I am not usually one to enter into discussion about the lives of the rich and (in)famous. However an article I read today hit a nerve with me. So here goes...
Anyone who reads trashy women's magazines or celebrity blogs would be aware that Nicole Ritchie is pregnant . Now apart from being surprised that she could actually get pregnant seeing as she weighs in at about 38kg (83lb) I wasn’t giving it too much attention that she was preggers. Until I read this week’s cover story in Australia’s New Weekly magazine.
Now bear with me for a moment while I pad this out with some pivotal background information...
Nicole Ritchie has a history of drug abuse . She started using before she even hit her teens. She has spent time in rehab and she had been on the straight and narrow for a while. But then she and her BFF Paris Hilton filmed the reality show (I use that term loosely) The Simple Life . It is said that Nicole got tired of being referred to as “the fat friend” and set out to lose weight. And lose weight she did. She went from being slim (by average standards) to a skeletal 38kg . For a while it looked like she and Lindsey Lohan were having a competition to the death (literally) to see who could lose the most weight. Naturally all sorts of rumours started flying that she was back on drugs and then Nicole was caught and charged with DUI. As Nicole is already on probation after pleading guilty to heroin possession in 2003, this latest charge could mean a trip to the slammer a la her BFF Paris.
And now, after the gossip mags speculating for well over a month, Nicole has confirmed that she is indeed pregnant. In NW magazine, she is quoted as saying "The baby was the perfect way to turn my life around. I wanted a beautiful reason to do it".
And it is that statement that raised my ire...
I have two children of my own. I know how much joy and wonder comes with discovering you are pregnant, carrying the baby and then giving birth. I know how much having a child adds to your life. I also know how much hard work goes into being a parent. Many couples have had a baby in a last ditch attempt to keep their relationship a happening thing. Anyone who has had a baby will tell you that this is a really risky thing to do. Newborn babies are high maintenance. Even the most easygoing baby needs feeding and changing approximately every two hours. Add to that the potential for a baby with special needs such as reflux or colic, or simply being a baby that likes to be held 24/7 and you begin to see that there could be trouble in paradise. Mix in the chances of mum having a difficult pregnancy/labour/delivery or postnatal depression and you begin to wonder how any relationship actually survives a newborn baby! If Nicole Ritchie thinks that having a baby is going to make her life easier, she is labouring under a misapprehension to say the least!
Women who are pregnant or who have just given birth are vulnerable emotionally because of the increased hormone levels in their body. They are also going through a major rite of passage during which life as they know it, completely changes. If you have any weaknesses, any issues, any ANYthing, it is going to be amplified when you have a baby. I agree that a baby will turn Nicole's life around but she is taking a huge risk in expecting another human being to give her the impetus to change her addictive and self destructive behaviours. Its common knowledge that no one can change an addict except for an addict themselves. And it isn't fair to expect someone else to do it for you. What happens if Nicole's baby screams all night long every night of the week and Nicole is at her wit's end and is tempted to use? Or if she does in fact go ahead and use? Will she then (consciously or subconsciously) blame her baby for that? After all, she is clearly stating that that the baby is going to purge her of all her issues, that's what is implied when she says the baby will turn her life around. Another thing that worries me is that Nicole states that she wanted a "beautiful reason" to turn her life around. How about wanting to live? Isn't the idea of staying alive enough of a reason to turn your life around? Or how about staying out of jail? That would be enough for some people...
Professionally I have worked closely with women who have had babies thinking that the baby would give them a reason to live, that the baby would provide them with the unconditional love they crave, that it would be "fun" to have a baby, that getting pregnant was the way to keep their man, that having a child was a great way to secure an income (welfare payments) and a million other reasons that have been questionable at best. And its all fine and good until reality sets in and things get hard. And when you are a parent, things.are.going.to.get.hard. Sooner or later, something will happen that makes you realise that being a parent is the ultimate in tough jobs. Of course there is rarely a time in anyone's life that everything is in place, that there are no issues and it is the perfect time to procreate. Making the decision to bring a child into the world can (and should) be the most difficult decision a woman ever has to make. Of course there do seem to be an awful lot of women who dont give it much thought at all and pop babies out without so much as blink of an eyelid. (Okay maybe not that easily but you know what I mean). There are some people who should never have children. Who exactly those people are depends on your point of view. But it goes without saying that having and raising a child is a huge responsibility and it is not something that should be taken lightly.
I honestly hope that this baby DOES help Nicole Ritchie get her shit together. I hope that she can stay on the wagon this time and put the well being of her baby before any of her own needs. I hope that this baby is raised feeling safe and secure and loved. I really do hope all those thing. But I am not holding my breath...
Friday, July 13, 2007
Saturday, July 7, 2007
to name or not to name?
The British government is making moves to force new mothers to name their child's father when registering the child's birth. At the moment, mothers are able to leave the father's name blank on the birth registration form, which results in a blank space in the area for "father" on the birth certificate. The thinking is that naming the father of the child will "send an important signal about father's roles" and that fathers "must take their role seriously".
Currently in Australia there is no obligation for the father's name to be listed on a child's birth certificate. The onus is on the mother to register the birth as it is she who is given the registration form while in hospital. If the baby is born at home or anywhere other than a hospital, the mother can request a registration form from her local hospital or the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages. The mother can then choose whether or not she lists the father's name on the form. A child born to parents who are not married will be registered in the mother's name. However if both parent's agree, the child can be registered with the father's name. The child will be registered in the mother's name if the father does not consent to his name being used, or if the mother does not want the father's name to be used. The father can agree to his name being used but still not have his details appear on the birth certificate by completing a Statutory Declaration.
There are pros and cons for listing the father's name on the birth registration. If a woman wishes to list the father's name she must have his permission to do so (either by him signing the registration form or by completing a Statutory Declaration). Another pertinent factor to consider is whether or not the mother intends to pursue the father for payment of child support. If she does intend to pursue payment, the process is made a lot easier if the father's name is on the certificate. If it isn't listed but the father accepts paternity, he can complete a Stat Dec to that effect. However if he disputes paternity and he is not listed on the certificate, DNA testing will be required to settle the matter and the court will often order this. If the mother doesn't intend to ask for child support but does plan to claim any kind of welfare payments from Centrelink things become a little more complicated.
Centrelink, which is responsible for the administration of welfare payments in Australia, including Parenting Payment - Single, insists that women name the father of their baby in order to receive welfare payments. If a single woman does list the father of her child on the birth certificate, when she applies to Centrelink for welfare payments, she will be required to pursue the named father for child support payments. Income received in the form of child support has a direct affect upon the amount of benefits that can be paid to a sole parent. She must then prove that she has made every effort to contact the father in order to receive child maintenance payments and that she has lodged his details with the Child Support Agency.
If the birth certificate does not list the father's name and there is no legal documentation accepting paternity, the mother will have to supply Centrelink with evidence that she either does not know the identity of the father or that she has been unable to contact him. This process places added stress on the mother at a time when she is already vulnerable. Having authorities demanding to know the father's identity in order to receive payments necessary for living costs can be very intimidating for a new mother. The mother may also be intimidated by the father of the child, if of course she is in contact with him. There are many cases were the father of a child has abandoned the mother at some time prior to the birth of the child, or the mother believes it is in the best interests of the child and herself for the father not to be named.
There are also situations when the mother may not know the identity of the father. As distasteful as it may seem to some people, the reality is that consenting adults have casual sex, often with partners they have only just met. It is also possible for a woman to conceive during a rape and who would want to list the name of their rapist on their child's birth certificate? While it doesn't seem fair that women can choose not to name the father of their child and continue to collect full welfare payments, there are situations when it is in the best interest of the child (and the mother) for the father not to be listed. And just because his name is not on the birth certificate does not mean that the child will never learn of their father's identity.
Another issue that can arise for the single mother is that if the father has possession of legal documentation that names him as the father of the child and there is no custody order in place, he is entitled to walk into any school or daycare centre and take the child into his care. This is particularly frightening because mothers are not encouraged to get sole custody of their child unless a direct need for sole custody can be demonstrated. So even if the father has never laid eyes on the child, has never had any contact of any kind with the child, as long as he has some sort of legal documentation proving paternity he can take that child into his care at any time he wishes to. Another situation that can arise is that if a child requires a passport and the father is listed on the birth certificate, the father must then give his permission for the child to obtain that passport and for the child to leave the country. Even if that father has NEVER laid eyes on the child.
Of course there are positives for having the father listed and they are primarily for the child. It can cause some children distress when they see that they do not have their father's name listed on their birth certificate and it can have an effect on their sense of identity. Knowing their father's name can also assist a child to trace the father's whereabouts in the future, as it is difficult to find someone if you do not know their name.
There are many different points that need to be given serious thought when an unmarried woman is considering whether or not to list the name of her child's father on the birth registration. And unfortunately there are no easy answers.
Currently in Australia there is no obligation for the father's name to be listed on a child's birth certificate. The onus is on the mother to register the birth as it is she who is given the registration form while in hospital. If the baby is born at home or anywhere other than a hospital, the mother can request a registration form from her local hospital or the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages. The mother can then choose whether or not she lists the father's name on the form. A child born to parents who are not married will be registered in the mother's name. However if both parent's agree, the child can be registered with the father's name. The child will be registered in the mother's name if the father does not consent to his name being used, or if the mother does not want the father's name to be used. The father can agree to his name being used but still not have his details appear on the birth certificate by completing a Statutory Declaration.
There are pros and cons for listing the father's name on the birth registration. If a woman wishes to list the father's name she must have his permission to do so (either by him signing the registration form or by completing a Statutory Declaration). Another pertinent factor to consider is whether or not the mother intends to pursue the father for payment of child support. If she does intend to pursue payment, the process is made a lot easier if the father's name is on the certificate. If it isn't listed but the father accepts paternity, he can complete a Stat Dec to that effect. However if he disputes paternity and he is not listed on the certificate, DNA testing will be required to settle the matter and the court will often order this. If the mother doesn't intend to ask for child support but does plan to claim any kind of welfare payments from Centrelink things become a little more complicated.
Centrelink, which is responsible for the administration of welfare payments in Australia, including Parenting Payment - Single, insists that women name the father of their baby in order to receive welfare payments. If a single woman does list the father of her child on the birth certificate, when she applies to Centrelink for welfare payments, she will be required to pursue the named father for child support payments. Income received in the form of child support has a direct affect upon the amount of benefits that can be paid to a sole parent. She must then prove that she has made every effort to contact the father in order to receive child maintenance payments and that she has lodged his details with the Child Support Agency.
If the birth certificate does not list the father's name and there is no legal documentation accepting paternity, the mother will have to supply Centrelink with evidence that she either does not know the identity of the father or that she has been unable to contact him. This process places added stress on the mother at a time when she is already vulnerable. Having authorities demanding to know the father's identity in order to receive payments necessary for living costs can be very intimidating for a new mother. The mother may also be intimidated by the father of the child, if of course she is in contact with him. There are many cases were the father of a child has abandoned the mother at some time prior to the birth of the child, or the mother believes it is in the best interests of the child and herself for the father not to be named.
There are also situations when the mother may not know the identity of the father. As distasteful as it may seem to some people, the reality is that consenting adults have casual sex, often with partners they have only just met. It is also possible for a woman to conceive during a rape and who would want to list the name of their rapist on their child's birth certificate? While it doesn't seem fair that women can choose not to name the father of their child and continue to collect full welfare payments, there are situations when it is in the best interest of the child (and the mother) for the father not to be listed. And just because his name is not on the birth certificate does not mean that the child will never learn of their father's identity.
Another issue that can arise for the single mother is that if the father has possession of legal documentation that names him as the father of the child and there is no custody order in place, he is entitled to walk into any school or daycare centre and take the child into his care. This is particularly frightening because mothers are not encouraged to get sole custody of their child unless a direct need for sole custody can be demonstrated. So even if the father has never laid eyes on the child, has never had any contact of any kind with the child, as long as he has some sort of legal documentation proving paternity he can take that child into his care at any time he wishes to. Another situation that can arise is that if a child requires a passport and the father is listed on the birth certificate, the father must then give his permission for the child to obtain that passport and for the child to leave the country. Even if that father has NEVER laid eyes on the child.
Of course there are positives for having the father listed and they are primarily for the child. It can cause some children distress when they see that they do not have their father's name listed on their birth certificate and it can have an effect on their sense of identity. Knowing their father's name can also assist a child to trace the father's whereabouts in the future, as it is difficult to find someone if you do not know their name.
There are many different points that need to be given serious thought when an unmarried woman is considering whether or not to list the name of her child's father on the birth registration. And unfortunately there are no easy answers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)