My intention wasn't to say only children raised in the traditional
family will do better.  I know families that only have adopted children
and those kids do better than many kids in traditional families.  I
think we are on the same wave-length here.

I was raising a question about the Fox news article that was included
with the original post.

Just to throw out some more food for this frenzied thread.  
My wife and I have 7 children, none of them are adopted, so I guess we
have over burdened the educational system?

I think the educational system is overburdened by the decision made
years ago, it is only now reaping the consequences
of those decision.  But this discussion has been around the 'L' several
times now.



-----Original Message-----
From: Carol Darnell [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 9:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Marriage Promoted as Cure to Social Woes


Larry..  I have to ask:  can only 'natural born' children of a married
couple have a chance?  What of adopted children (like my much-loved
brother), or those children born to duly-wed parents who are grossly
dysfunctional and even abusive?  Accordingly, what virtue or benefit is
there in marriage if the only rationale is to procreate?

I think the point is that we tend to place a 'more likely to be' label
on
the children of the conventional two-person marriage.  Reality says that
parenting success is far more dependent upon the individual(s)
attitudes,
approaches, dedication, etc to parenting and the responsibilities
inherent
in parenting than in how closely the *parents* adhere to convention as
individuals.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *