Hacker News Reader

Comment by theGeatZhopa | Hacker News Reader

I can't have kids. So am I big sad. Congratulations to all fathers out there.

Want to adopt some poor kid and give him/her a possibility to have a kind of a standard life and to help to open a door to the world :(

But a single man adopting is considered as pervert. So I am even bigger sad.

View on HN

> But a single man adopting is considered as pervert

Is this evidence or assumption? Not challenging too hard just wondering if you've actually been called or treated like a perv or if it's something you assume will occur

It will absolutely occur. Men who take their kids to the playground by themselves are often confronted (by moms of other kids). At some point things are so obvious that not many people are going to bother finding a peer reviewed study to cite. Maybe they should but they won't.

I've never seen that happen myself, but I have heard of it. My only theory is that it happens in places which are heavily socially/politically conservative and "backwards", where women can't imagine men being an actual real parent.

I live in a flyover state and have never had that sort of thing happen...I actually assumed the opposite, that socially/politically liberal areas would be less accustomed to seeing two-parent households and would be wealthy enough to have busybodies with too much time on their hands.

Gender equality is correlated with social liberalism, so that makes it more logical of a theory than that.

in new zealand men are not able to work as teachers or caregivers. which essentially means, men are not trusted with children. i don't think of new zealand as conservative or backwards, even though that attitude certainly is backwards, but that makes it tautological.

Everyone's experience is different, but my understanding (and experience) has always been the opposite: People see a dad taking his kid out to the playground and think "dad of the year" before they think of a pervert, because the bar for what it takes to be a good dad is so low. There are so many uninvolved dads out there that the smallest token gesture like taking your kids to the playground is seen as some huge accomplishment.

But it's also insulting when someone makes off-hand remarks about "giving mom a break," etc. I have 4 year old twins and a nearly 2 year old singleton. We're all busy as fuck here, but no one ever diminishes my wife's ability to be a parent.

It only takes 1 bad Karen to spoil the experience of many dads who love taking their kids to the playground.

Not sure where you are but here in the UK I have been taking my children to the playground on my own for 10 years now and I have never seen this happen either to myself or another Dad. At the weekends I'd say it's mostly Dads in fact.

It is theoretically possible as a single male, but there are many more restrictions - in practice its very very rare. For example, see these requirements for a very large international adoption agency: [1]. In my experience there is, as OP describes, a strong stigma against single males, not just that they are considered perverts, but also that they are considered incapable of taking on this responsibility alone, not nurturing enough, too career-focused, etc.

[1] https://www.holtinternational.org/adoption/ See "Quick overview of parental eligibility requirements" section

Have you considered doing volunteer work with children. Something like Big Brothers?

I don't have the problem OP has, I just know something about the system. A better way to phrase this for a useful discussion (rather than unsolicited, assumed advice) would be to say "do you know if volunteer work with children would help alter this perception?".

Not sure by bt4u's comment is dead, but I've had that exact situation happen to me. Been accused of trying to steal a child while taking my son to the playground. It is an actual thing and it sucks.

Is this an American thing? I can't imagine that happening in Europe, but maybe I'm just a bit naive.

Yes, in California at the time. Some people get weird. It isn't like it happens all the time, it was a first for me.

It might be. I would get strange looks when I took my kids to the playground without my wife. They look like me, too.

Yeah we're kinda over the traditional family thing here in Europe. I would bet two fathers taking their son to the playground would raise some eyebrows in the US too, depending on the area of course. Whereas here it wouldn't.

I think it depends on where you are in Europe. I had far more reaction doing childcare in Poland than I did in the US and Canada. Almost completely positive, though. "Your wife is so lucky, a Polish man would never change a diaper".

Oh ok, that surprises me, Poland has a reputation of being very strongly anti-LGBT (and Hungary too). Guess it depends on the area.

When I was in Ireland there were many people against single parents "Lone parents" they call them there, it was a real witch hunt in the media.

So yeah we get these things here but it tends to be localised.

Did you ever feel people were moments away from calling security/police on you? Your last sentence doesn't give that feeling. If not, I'm not sure we're talking about comparable reactions.

It definitely will raise eyebrows, but maybe noone will say a thing. It really depends on the location though.

Yes, this is completely an American thing. I experienced it first hand and it's hilarious. Hilarious in that it's so pathetically predicable that I can predict there's going to be a "situation" before it unfolds and am able to avoid it. But it's absolutely batshit crazy how easily it happens.

No way this happens in europe. Helicopter americans probably claim there is more child trafficking and kidnapping in europe or something. Yeah, ok. These people watch so many child kidnapping movies and documentaries they don't know which way is up anymore.

I was at an amusement park recently. Took my daughter to go to the bathroom. I used a family stall. Someone knocked on the door and I said, "Occupied, we won't be much longer!" I heard a hushed whisper. A minute later, we're finishing up, washing our hands. A more aggressive knock, a man's voice, "Security. Open the door!"

This older woman with her 10-ish year old daughter had assumed that I, as a man, had no business being in a family stall. She went to get security to sort me out. Security asked me why I was using the family stall. I opened the door all of the way and pointed at my daughter (we have twin girls who are 4) who was drying her hands. The mom is aghast, "Where's her mother?" I scooped up my daughter and said, "I helped make her, too. Mom's busy. Mind your own business." and went back to my wife.

This is the most egregious example that I have but it's not at all an isolated event. Something in this direction has happened to me well over a dozen times in the last 4 years.

Another strong signal you can find: Many, maybe most, men's restrooms don't have a changing table. I've changed countless diapers while sitting on a toilet with one of my kids in my lap.

Whenever I see a comment like that I always wonder how it's possible that someone might actually challenge what we all know well and experienced multiple times throughout our adult lives.

Trolling or genuine question from a person that never witnessed what everyone else did?

I'm not a parent, I live in a small town in the UK, I've literally never seen this happen.

I've never even heard of it happening outside of Reddit. I figured maybe it might just be redditors coming off as creepy in general, but seeing the sentiment here too I figured I'd ask.

A solo dad out with their kid would probably go home with a pocket full of phone numbers here haha

Different people have different information mate. If I start trolling on HN I promise I'll make the comments more interesting than a pretty mild question :)

Thanks for your reply and insight. I'm in my 40s and having lived in 4 countries on 3 continents this theme is pretty consistent across cultures.

Ask your friends and family if they'd feel as confident employing a male child minder as a female one. Then ponder on the answers.

In child custody cases the man stands no chance unless the mother is an addict and a criminal. Or at least that's the case everywhere I've been.

Does fostering have less of a barrier of entry? You may also be able to participate in a mentoring program like Big Brothers Big Sisters.

i actually think fostering should have a higher barrier because foster kids usually come from difficult situations and eventually go back to their parents and they need to be raised and taken care of in a way that enables that. for adoption it should be more like: you are capable to be parents, here is your kid. off you go.

I hear what you're saying, but the legal aspects of being a parent likely outweigh that. With foster children the state retains legal custody. Adoption is not just finding suitable parent(s) for a child, it is transferring both legal rights and obligations.

I'm saying this through a US centric lens, of course.

i understand why things are that way, but it is exactly the legal situation that makes me think it should be otherwise. when adopting you are giving parents the full responsibility to raise the children as they see fit. so obviously they should be capable, but that is all that is needed, just as if they had kids of their own.

for foster children the state retains a continuous responsibility for these children, and foster parents need to be able to go along with that.

i think part of the reason why it is otherwise is because it is easier to take foster children away, so if a mistake was made, it can be undone, or so the thinking goes, but i actually think that is wrong.

the most suffering foster children experience comes from changing families all to frequently. it hurts their ability to form trusting relationships. the adopted kids will be fine even if the parents make a mistake here or there, but the foster kids who are moved to another family because the foster parents made that same mistake have their world shattered.

Right, but the foster children can be taken away at any time the state sees fit to do so. The hurdles to do that with adopted children are much higher.

One action can easily be undone, but the other can not.

Edit: one other thing to consider is that there are a huge number of children in the foster system and they are desperate for foster parents.

(i added more to my previous comment so you may have missed that)

the fact that foster kids can be taken away easily is the problem, because that should not happen. and that can only be avoided if foster parents are vetted more strongly.

Right, I do agree with what you are saying but it's also an example of perfect being the enemy of good enough.

It's an unfortunate situation, but if the barriers are high enough there will be fewer people willing to foster. How many good-enough homes are out there, even if they are not perfect? At what point is the risk of being placed in a less than perfect home worth it?

I have just a few more years until all of my kids are out of the house and living on their own, and fostering children is definitely on my mind. We have already started by hosting foreign exchange students.

i don't know what the best solution is, for one i think the same is true for adoption, although i hear that in the US (and maybe in most western countries) there are not so many kids needing adoption for that to be a problem.

How many good-enough homes are out there, even if they are not perfect?

that's actually not what i am concerned about but foster parents that are outright abusive. so basically, i think that even foster kids should only be taken away if they are neglected or abused in such a way that you would even charge native parents with that.

the goal should not be to find perfect parents, but to find parents where the kids actually can stay as long as they need to. the barrier to take them away again is to low because it doesn't consider the hurt caused by being "taken away" itself.

It's becoming more and more common for single men to adopt children. But yeah, expect some scrutiny. Otherwise we failed as a society.

HN is a global forum spanning multiple countries and even more societal mores.

To your point though, "we" already failed as a society by not sufficienty scrutinising the bulk of adoptions to ostensibly stable 'ideal' families in decades past.

A number of these adoptions turned out fine, many did not.

> "we" already failed as a society by not sufficienty scrutinising the bulk of adoptions to ostensibly stable 'ideal' families in decades past

That is correct, and what is trying to be corrected for now.

Sure .. just as long as crazy assumptons aren't made such as automatically flagging single men, single women or homosexual couples.

The social history I'm most familiar with had a wide systemic issue with wealthy elite pillar of the community power couples adopting in "unwanted children" trained for menial servant roles as nannies and living breathing sex dolls .. not that you can accuse chief justices and their scaly mates down the yacht club of that kind of thing, of course.

that sounds like something from movies. was that really that widespread?

screening is really a challenge. i mean the only thing you can really do is to analyze the motivation of why someone wants to adopt. but most people that you would not want to allow to adopt can go and have their own children anyways. when does preventing adoption turn into preventing to have children? or why should anyone who could have their own children be prevented from adopting?

short of a clear misaligned motivation or mental (and other serious) health issues anyone should be able to adopt.

Fairly sustained practiced from ~(1900 - 1965) and it's less common to met a girl (and yes, boys also) from that system that didn't experience some form of sexual abuse as a result.

https://psychology.org.au/inpsych/2014/august/dudgeon

Reported abuse levels by relatively small numbers of witnesses are here:

https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/bringing-them-h...

with typical stories and it'd take a few years to convey why those fall well short of reality and to go through stories of many who never made it to witness stands.

Yeah, there's been a movie or two made about parts of the stories: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lbnk8wSVMaM

> why should anyone who could have their own children be prevented from adopting?

I don't understand this at all. People with a history of abuse or neglect can have their own children—and often they do—but why on earth would you use that as an excuse to give them more children to abuse? Like, what is your thinking here?

that's not what i meant. if the abuse is so bad that their children will have to be taken away (even if only temporarily), then obviously if they have children again, and the abuse continues, those children will also be taken away. which means in practical terms, they can't really have children.

what i did mean was: if whatever failures these parents have is mild enough that they are allowed to keep their children, because noone is perfect and the children are never in any danger then why should they not be allowed to adopt as well?

in short, why should adoptive parents have to submit to higher standards?

but, as someone else stated, there are not enough children up for adoption in the US anyways, so that argument becomes moot, because obviously you'll pick the most suitable parents first.

and you do have a point. after rereading what i said: "most people that you would not want to allow to adopt can go and have their own children anyways", this is really a claim that needs further scrutiny. it was supposed to imply that the tests are to harsh, but that is based only on anecdotal evidence so i am not really prepared to defend it. in hindsight, your reading of it makes sense too, so you are right to question it. thank you.

> Sure .. just as long as crazy assumptons aren't made such as automatically flagging single men, single women or homosexual couples.

I agree completely.

I wonder if we could have adoption process, where two random person can adopt the same person without being in a relationship? Heck maybe the adoption services can act as pairing services between two potential singles who are willing to act as a parent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com