practical standpoint your child has better odds with a dual-parent household. It's not that I consider myself incapable of successfully operating as a single parent, but rather that the single parent scenario is unfavorable; it should be a last resort, something that happens by circumstances that one tried to avoid rather than by choice. It seems unfair to the child otherwise.
"makes me think that you wanted a child for the sake of having a child"
DeleteUm, yeah. Why else do people have kids? To eat them?
"from a statistical and practical standpoint your child has better odds with a dual-parent household"
I'm not sure if that's true. That's assuming that it's a happy marriage to begin with. Remember: 50% divorce rate. If you at least start out single, you've probably planned for all the contingencies of being a single parent, so I'll bet you'd do much better than the 50% of parents who suddenly find themselves single.
There are lots of reasons for having a child: to have an heir,to have someone to love who loves you back, to pass on your genes (yes, this was a reason given by a coworker years ago), because they're cute, because it's expected, because it's time... Lots of reasons. Some better than others, obviously. Wanting something doesn't automatically mean you should have it.
DeleteWhen you list them like that, those all sound like horrible reasons. If the only reason I wanted a child was "to have an heir", I'd expect to be made fun of.
DeleteWanting to procreate is a very primal urge and I doubt most people can articulate exactly why they want to do it. That's why those reasons sound silly and don't really capture why people have kids.
Um, yeah. Why else do people have kids? To eat them?
DeleteIn re-reading what I wrote, I didn't express myself clearly. To expand, I meant that it came off as wanting a child as if it were an item to be possessed or a status symbol. Setting your age as a limit contributes to that. I mean, what's stopping you from doing it when you're 34, 33, or 30? Why is 35 the magic number? Some people buy themselves fancy watches or sports cars for reaching a momentous age, but you'd buy yourself a fertility treatment? It's not how you meant it, I know, but in thinking on it further that's the comparison that was running in the back of my mind. The alternate would be something like "even if I don't have a male partner, when my bank account reaches $X and/or when I achieve a certain stability in my job, then I'll have a child." That would imply that you're concerned not just with having a child, but with providing for them.
As to the dual-parent household thing, don't worry about the divorce rate. It's going down... because fewer people are getting married. (Dual-parent doesn't imply married parents!) You're right that a child is probably better off in a single-parent household than they would be in a two-parent household filled with hostility, but why assume the worst? It's a reality that the world is dealing with, but we're talking about the thought process behind having a child.
My thought process was as such: find a partner -> ensure stable relationship -> ensure stable financial situation -> if no other major problems, have children. The idea to skip steps, which is what "OR have child at age X" does, seems a bit odd to me. In some ways it seems irresponsible, perhaps lacking in thought for the future or lacking in concern for the child. Having read your blog for quite some time now I can confidently say that those don't apply to you. Who knows - this may be a "men are from Mars, women are from Venus" type of thing.
I think it's more of a "men can have children forever and women can't" type of thing. I knew I would never feel fulfilled in life or truly happy if I didn't have a child of my own. Not everyone feels that way, but I always have. After age 35, fertility drops off sharply in women. So if I waited until every box was checked off, I'd have possibly missed out on having the most important thing to me in the world (about a hundred times more important than career, to be honest). Obviously, 35 is somewhat arbitrary, but seemed to me long enough to give myself a chance to find a partner while not taking too big a risk of losing fertility.
DeleteIf I were a man and could have children at any age, I definitely wouldn't have thought that way. With unlimited time, I would have preferred to wait for everything to be perfect.
And having a child while single doesn't mean your child is going to grow up in a single-parent household. In fact, if you have a child on your own terms, you may be more relaxed in relationships and find someone who's more compatible with you when the time is right. I'd imagine most single moms continue to date (eventually).
Good points. The only thing I have to disagree with is the idea that men have "forever." The fertility aspect is correct (although there are still issues with birth defects; granted, research indicates that this occurs at older ages for men than it does for women), but your age still counts for what you can do with your child, and what you'll live to see. Have a child at age 20 and you'll be nearing the tail end of your prime when your child is already a young adult. Have (or adopt) a child at 40 and you'll be "young-old" when they're a young adult. If your child follows in your reproductive footsteps then you might not live to see grandchildren - and even if you do, you might not have the energy to interact much with them. That's a concern for men as well as women.
DeleteI'm in agreement with you here - I see no problem with a single mother raising a child. Though I have to add on that financial stability and time is necessary. I think it's different when you -choose- the time to have a child, vs getting caught by surprise by a pregnancy. To be fair, it's something I've thought about. I'd like children (or just one!) someday. If I have to, I'd raise them on my own as long as I am certain I can provide everything they need.
ReplyDeleteFizzy, some of your readers really say stupid things.
ReplyDeleteA-freaking-men.
DeleteI am one. I originally said that if I didn't have a partner when I was 30, I'd do it on my own. At 30, I wasn't ready, emotionally or financially to do it on my own. Then I said that if I didn't have a partner when I was 35, I'd do it on my own. At 35, I still wasn't quite ready.
ReplyDeleteAt 38, I was ready. I didn't have a partner, and I didn't want to never have kids. It took some fertility treatments, but now I'm 41 and have a pair of fabulous 14 month twins. I have my job (during which time my nanny takes care of the kids), and my kids. My kids have 2 primary caregivers (me and the nanny), and are doing fine.
We're all pretty happy.
Good for you! I take it you don't feel wracked with horrible regret ;)
Delete*grin* Nope. Loving life most of the time actually.
DeleteIt'd be nice if there were about 10 extra hours in the day, or if my job could be just as satisfying, pay just as much, but take only half as much time (I'm a hospitalist), but other that those tiny little requests, I'm pretty lucky.
I enjoy my job. I adore my kids. I trust and enjoy my nanny.
I'm sleep deprived, and I can't afford fancy extras like trips abroad (they'd be wasted on toddlers anyway), but this is what I wanted, and I'm glad I did it.
There are many factors that play into success as a parent. It is MOST responsible to get all your ducks in a row before you take that plunge. Seeing as your chances of failure are high, it seems somewhat irresponsible to accept a lesser approach. Can you still make it work? Absolutely. It might even work better than some other family units mentioned above. The question is...are you willing to take that chance? So it seems. I could not. My husbands companionship and guidance as a father are things I/we so deeply cherish (and require) in my household.
ReplyDeleteI was just watching a Daily Show where they were talking about gay marriage (I'm about a week behind). They were showing a clip of Scalia saying that we don't know the impact of a child being raised in by a same-sex couple, and it could be really scarring. Then Stewart flashed to the logos for about half a dozen shows about teens becoming parents, families with tons of kids, kids out of control, etc. I think the home of a mature single woman with a supportive family is not in any way a terrible place for a child to be raised. So many things determine whether you're going to be a good parent or not, and I feel like simply having two adults living in the household is only a tiny part of it.
DeleteJust a tiny part? Like less than 5%
DeleteIt probably depends on the parents. I'd take a doting grandparent over a disinterested, workaholic father. I spent much of my childhood in a single-parent household and I don't think it was a big deal at all. What *was* the big deal was the animosity my mother felt toward my father. If she'd had a kid on her own, I'd probably have been way better off. A lot of people have told me that their childhood was happier AFTER their parents divorced.
DeletePlus, as I pointed out to someone above, just because there aren't two parents in the household when the baby is born, that doesn't mean it will always be that way. Women DO marry after having kids... and maybe to a better guy if they aren't in such a rush anymore.
I wrote the original comment (at 6:40). I agree with much of what you have said, which I had hoped to convey initially. There are far worse contexts for child-rearing than that of a "good" single parent. (I also grew up with a single parent - watching their painful marriage was worse than my fathers absence). And although a single parent household that is functional is far better than many other household situations...it is just simply not the best (which I think we should strive for as parents).
DeleteTo quote you, I disagree that a functional two adult household is only a "tiny part" of good parenting. I think it is a big part...along with many other things.
When I put my son to bed at night, my heart smiles because I know that I gave him the loving father/role-model that my drugged-out brother never had.
Obviously, it's great to provide your kids with a loving father growing up. But even if you are married when you procreate, there's no guarantee that the man you marry will be the loving, doting father you want him to be. A lot of men aren't. Mine wasn't (although we have a good relationship now). My husband's father wasn't.
DeleteAnd the longer you wait for "the best" situation, the more you sacrifice of other things. If you're older, your kids will have you in their lives for less time. When your kids have kids, you may not be there or you may be ill. I know a woman who waited till 40 to have her daughter, then she had a stroke at 47. You also sacrifice your own parents being able to help out, as they will be older as well.
I guess my point is just that "the best" often isn't obtainable. Even if you do everything to plan for it.
I thought about this back when I was single at the ripe old age of 23 and concluded that temperamentally there was no way I was cut out for single parenthood so I couldn't have this kind of contingency plan, and it worried me. I've always wanted kids and the idea that not finding the right guy could also torpedo having kids was pretty depressing. I think your position makes total sense. To people who are neutral on whether they want kids, or who don't want kids, it probably doesn't make as much sense.
ReplyDeleteLuckily, I met somebody and it ended up not being an issue. :)
:) I told my now hubby the same thing.. My cut-off was 33.
ReplyDeleteIt's a toughie. I would (/ will...?) probably do the same, provided I fully believed in my commitment to the baby. But it will be a hard decision to pass, as I do believe two loving parents are always better than one loving parent. My kid might never have a dad, let alone a great dad. Up until then, I feel like it's my responsibility to my future kid to try my hardest to find the right partner. Eep. Pressure.
ReplyDeleteHowever, perhaps the interestingly controversial question is, why to put it off till 35? I'm late twenties... if I was going to make the single-parent choice, arguably I could do it now. My parents are still here, still healthy, and could help with the early years. I want to go back to school in order to get a better career, but perhaps I could do that in my 30s, after my kid's started their school. I've still got lots of energy.
What's stopping me is the hope that I'll still be able to achieve that best outcome- caring, similar minded partner, me with my career, extra money to cover childcare in case my parents can't help out. These do seem like high stakes, though. Because if I don't find that partner, 10 years from now I could have much worser ones. Ailing parents, less energy, career commitments, big debt, no partner.
Quite a gamble.
This is something I have been pondering for a while as well. I honestly don't know if I want to get married, but I do want children. I was just reading about women who call themselves "Choice Moms". These are professional women, mostly who are past 35, who have not found a partner & have kids on their own. In fact, there are a few books written on this very topic. I think if you have a good support system & the financial means, I don't see a problem with that. I know quite a few people who grew up in two-parent homes, but had the most dysfunctional households. The main drawback is when the child starts asking for their dad or who is their dad. These are questions a woman needs to be prepared to answer.
ReplyDeleteI think a mother that decided to be a single-mother by choice is mature enough to answer those types of questions. There are lots of scenarios that require tricky questions answered: adoption, fertility treatments (egg/sperm donors) in couples, knocked up accidentally & dad not in the picture, etc... Having to answer those questions doesn't seem enough of a deterrent.
DeleteI agree with you completely on this Fizzy. I was recently wondering if my mid-30s friends who are still single are considering this option, I think they would make great mothers, have talked about having kids since childhood, have good careers and support system (family, friends), but unfortunately come from more traditional cultures where this option would probably not be well-regarded. What a shame.
ReplyDeleteAlso thinking it is somewhat unfair that while this option is gaining in popularity for women, it is still pretty far outside the norm for a guy to do the same thing (adopt a child when he reaches a certain age with no prospect of a partner). Maybe in time.
If we treated single moms with more respect and less stigma, there would be less abortions. Conservatives who are against welfare need to realize that.
ReplyDeleteThis is interesting. I've actually heard it hypothesized that the declining stigma against single motherhood is one of the reasons many people are starting to favor more restrictions on abortion. I.e. planned single motherhood is perceived as a more viable option than it once was.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm a few months late to this conversation, but I just found your blog, and I had to comment on this subject.
ReplyDeleteThis is something I've thought about for a long time, and since my own "deadline" is coming up relatively soon, I may be doing this myself in the next year. I've discussed this with family members and a couple of close friends, and while some have expressed similar concerns about the stability of a one-parent household or lack of gender role models, for the most part, my friends and family support me. I also have a great and stable job, and am financially secure.
So, to answer your question--there is nothing wrong with a women (or a man, for that matter) going it on her own, as long as she is committed to providing a loving home and putting the needs of her children above her own. This is all we can ask of any prospective parents, no matter what their situation.