Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 08-10-2014, 09:23 PM
JessicaBurde JessicaBurde is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Default

The short answer is poly homes are not immune to abuse, neglect, mental illness, instability, drug abuse, or any of the dozens of things that actually hurt kids. Poly households in and of themselves aren't harmful, but there are individual poly homes that are harmful because they have the same problems that monogamous homes do.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 08-10-2014, 09:31 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Yelm, Washington
Posts: 6,262
Default

Well to be more specific about what I've heard, I'd direct you to the following thread:
From what I've heard, some of the problems were specifically related to the way poly was handled in the home. Although like I said, the thread references many success stories as well.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 08-10-2014, 09:40 PM
JessicaBurde JessicaBurde is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Default

Just on a quick skim, it sounds like the daughter was being neglected and deprived of her mother's attention. Yes, the poly situation was handled badly there, but the same thing can happen in a monogamous household when a mother gets caught up in her work, school, new boyfriend, hobby or even new pet. Neglect is bad for a kid no matter what their parents relationship was. But if a monogamous couple were so caught up in themselves they were neglecting their kids, or a single mother ignored their kids in favor of her boyfriend, you wouldn't say the problem was that the kids were in a monogamous or single-parent household, you'd say the problem was the parents were neglectful.

This seems to be an example of an individual poly home being harmful because of a problem that is equally common in other family styles.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 08-10-2014, 10:10 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Yelm, Washington
Posts: 6,262
Default

Re:
Quote:
"But if a monogamous couple were so caught up in themselves they were neglecting their kids, or a single mother ignored her kids in favor of her boyfriend, you wouldn't say the problem was that the kids were in a monogamous or single-parent household, you'd say the problem was the parents were neglectful."
Agreed.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 08-11-2014, 02:30 AM
RichardInTN's Avatar
RichardInTN RichardInTN is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdt26417 View Post
Good to hear!

I've heard anecdotal indicators of kids doing badly in some open/poly households, as well as of kids doing fine. My conclusion so far has been that poly isn't for everyone and that the kids' needs must be closely monitored.
I agree with that conclusion, but would also add that mono isn't for everyone either. And because of this (and what an unsatisfying family dynamic can do to the family unit), kids' needs must be closely monitored.
__________________
Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination
I believe in I.D.I.C.
(Vulcans would LOVE {pardon the pun} Polyamory)
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 08-11-2014, 12:26 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,876
Default

My own personal objection to polyamory (from recent experience with the bf I broke up with a month ago) is, some poly people are "too" poly, NRE junkies, neglect established lovers, always on the hunt to nail the next new person. It starts to seem like they are shallow, lacking depth of feeling and commitment.

I am not suggesting a poly-fi triad is the only way to go. But there comes a point where, IMO, if you love somebody, you'll focus on them sometimes and not always be running off to the next new person and NRE sex hormone stimulation.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 08-12-2014, 01:23 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Yelm, Washington
Posts: 6,262
Default

I don't have a good rebuttal to that objection. If someone is blind to their increasing level of saturation, they probably have no business doing anything poly, or at least that's how it seems.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 08-12-2014, 11:50 AM
JessicaBurde JessicaBurde is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Default

I don't know if I'd consider that 'too poly', if only because my definition of poly includes commitment and ethics, and people like that have neither. Whatever you call it, it's an absolutely shitty way to treat people, and I'm sorry you had to go through that.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 08-13-2014, 02:18 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,536
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardInTN View Post
. . . ALL states could do it uniformly (especially if it were federally enacted FIRST).
That would impinge upon states' rights, which is a basic component of our governmental system, the 10th Amendment, and all that.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "

An excellent blog post on hierarchy in polyamory:
solopoly.net/2014/10/31/why-im-not-a-secondary-partner-the-short-version/
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 08-13-2014, 11:49 PM
RichardInTN's Avatar
RichardInTN RichardInTN is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
That would impinge upon states' rights, which is a basic component of our governmental system, the 10th Amendment, and all that.
I disagree.

Just like Federal Same Sex marriage laws (courtesy of the SCOTUS ruling against D.O.M.A.) don't trump State Laws against it.

Federal Poly Laws could be for "Federal Recognition only" as a beginning... and then states could then have a "roadmap" to follow.
__________________
Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination
I believe in I.D.I.C.
(Vulcans would LOVE {pardon the pun} Polyamory)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:00 AM.