Before the day was half done on December 14, 1987 - not 20 years ago - I was born into a warm and loving family. All those who were there to support my young mother in labor, my grandmother, grandfather and sister, were the ones who would compose my indivisible family.
My biological father, or as I prefer to call him, a sperm donor, was most surely absent on the day of my birth. He was probably off somewhere with engine grease covering his large, oaf-like hands. And I am anything but sorry for all of that.
There may have been an imbalance of female influence in my life; my sister dressed me up in girl's costumes, my mother painted my nails, my nurse grandmother taught me to care for my body. But my grandfather certainly balanced out the feminine time by letting me look at his civil war muskets and sitting in his den pretending to do important paperwork.
These are the stories that have come to be prevalent in my life - I'm thankful that my father wasn't there to have more of an influence on me. Instead, I am proud of the family that raised me, the family that taught me what was right and wrong, the family that gave me the means to survive in an amoral world.
It seems that more and more, I hear stories from people about their nontraditional childhood. It makes me realize that it doesn't matter who raises a child as long as the prime concern is the child's welfare.
What once would have been a social blemish, the fact that I am a bastard child, is now something that has no count in society. What matters is that I was raised to be polite and proper in my relationships with others.
The crux of my point is that the conservative ideal of family values has died. If I got to where I am without a traditional family environment, why can't others?
Whether they be single, gay, stepparents or whatever, who's to say that they couldn't properly raise a child? Does it matter the composition of the parental units or does it matter that they are of good character?
The high amount of divorces in this country certainly has adverse effects on youths, but it doesn't have to be that way. It is up to the mother, the father and surrounding family to put the welfare of the child first.
Proof lies in the statistics: in 2001, the number of divorces per 1,000 people was four, whereas it was 2.6 in 1950. Yet at the same time, in 2003, the educated population of the US reached an all-time high with 85 percent of people age 25 or older having at least a high school degree, according to the US Census Bureau.
There might be a constituency in our country that believes those statistics reflect the government's concern with education rather than morality. I'd like to think that despite parental tiffs, moms and dads are trying to think about their kids first. Sure, parents in the spotlight might not set a good example, but people are smart enough to look beyond the hoopla.
While we came into the situations differently, former President Clinton and I have our fatherless childhoods in common. His father died; my father ditched. But it doesn't mean that we didn't have immediate family influences to help us along towards success.
The component of family values that usurps all the rest is the idea of spending quality time with the children who are born with blank slates that are open to all influences. No matter the age, race, gender or sexual preference of the person who raises a child, the goal should be the same: to create the best of all possible worlds for them.
Photo: Courtesy of Laron Fomby
