mothergoodbypaige

For an American Studies class entitled Capitol Crimes, which discusses “America’s love affair with money”, we were assigned to read the novel The Privileges by Jonathan Dee. Definitely a worthwhile read, I would recommend this book to pick up light reading that is relevant to contemporary society. It is not a far fetched to see some of our own experiences as privileged as students at Notre Dame. In fact, the line where it says that “We were adults acting like children acting like adults” could be the motto for me and many of my peers. At the ages 18-23, we are adults. We act like children when we go out to drink the night before an exam, wearing costumes at bars and singing with out friends. We are children acting like adults, because the next day we will show up to the career center with a electrolyte packed gatorade in hand along with our resume. We are not willing to give up our status as upwardly mobile, money making students looking to be successful, yet we are also unwilling to forgo childish antics. So how does this culture of ours relate to motherhood and parenthood? In class, it is a unanimous decision that none of us would want to have a child right now. Most of the mother’s in our novels were not singled out for being particularly young mothers, so I assumed that they were all of an appropriate age to have a child for their time. This idea of the appropriate age is in flux, and on the rise. Career oriented students at Notre Dame do not think of children as an option now, and some of us not ever.

So, the consensus in class is that a child for us as adult/adolescents, children/women and men is definitely a no-go. But what if we did have a child now? What if one of our children was some sort of creature like in The Fifth Child? or a hermaphrodite like Wayne in Annabel? What if we married someone who pressured us to have an abortion and make us live with the guilt like in Hannah’s Diary or we felt so detached that we fled our family to The South? These are fictional novels and depict trying circumstances, yet they encourage us to realize the uncertainty in having a child. This uncertainty is daunting, and a main reason why it seems healthier to have  a child when you are mentally, physically and financially prepared. Yet most of these novels end with some hopeful note about parenthood. The relationships heal somehow, against all odds, the mother finds a way to get through each day with whatever it is that she is confronting. The circumstances might not be optimal, but the course shows realistic ways of survival when parents are challenged by a surprise, an inevitable challenge when having children. To return to Dee’s novel, The Privileges, he describes his version of the ability for parents to adapt to whatever challenge their child presents them with. And his solution is simply love, something that has been echoed throughout our novels. Dee’s character disciplines his adult/adolescent daughter after she gets in a car accident while on drugs. Perhaps more lenient than others parents would be, Dee writes: “‘You are loved,” Adam said. ‘Okay? And if you know you’re loved that you might make a mistake once in a while but you are never in the wrong. I know this isn’t a great time for you, but I have total faith that things will get better, because that’s what things do. They get better.” (Dee, 240) With this in mind, we can re-evaluate the mothers in our novels with a better and more optimistic understanding of what it means to love your child.

In my last post, “Pregnancy in Pop Culture”, I remarked on the controversy around the MTV show “Teen Mom” and how it is rumored to perhaps encourage teen pregnancy. The rumor is that Jenelle Evans, one of the girls featured on the show, inspired three of her friends to become pregnant, dubbed “copycat moms” because of the fame and celebrity (D List at best) surrounding her teen pregnancy. Unfortunately, I would argue that although who an adolescent is friends with definitely contributes to the kinds of behaviors they partake in, the root of the problem is the lack of sexual education in schools, especially in under resourced areas. The failure of effective Sexual Education programs in preventing teen pregnancy was discussed in length on Anne’s blog, which is definitely worth a read, Anne points out that no matter the scare tactics used by conservative programs or the ineffective ones used by more liberal programs, a large amount of teenagers are inevitably going to have sex. This is a fact that should simple enough to be undeniable. If it’s not an primal instinct  to have intercourse, then its a cultural pressure by hyper sexual images. The comfort levels for each person are different and no doubt personal standards, religious beliefs and plenty of other factors complicate the generalization that all teenagers have sex, because of course they don’t. However, why not just assume they do? For the sake of all those unplanned pregnancies out there, sexual education should be comprehensive, focusing on how to access birth control, how to use birth control correctly, resources that are available for help, etc. Generally more realistic lessons about sexuality are needed, especially in America. This country is one of the most religious modern nations, with often puritanical leanings when it comes to formal, official statements on sexuality. YET the American popular culture is undoubtedly hypersexualized. From the a young age, girls know they are supposed to look sexy, and boys know they are supposed to want sex as young as age 12. As we saw from the Rebecca Walker piece, losing virginity at 13 is not out of the question. The conflicting messages from moral codes that say sex is a taboo subject that should be dealt with in a cursory way in schools and families, deemed improper and awkward to talk about, in combination with the messages from peer groups and the media that sex is encouraged at a young age leads to a dangerous youth culture surrounding sex. In my opinion, the solution is an open conversation about sex so that the media, which won’t be avoided, can be confronted in a healthier way. It shouldn’t be taboo to talk to your mom about sex, even if you are a staunch Catholic or your dad is a Reverend. Sex is out there for adolescents to see and if they don’t get to talk to informed adults who they feel comfortable with, they will partake in risky behavior and have to deal with their parents when confronting the consequences.

We all know that open conversation about sexuality leads to a better understanding of self and healthier relationships with others and the culture around us. That seems obvious enough, but what I would like to tell my daughter is about the emotional repercussions that stem from biological drives. I say daughter because I think women have the pressure to have casual sex and then remain “cool” about it, “chill” enough to not be “needy” and expect the guy to care about how the girl feels afterwards. The girl should be able to have a one night stand and not expect even a phone call. If she complains about it, she is deemed clingy. If she confronts the guy about it, she is deemed a complete psycho who needs attention. She shouldn’t have done it in the first place if she was going to except him to wife her up. But all of her friends think casual sex is normal, all of the shows she watch say it is normal, everything is telling her to do it, but they never openly deal with the emotional consequences. Going into casual sex blindly and without preparation does not only open up the possibility of unplanned pregnancy and STD’s, but also serious emotional conflict.

One of these lessons I would like to impart to my daughter when she reaches that age, and I’ll tell any friend who will listen, is the emotional repercussions of having sex before the right time. I honestly think this scientific knowledge that I recently learned from discussing hormones that are released in women’s bodies could be the #1 most effective way to warn adolescent females about the consequences of sex. Sexual Education programs should teach about the hormone oxytocin. What I learned is that women are at a biological (dis)advantage when it comes to emotional ties during intercourse. Oxytocin is a hormone released by both partners during sex that promotes bonding, but it is released in higher levels in women. It is also released in women during pregnancy and breast feeding to stimulate the same bonding processes. Oxytocin release can be classically conditioned when it is released in women, so much so that when she even catches a glimpse of a previous sexual partner, it is released in her body. In the popular shows we see on TV, it is rarely, (if ever) the male who is torn up about an unplanned, irresponsible sexcapade. Girls need to know that they are programmed to be more attached to men, causing heartbreak and discomfort, and maybe worst of all the pressure to act like they don’t care, when everything is biologically telling them that they do. This inner conflict between hormonal pushes and societal pulls can be a painful process. If more females knew that they were actually programmed to feel differently post sex, they would understand the implications of being a female who is sexually active and how their body is telling them one message, while they are being pressured to act another way.

Biologically, women’s bodies are more vulnerable than men’s when it comes to the repercussions, physically and emotionally, from unprotected sex. If the woman becomes pregnant unexpectedly, it is her situation and should be her choice to deal with no matter how supportive or close the partner is to her. If a woman is raped, it is because she is predisposed to be weaker than a man who may be attacking her. If a woman has sex with a man who decides not to care about her feelings, she is biologically driven to be emotionally consumed by feelings of regret. Women need to be educated about their vulnerability that comes from being a woman. I am a feminist and I believe in the power of a strong, intelligent woman who makes choices that are right and appropriate for her. I also acknowledge that not all women will feel regret after casual sex and may find empowerment in using her body this way, and that is completely legitimate. But I guess I would want to tell my daughter to be honest with her feelings and think of how it would feel before she engages in sex, tell her about using protection, and create a comfortable non judgmental atmosphere to talk about sexuality within her home.

Of course the next dilemma would be to decide when the right time this kind of conversation should be encouraged in the household. But I will have to save that for a later time in life, especially because as we said in class, you need to relinquish a little control and just be open to the unexpected when it comes to mothering.

In response to Anne’s post on March 29th, entitled “Babies having babies…”, (Definitely Worth a Read) I would like to sympathize with her about the ongoing debate about sex education and teen pregnancy. Shows such as “Sixteen and Pregnant” and “Teen Mom” are incredibly popular standouts on MTV’s rotation, and admittedly a guilty pleasure for me and my friends. There has been mixed reactions to these shows for obvious reasons: do the often “trashy” girls that are picked to be featured on the show reveal the pain and difficulty that characterize and unplanned teen pregnancy? For example, after Jenelle Evans was featured on the show, three of her teenage friends also have become pregnant. (Pregnancy Pressure: Is MTV\’s \’Teen Mom\’ Encouraging Pregnancy for Fame?)

The girls often have ridiculous fights with their on again off again boyfriends who are often unemployed and have even been featured by engagement rings at Wal-Mart and “homemade dinner” at Cracker Barrel. This isn’t the kind of fairy tale romance that any viewer would want, so is the show doing us a favor by showing us the “reality” of just how hard it is to be an unprepared teenager who is trying to graduate from high school and dealing with boy drama, family drama, money drama, and diapers to top it all off? MTV claims that the show provides a lesson to viewers by contrasting the difficult lives of the young mothers with their peers who maintain relatively conventional, carefree high school experiences. “MTV presents their teen mom reality shows as an object lesson for teens in avoiding unwanted pregnancy. Each season, the show follows four teen mothers showing the gritty hardship, both emotional and financial, of teen motherhood.”

On the other hand–this stuff is fascinating, and very easily removed from a viewer’s reality! It is a train wreck, a car crash you just can’t stop watching. It’s pretty easy for an average viewer to place themselves into the unfortunate situation and think, “well if that was me, this is what I would do…” The “I would dump him” “I would still graduate” “My parents would be more supportive” type thinking may make light of a situation that is difficult no matter how fortunate one’s circumstances are. By showing extreme scenarios of Wal-Mart and Cracker Barrel, screaming matches between couples, and boys who kick their pregnant girlfriend out of a car on the side of the road, MTV is entertaining us, that is obvious. But they also make the cases so outlandish that the difficulty of unplanned pregnancy is removed as an immediate, legitimate threat to the average viewer. It is easy to say “that wouldn’t happen to me” when I am in a stable relationship, at a top 25 university, and blessed to have a supportive, cohesive family. But the incredible challenge of an unplanned pregnancy would be just as real and just as profound if it happened to any young woman (or couple, for that matter) The reality is a shared one–the tension over the “right thing to do”, the strain that an unplanned pregnancy has on a young and immature relationship, the pressure from parents, the lack of financial independence, the confusion, pain, and guilt—these are human emotions. Next time I revel in my fortunate state, far far removed from the West Virginia hills that those Teen Moms are putzing around in, I will remember to be keenly empathetic to the emotions that they are going through and the real risk that every single person encounters with unplanned pregnancy, no matter what resources they have at hand. It is important not to buy into the spectacle. Even though you aren’t dating Gary, doesn’t mean you wouldn’t feel like Amber if it happened to you.

Tina Fey enters the scene in her business casual attire and yells at fake blonde Amy Poehler, (her surrogate mother), “What kind of food is this for a pregnant woman? Dr. Pepper? Pringles? Tastee Cakes?…Red Bull?!”

In class today we talked about the ambiguity that surrounds what is healthy for a pregnant woman. Why is wine acceptable in Europe by absolutely looked down upon in the States? Why are some women aware of their exact amounts of folic acid, while some have never heard of a pre-natal vitamin?

The health of a fetus is no doubt connected to the health of the mother that is carrying it, fed through the same digestive system, babies literally cannot be separated from the choices of their mothers. Yet, how far is too far in the protection of an unborn baby when it comes to the behavioral choices of a mother? When does the stress of eating right, finding the perfect balance between rest and physical activity, and maintaining relative emotional stability too much pressure for the mother?

Clearly the implications of these questions are affected by many factors, including location of a pregnant mother and what access to resources she has depending on her socioeconomic status and social support. In the movie Baby Mama starring Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, the two women represent the extremes of this pregnant perfection conundrum.

Tina Fey’s character jokes to her new boyfriend after a detailed order of a Philly cheesesteak that, “Some people would say I am bossy and controlling.” She learns how to loosen up over the course of the movie, but according to upper/middle class white women her attitude towards how to nourish oneself during pregnancy is “the norm.” Or so I thought. According to Dr. Ira Chasnoff, president of Children’s Research Triangle  (http://ninezeroproject.blogspot.com/2010/04/white-middle-class-women-drink-during.html) “We found that middle class Caucasian women have the highest rates of alcohol use in pregnancy.” The NineZero Project is warning against the effects of alcohol in fetal alcohol syndrome, and claim that just one drink during early pregnancy can have a detrimental effect on the baby’s brain development. So Tina Fey’s character in Baby Mama is a wealthy, full-time business woman, single and independent. Her character contrasts Amy Poehler’s, who is called “ignorant” and “white trash”, clearly of a lower socioeconomic status and with a verbally abusive boyfriend. Amy’s character wants to drink during pregnancy and eat unhealthy food. Tina Fey’s works for an organic food company. Perhaps biased and putting undue blame on the white middle class demographic, the study complicates the narrative that upper middle class women are abiding by the “right” rules when it comes to pregnancy. It also shows the ongoing struggle to find a balance between the pregnant woman’s health as an independent being, and the health of her growing fetus. With new studies coming out and extremist websites galore, on both sides of the spectrum, the debate promises to be ongoing.

I mentioned in my last post that I held a discussion last semester as part of a final project. I tried to get my findings published in the Gender Studies Journal but was rejected due to lack of funding. I am not trying to give myself an eg0-boost or claim in any way that my paper should have been published. (I admit to writing it and sending it in after one sitting at Como…) I just want to argue that this brings up two points 1. Maybe the lack of funding for the Gender Studies academic journal has something to do with the lack of attention for the major in general. Which, we know by now is only a supplementary major at Notre Dame and cannot stand by itself. 2. My paper was designed to bolster communication about salient issues around campus. Everything worthwhile needs to be talked about. The respectful discussion about a particular topic, not the agreement, is what remains crucial and must be encouraged at our school. If we are at the peak of our intellectual curiosity, surrounded by people from diverse backgrounds with rich and varied perspectives, isn’t our environment  basically begging us to start talking to each other about topics that actually matter? We have teachers that are willing and eager to meet up with us during office hours or over coffee, they invite us to their houses (Thanks Professor Palko!), we have friends at our finger tips living next door or in our own room that are always available to bounce around ideas with, we have stimulating readings and lectures available for free everyday. We need to start taking advantage of it. Even if we are seniors.

In her blog, Anne discusses the lack of conversation about Planned Parenthood and abortion on campus. Sure, we all know when South Quad gets filled up with tiny white crosses that remind us of the unborn babies. Yes, we are aware of the church’s stance on abortion. But these topics are salient and especially relevant in the bigger world we live in.

Anne said, “Thanks to a recent vote by the US House of Representatives to revoke all federal funding for Planned Parenthood (none of which went to provide abortions, for what it’s worth) and this week’s passage of a new Texas law forcing women wishing to obtain an abortion to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before the procedure can be done, the topic of a woman’s right to abortion access has been front and center in the news for weeks.  Despite this, however, I’ve noticed a stunning lack of debate and discussion around campus on this very important, very timely issue.  Regardless of our views, we shouldn’t be afraid of this topic, nor should we be apathetic towards its impact on our lives and society.  We won’t always live in the Notre Dame bubble, and I believe it’s time that we prepare ourselves for the debates and discussions which lie beyond.”

Anne’s argument is eloquent and powerful. I affirm you! Last week, one of my best friends sent me a link to sign a petition against the elimination of federal funding for Planned Parenthood. She knows my stance on Planned Parenthood and knew I would be eager to sign anything that supported it. When I signed the online petition, I inadvertently clicked a button that posted my support for Planned Parenthood onto my facebook page. My friend immediately remarked “wow, bold move.” I started having slight qualms, did it look like I was pro-abortion? Did people automatically assume I was making a statement on abortion, instead of showing my support for the sexual education, birth control, AIDS and STD prevention that Planned Parenthood offers? I almost clicked “Hide” on my wall to remove the post, but then a tiny facebook miracle happened. I saw my sister “liked” the post. Just that one affirmation allowed me to keep it up there. Yes, I was proud to support Planned Parenthood. Yes I know people who have benefitted from their services that would not have been able to without their help.

Why did my friend think it was such a bold move? She is a gender studies minor, a self-declared feminist, and yet did not feel comfortable posting this on her facebook as part of the Notre Dame network. Even deeper into the issue, why did not one person from Notre Dame show any support for my post? In fact, I received a notification that one of my guy friends “liked” my post, but when I went to check my wall, he had immediately removed it. He either made a mistake in the first place, or became so self conscious that he chose to remove his public support.

Whether or not you support planned parenthood, whether or not you want to “like” a post on my wall, or post your support publicly, I agree with Anne when she says that Notre Dame has remained uncannily silent in the wake of a major debate. We are an academic institution alongside our Catholic faith, we are thinkers and intellectuals. We can respectfully debate something that might be taboo to our faith. It is relevant in the world unto which we are about to enter without our Notre Dame support, besides for a diploma we are going to need to think for ourselves. We should start now.

I, too, saw the video of that adorable little effervescent girl bouncing around the screen proclaiming all that she loves to the mirror. She wasn’t saying it to the camera, but to herself! Looking right at herself in the mirror, straight on, staring herself in the eyes, and giving a “Daily Affirmation” to start off her happy day.

Does she have more confidence as a young child than we can claim at students at one of the premiere universities in the country? Anne, you say that “Girls at Notre Dame are smart.” There is no doubt about that. Coming from two different transfers, I’ve encounter a lot of smart female students in a lot of different places. And they all suffer from the same self-defeatist attitude that undercuts their own intelligence. This may not be an obvious trend. I don’t know many females who go around touting how stupid they are, the dumb cute thing got called out really quickly in adolescence. (I was told by my mom to stop twirling my hair “It makes you look like a ditz.” ) I’m known to do goofy things now and say “I’m smarter than I appear.” Why do I feel the need to explain how intelligent I am.

We are not girls. We are not the five year old child small enough to climb on top of her sink and jump around the bathroom. We are women. So why do we continue to call ourselves girls? We are in an adult world that we contribute to in worthwhile, constructive ways everyday. We graduate in greater numbers and with greater academic than our male counterparts, yet we call ourselves girls.

The self-effacing habit is perpetuated by our daily habits. It is in our language, it is in our etiquette, it is prevalent. I would love to conduct a study that would record what people say in class. Just a stenographer sitting in the corner who jots down how each student who raises their hand introduces their comment for class. I would be willing to bet that female students add more qualifying statements. How many times have we heard the unnecessary phrase “I might be wrong but…” “I may be totally off track here but…” “Going off what he/she said…” “Yeah, kinda along those lines…”

Why do we have to either 1. apologize for going off track 2. assume we are wrong 3. need to agree with someone else to be validated?

I held a forum last semester on the hook up culture at Notre Dame that consisted of a candid conversation between female students, ranging from freshman to Masters level. One of the most salient themes that I observed from the conversation was that women feel the need to apologize where they are not in the wrong. In fact, most times the other person whom they are apologizing to is in the wrong. For a boy who is making a sexual advance on a non-consenting girl, it is not common for him to hear “Sorry, but my friends need me” “Sorry! I gotta go to the bathroom” “Sorry! i have a boyfriend!”

For whatever reason, clarification and apologies are rampant in girl-talk. Just like Anne and Kelly said, we need to start taking ownership of our intelligence. Non-apologetic, confident, and self-assured ownership. Instead of saying I’m so sorry you are making me feel uncomfortable, random boy on the dance floor at Fever, we should be saying “you should be sorry because you are making me feel uncomfortable.” We should be starting off our conversations in class with self-confidence of a young adult woman who knows she is intelligent, knows what she says is perceptive, knows that it will contribute to class, and is not afraid to sound as smart as she is.

I don’t know, sorry if I’m ranting, maybe I’m wrong, I’m just going off what Kelly and Anne said….

The Motherhood Manifesto as understood by pop cult figure Lady Gaga. I don’t have words for the following video. Does motherhood mean giving birth to a gun? What is going on here?

Doris Lessing’s The Fifth Child was begging me to make a parallel with the 1968 movie “Rosemary’s Baby”, starring Mia Farrow. My own mother told me about the plot of this movie when I was still young enough to be scarred by the imagery of an alien devil creature being carried in my own womb for nine months, being nourished by what I decide to eat, finally entering the world through my own body. For those who weren’t told about the movie by their mother at an impressionable age, a NY Times journalist reviews the movie, exposing its themes of persecution, isolation, paranoia and motherhood. His informative and entertaining video is short and worth a quick watch because it has footage from the original movie, which manages to convey its creepy terror to the modern audience despite its outdated, understated effects.

Even from this short clip any reader can see obvious commonalities between the two stories–a young idealistic couple buy a house they can’t afford to raise children they can’t afford, operating under delusions of grandeur with neighbors and family intervening deep into their private lives to help as they see fit, for better or for worse. Both young mothers give birth to a child that is not normal, not like them, otherworldly, monstrous and alien-like. The child is unable to connect with any other individual in a human way.

The one similarity I want to emphasis is the mother’s feeling of persecution for birthing this creature. Harriet repeatedly mentions how she feels like a criminal, she feels like everyone treats her with condemnation, it was  her fault for giving birth to Ben, yet no one will acknowledge that he is different.

Lessing writes, “Again Harriet was wondering why she was always treated like a criminal. Ever since Ben was born it’s been like this, she thought. Now it seemed to her the truth, that everyone had silently condemned her. I have suffered a misfortune she told herself; I haven’t committed a crime.” (78)

Is a woman every culpable for her child’s behavior? If Ben wasn’t “different” would Harriet be blameworthy of raising a child who would kill cats and dogs? How much is nature vs. nurture to an outsider who is merely observing or hearing rumors about the child?

Harriet desperately wants to share her burden with someone in a more deep, candid way than through superficial pragmatic conversation. We see this recurring through the novella, when she speaks with the principal or doctors or anyone of authority. Lessing injects disdain for the superficiality and impersonal nature of interactions with authority figures who would rather ignore inconvenient, giant issues, and have the mother deal with her problem by herself.  “What she wanted, she decided, was that at last someone would use the right words, share the burden. No, she did not expect to be rescued, or even that anything much could change. She wanted to be acknowledged, her predicament given its value.” We see Harriet share Rosemary’s paranoia and feeling of being persecuted. We get an inside look from Harriet’s point of view, which is unique as a reader because we need to decipher what is reality and what she is feeling. Just as in the NY Times video, Harriet is similar to Rosemary,

“…the beating anxious heart of this film is mia farrow. everything that happens in the movie takes place from rosemary’s point of view so that we feel every nuance and tremor of her panic, vulnerability and terror.”

When Aunty Cora wants to formally adopt Peppy, the question of who deserves to be called a mother is presented to the reader. Aunty Cora raises her Peppy, “mothering” her by providing security, shelter, manners and life lessons during her formative years. She cultivates her great-nieces individualism and personality, allowing her to play to heart’s content. This makes other mothers in the community criticize Cora for spoiling the child, leaving her undisciplined and rude, yet Patricia Powell paints Peppy as a charming, vivacious character. It’s easy to see how selfish Gwennie is acting when she won’t allow Cora to formally adopt Peppy, who is Gwennie’s biological daughter. But is it selfish? Does a mother have a certain right to their child even though they may not raise them, just because she carried the child for nine months and birthed her, providing half of her genes?  Adoption is a relentlessly complicated issue that is controversial for its myriad of advantages and disadvantages, in addition to its incredible personal nature. The personal, subjective, complicated issues that accompany adoption can only be paralleled with the issue of abortion, concerning a woman’s right to her body, her child, welfare of a child, welfare of a mother, etc, etc.

I read an article on a popular blog based out of New York called Jezebel about Jessica Beagley who is an adoptive mother in Alaska. She was featured on Dr. Phil when she shared footage of the unique and unconventionally cruel punishment of her young son. The article refers to the practice as “hot saucing”, a punishment that entails squirting painfully spicy hot sauce into a young child’s mouth when he misbehaves. The questions are endless: What constitutes misbehavior? When is punishment required? How is a punishment equal and fitting to the child’s behavior? The questions become more intense when media gets involved. Airing the footage on Dr. Phil allowed responses from the public to be shared on countless links, as the story was widely covered and the original footage featured on youtube.com. (for video footage see the following link, but beware of disturbing footage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jyKtnpzyIU )

The media coverage and backlash from viewers caused Beagley to be charged with a misdemeanor, with the severe (and unlikely) possibility for her children to be sent back to their native country, Russia, where they were adopted from. Who deserves to have the children? Would they be treated more humanely in an orphanage or foster system in Russia?

Unfortunately, neither outcome looks promising, and this is just one case of many of children with less than ideal upbringings. Would Peppy be better off with a loving and doting, yet elderly, Mama Cora? Or with her slightly neglectful biological mother Gwennie and abusive father Walter, yet among her siblings for camaraderie?