An interesting read.

My comment regarding the article is below.

http://news.yahoo.com/all-in-the--non-nuclear--totally-unorthodox--famil...

It may be surprising that as a step dad who adopted my step son recently I disagree with the stance of the article that the definition of family is changing. Family in the human community is, has been, and always will be some combination of parents and children and in an extended sense grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, nieces, nephews, etc... Adding the blended family scenario into this family model with step parents and extended step family members makes this even more complex and potentially particularly difficult on the children.

Anyone who has experienced life in a blended family marriage raising some combination of yours/mine/ours kids has an idea of how difficult the complex dynamics are to navigate and how many issues the situation can create for children. This is in my opinion driven by the inherent instability that the children in step family situations must live with. Though difficult, step families are only a moderate modification to the traditional family model.

Plural relationships/spawning situations can only drive notably more baggage onto the shoulders of the children in these situation.

What alarms me about this article and the trend it discusses is the invariable transience and instability that this drastic non-nuclear model of family forces upon the children. It is a proven fact that children thrive in stable households and families. Plural marriage rarely establishes sustainable households and relationships. I cringe at the baggage that a child that is a product of a plural spawning situation will be exposed do during the highly likely if not inevitable disintegration of the child's family.

In our family our son is an only child. His mom and I married the week before he turned two years old. He is now 23. A few months before his most recent birthday he asked his mom and I if I would adopt him. We had discussed at a few points over our 20+ years as a family about me adopting him and at those points he chose to not accept that option. His reasoning at those times was wise beyond his years. He said I was his dad, I had always been his dad, and adoption and changing his name would not change that. He was of course concerned about the feelings of his biodad and that leg of his family.

When he approached him about doing an adult adoption I reminded him of his wise response during earlier discussions of the topic and that no matter what I was his dad. I told him that an adoption was not necessary and if he wanted to take the family name he could initiate a change of name rather than doing an adoption. His response took my heart. He told me he wanted me to be his dad and that he was and had always been a (family last name) and always would be. He wanted as he put it a "full meal deal" adoption. So we made that happen. It took four days from the day we contacted our lawyer until the Judge signed the adoption order. Since then my son has had all of his official documents reissued under our family name including his birth certificate which I am proudly listed on as his father.

Our side of his family is the stable side. On his biodad's side of the equation my son is the eldest of four all out of wedlock children by three different baby mamas. My son had regular visitation with the paternal clan for his entire life. As he grew to a self-supporting viable adult of character my son's perspectives on his complex extended multiple branch family changed.

He began observing his family life from the eyes of a maturing young person as everyone does. What he saw was stability, dedication, support, and engagement on two of the three sides of h is family and chaos, instability, and lack of character on the other. His three younger siblings are all struggling mightily with the baggage of family transience and instability while my son is thriving having had strong examples of stability and performance from his mom and I, two of his three sets of grandparents, and from his aunts and uncles on his mom's side of his family and mine.

I fear for the children of these inherently unstable family models. The societal transience of marriage over the past 100 years has been crippling to children. This will be far, far worse on the children who are put through the demise and reconfiguration of their sense of family among a half dozen or more "parents".

Let’s try to keep kids to two parents. Mom and dad, dad and dad, mom and mom, is not nearly as important as the number 2. Of course that is not a reasonable mandate so lets expand it to say let’s keep the number of Step Parents a child has to incorporate into their lives to the smallest number events will allow.. A child having to navigate a situation where Mom, Mommy, Mama, etc....... and Dad, Daddy, Pops, etc.... with invariable cycling mixes of people is a scary thing for an adult to comprehend.

Think of it from the child's perspective. Kids thrive on stability, boundaries, and expectations. This trend makes it nearly impossible for a child to have a shot at those foundation elements to their lives.

All IMHO of course.