Single Motherhood

"I see no other way out," Actress Lupe Velez wrote in 1944 before committing suicide. She was taking her life, she explained, because she was pregnant and her lover refused to marry her. Times have changed. During the past two years, such unwed public figures as Actresses Vanessa Redgrave and Mia Farrow and--just last week--Irish Firebrand and Member of Parliament Bernadette Devlin have chosen another way: they have openly and happily given birth to their babies. In an era of general sexual permissiveness, this new tolerance for unwed motherhood is not confined to the swinging world of show business and the anti-Establishment subculture; it has also become a middle-class phenomenon in conventional communities in the U.S., Canada and Western Europe.

Evidence of the new outlook is cropping up everywhere. Although the number of illegitimate children born each year has been growing, once crowded retreats for unmarried mothers-to-be now have many vacancies. The Florence Crittenton Association, which operates homes for unmarried pregnant girls in 49 cities, is running at only 50% to 80% of capacity--even though it has recently begun to accept lower-class and delinquent youngsters as well as the "nice" girls it was originally set up to help. The reason: more and more unwed pregnant women feel no need to hide out; they live more or less normally in their home communities while they are pregnant and have their babies in local hospitals.

Even more important, increasing numbers of unwed mothers are keeping their babies instead of giving them up for adoption. In Boston, for example, about 45% of single mothers now bring up their infants, compared with only 10% a decade ago. In Montreal, the percentage has risen to 55 from only 20% five years ago. Blue Cross has begun paying maternity benefits to single mothers; at least 140 public schools in the U.S. now have special facilities for pregnant youngsters, who until recently would have been forced to abandon their education--at least temporarily.

Vulnerable Position. There is little doubt that Women's Lib, with its emphasis on female self-sufficiency, has stimulated many of these changes. Yet not many unmarried mothers really want to be self-sufficient. Even those who scorn marriage as an anachronism often live with their child's father. Most single mothers want eventual legal ties, provided the price is not too high. As a Boston mother, whose lover proved to be a heroin addict, explains, "I used to believe marriage was important for a name for my son, but it isn't important enough for me to marry a junkie. I want a good marriage when I marry."

The odds are good that she will marry; most single mothers do by the time their children begin school. But until then, the going can be rough. For one thing, unmarried mothers find a normal social life hard to arrange. "I'm in a very vulnerable position," says Peggy Fleish, a New York travel agent with a two-year-old son named Peter. "Men know it, and lots of them try to take advantage of it. They think, 'Here's an easy trick.' " Another difficulty is providing masculine influence in the life of a fatherless child. For this, Peggy relies on friends and her family (her father and brother are "crazy about Peter"). "It's nice when a beau comes to pick me up for dinner and plays horsy with Peter on the floor," she says.

To help with problems like these, the Florence Crittenton homes, as well as other social agencies, are beginning to sponsor weekly group meetings where mothers can talk out their worries and look for solutions. Agencies also try to help with the economic troubles that plague nearly every unmarried mother: several provide low-cost day-care centers, and others run used-clothing and equipment exchanges. Some unwed mothers cut costs by joining forces with others to rent apartments and share baby-sitting chores. Others manage to get by alone.

Damaging Years. Despite such troubles, many single mothers think that parenthood is the best thing that ever happened to them. "My complaints are minor," Peggy insists. "Ninetynine percent of the time, having Peter is a joy." Moreover, she believes, and her friends confirm, that she has changed for the better: "I've become a much softer person. I treat people with more kindness, and I'm less selfish."

Though it may be satisfying for mothers, is single parenthood good for children? The experts have their doubts. Psychological studies suggest that among unwed mothers, it is the most unstable who keep their babies. Some of these women, says Boston Psychiatrist Malkah Notman of Beth Israel Hospital, have a neurotic need to be "the sun in someone's universe." Others, says Boston Psychologist David Haughey, cling to their infants not out of love but out of anger. "They are either rebelling against parents who want them to give up their babies or trying to force the man who fathered the child to take care of it."

Under such circumstances, psychiatrists fear, a mother may be so troubled emotionally that she cannot give her youngster the love he needs. Worse yet, practical problems may force her to give him up at the age of two or three--which is almost sure to be more harmful than putting him up for adoption at birth. Says Social Worker Charles Bates of the Boston Children's Service, the city's largest adoption agency: "If a mother wants her child, I'd go along. But the first two years are critical, and if they are damaging years--well, I'm worried about some of those kids who'll have to be adopted after all."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.