Sometimes in life things aren’t planned and they may even scare you at first, but they end up being a blessing…
That is how I feel about having a daughter, I am looking forward to being a parent to her.
~ Former Jersey Shore cast member Pauly D (Paul Delvecchio) reacting to the unexpected news that he fathered a daughter, Amabella, as quoted by People, October 24
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
HOW REFRESHING to see Pauly man up and protect his wife/girlfriend and child from abortion!!
He saved TWO lives!!
Actually he tried very hard to convince her to have an abortion. He’s trying to present himself as number 1 dad in order to win sole custody and avoid paying child support.
Why is it so difficult to give people the benefit of the doubt? Maybe he had wanted the baby to be aborted previously but had a change of heart? We see women change their minds about abortions (or have aborted previously) and become excellent mothers, why is it impossible that men might be able to change too?
You can blame it on the male brain Jack. Just kidding!!! I like to see men own up to their responsibilities and Pauly D is setting a good example. Let’s keep fingers crossed for him..
If you read it–you will see that he is trying to take the baby away from her mother. I don’t think that is cool. I think dads are super important and that baby girl needs her daddy in her life but to take her away from her mommy is just selfish and cruel. She needs BOTH parents.
Sometimes mothers aren’t suited for full custody. None of us know which parent is best, I hope that with mediation they end up with a joint custody arrangement that means the kid doesn’t get deprived of either parent (assuming that both of them are fit to be parents).
I heard that too Jezebel. I think hes a little creep,
“I think hes a little creep,”
Well, he was on Jersey Shore, so it’s pretty much a given.
Jersey Shore was a lame show, yes – but Pauly D may actually transcend his character in real life. The male brain may yet be redeemed. Go Pauly!!
Go Pauly? Rein it in there, Thomas. This guy has a long history of being more than a little creep. Let’s see how this unfolds before we decide whether he’s stepping up to be a good dad or just taking one more step down the weasel path.
I don’t usually defend my gender CT and tend to blame all on the male brain (sorry again Jack) but in this case I think there is a possibility Pauly D will be restored to useful citizenship. And besides, daughters cast a spell on all fathers…
It’s just the same attitude that simultaneously excuses dudes for bad behavior (“Boys will be boys”) while ignoring any chance for redemption (“once a bad guy, always a bad guy”). It’s just dumb. Some people regardless of gender make mistakes but everyone has a chance to turn themselves around.
And besides, daughters cast a spell on all fathers… – ah, is that the ‘alterior motive’ thing again “thomas r.”?
Not “all” fathers, Thomas R. Some fathers do a “disappearing act” on their daughters before they’re born.. :(
I apologize for my optimism Pamela. Yes, you are unfortunately correct. Still, there are plenty of good guys out there who yearn for the opportunity to be fathers. Don’t ever loose hope…
I put your moniker in parenthesis because it it s not reflective of its meaning “reality.” I use my proper name so parenthesis are not needed Sherlock. And since you missed my point entirely resident-philosopher Sir – it is a challenge to raise girls in the US. Fathers of girls have an enormous task ahead of them to raise their daughters to become strong women not in need to rely on the misleading girl-power propaganda.
That is my “alterior motive” and I am proud of it…
I think it’s a challenge to raise a child of either gender just about anywhere in the world “thomas r.”.
Fathers of girls have an enormous task ahead of them to raise their daughters to become strong women not in need to rely on the misleading girl-power propaganda. – seems a bit of an oxymoronic statement to me.
That is my “alterior motive” and I am proud of it… – so now you’re into witchcraft and sorcery?!? I am surprised.
But the USA is one of those nations where this challenge is more evident for girls tmeister. Just pick up the Seventeen Magazine and you will understand my point…
Not “all” fathers, Thomas R. Some fathers do a “disappearing act” on their daughters before they’re born.
Unfortunately, some fathers want their daughters destroyed before they are even born.
I was reading an interesting article about Sweden. Abortion is considered a “natural right” and its against the law for a doctor to refuse to do one if a woman requests it, even if goes against his or her conscience for any reason, even if it is a sex selection abortion. Its also illegal to homeschool your children; they can be taken away by the government.
I always hear about how great these Scandinavian countries are but I sometimes wonder.
Are you making fun or Thomas’ spelling, Reality? Do you know he is not an native speaker? Personally I thinks he writes English real good.
I misspell just to provide “reality” with material for commentary here phillymiss. So no worries Madame. He would not have much to comment on if I were non-engaging that way.
Scandinavian nations are liberal to an extreme, yes. They also tax their citizens beyond means to pay for these abortions and other “social programs.” Last figure I saw was about 40-60 percent range of income as taxable.
Not at all phillymiss. When he said ‘alterior motive’ I took him at his word. Hence my expressions of surprise at his allusions to witchcraft and sorcery.
Have you looked at factors such as crime rates, health standards, education access, teen pregnancies etc. etc. “thomas r.”?
You don’t need to misspell to provide me with material for commentary, what you say itself is sufficient.
Are you making fun or Thomas’ spelling, Reality? Do you know he is not an native speaker? Personally I thinks he writes English real good. – was it your intention to write this in parody? ;-)
(directed at Thomas not phillymiss)
I love how people only mention the tax rates in the Scandinavian countries but don’t mention they tend to score much higher than other developed countries on some very important quality of life markers. They have a lower abortion rate than we do, too, in general. But who cares about that? Taxes are bad the end kthanksbye.
Jack my internet compadre – taxes are not bad and neither did I state anything to that effect. I simply responded to phillymiss with info on the tax structure over there.
I doubt very much that many in this country would want their taxes go up so high (above 50 percent) when so much of this money is already wasted by the dems…
Have you looked at factors such as crime rates, health standards, education access, teen pregnancies etc. etc. “thomas r.?”
All those factors considered still does not excuse PP to happily abort a human being!
– our society is well equipped to handle crime rates. A challenge, yes, but we manage.
– health standards? I think you are referring to the lack of such at PP clinics.
– everyone in the US has access to education, some choose not to apply themselves and some choose to forfeit this opportunity at 16? Newsflash – Ivy League Universities accept candidates from all sorts of high schools.
– teen pregnancies? one of the main reasons PP performs abortions? You must be very proud “reality.”
All those factors considered still does not excuse PP to happily abort a human being! – this isn’t about PP. This is about your disparaging of those nations for being ‘liberal’ and having higher tax rates.
– our society is well equipped to handle crime rates. A challenge, yes, but we manage. – well that’s just marvellous! How about a lower crime rate to start with? Due to factors such as greater social equity and access to support services.
– health standards? I think you are referring to the lack of such at PP clinics. – no, you are doubly wrong. I’m referring to the vastly better acccess to healthcare in those other nations.
– everyone in the US has access to education, some choose not to apply themselves and some choose to forfeit this opportunity at 16? Newsflash – Ivy League Universities accept candidates from all sorts of high schools. – well isn’t that great. How about cost?
– teen pregnancies? one of the main reasons PP performs abortions? You must be very proud “reality.” – how about having a lower teen pregnancy rate to begin with “thomas r.”? Through real education and access to contraception.
Those countries with higher tax rates have lower negative social measures and outcomes and higher positive social measures and outcomes.
“well isn’t that great. How about cost?”
Or, you know, the fact that sixteen year olds aren’t fully mature yet and are heavily influenced by their family and peer environment. But no, it’s totally those kids faults for not applying themselves. And don’t talk to conservatives about cost, Reality. If you don’t want to put yourself in tens of thousands of dollars worth of debt than you are “keeping yourself poor”, but if you DO put yourself in that debt and have trouble finding a good job and paying off your loans, then they’ll say you should have worked harder. It’s really a useless argument.
Indeed Jack. I find it most incongruous that those who are most likely to adhere to creationism rather than evolution display such a propensity for society to operate on a survival of the fittest strategy.
It just really upsets me that people deny that the most important factor for educational success having a family that emphasizes and supports the value of education from an early age, in MOST cases, it takes a lot of family support and a positive peer group to be successful in school. There are the few people who make it out from terrible circumstances and such, but you can’t deny it’s far more difficult and unlikely if you don’t have a safe home to study in where you don’t have to worry about beatings or worse, parents to feed you sufficiently so you can concentrate properly, someone to help you if you don’t understand a subject, etc. There’s a “cycle” of poverty for a reason, just like there’s a “cycle” of violence. Kids who come home to abusive, neglectful, or unsupervised homes just don’t get the same values instilled in them that kids from safe and stable homes do. That is a highly difficult thing to overcome, and people generally end up perpetuating that instability and such onto their own kids. Pretending this phenomenon doesn’t exist, that it’s just lazy kids who all have the same opportunities and are forfeiting their opportunities, it’s just not accurate.
Here’s my take Jack:
I agree with circumstances that you describe but you seem to discount the person. I, conversely, give a lot of credit to abused children as I have seen many that overcame. Why? Simply because they possessed internal resources to do so. Intrinsic forces are important for anyone of us to succeed. When do we reach a point where we start taking responsibility for ourselves? I have said this to you many times: you have overcome and you are successful now.
I know many here do not like when I speak of leaving the past and going forward, and many don’t even like when I contradict what you write - but being stuck in the past does not help us.
And since you so focus on “caring families.” Are there those that read this blog who are intact and non-abusive/supportive parents and yet their children are educational slackers and as they have to stand over them just to do homework? Intact/non-abusive/supportive family does not really correlate with child’s success in school. It is intrinsically driven. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.
And for the love of God I was not pretending anything nor calling kids lazy. I am so tired of you misrepresenting my posts. Is it not a fact that many in the US call it quits and drop-out at 16? How many of these children do so in accordance with your theory that they do so due to having been abused or not having the support, and how many do so because they forfeit the opportunity of education for whatever reason even though they were from intact/non-abusive/supporftive families? The US has the highest drop-out rate in the world. Is it all because of circumstances you described? I think not…
I live for the future Jack (and for your info I have skeletons in my closet from my childhood as well so this is not just empty talk).
Regarding your October 30, 2013 at 6:39 pm post “reality:”
Social equity is not even achieved in socialist nations “reality.” When I was growing up in the Eastern Bloc, politicians/cops and their families had stores just for them where there were no lines and no rationing of food, and the rest of us had our stores that were stocked when the privileged stores had their deliveries done. Socialist nations adhere to a sort of a caste system even today. The equity factor is more of an abstract delusion. What you see in movies and read in the US pro-socialist propaganda ain’t it Sherlock…
You are also positing that those in need in the US, have no access to support services? That’s laughable….
“Simply because they possessed internal resources to do so. Intrinsic forces are important for anyone of us to succeed. When do we reach a point where we start taking responsibility for ourselves?”
Well we were talking about 16-year-olds, people should take responsibility for themselves when they are adults, but we were just talking about minors here I thought? And I do agree some people are intrinsically gifted with the ability to persevere through really bad odds, but the majority are not, especially when it comes to education (many people can make it through terrible childhoods, but it’s the rare one who manages to become successful in education). Some people just aren’t naturally scholastically gifted, I’m certainly not, and need more help then they receive in certain families. And anyway, I wasn’t speaking of me but I don’t get why you keep telling me I’m successful when I’m not, lol, I don’t even have a GED.
“I know many here do not like when I speak of leaving the past and going forward, and many don’t even like when I contradict what you write - but being stuck in the past does not help us.”
No, I AGREE people should leave the past and go forward and I really do try (and why would anyone care if you contradict me btw? lol). But there’s a difference between being “stuck in the past” and acknowledging that you have these issues from things you didn’t get/were done to you during your formative years and that they still affect you, and you have to figure out a way to work around them. They call them “formative years” for a reason. And again, I wasn’t speaking of adults, I was talking about 16-year-olds. I think you would agree with me that a sixteen year old still in an abusive or neglectful home isn’t doing anything wrong, they just haven’t been able to move forward yet?
“And since you so focus on “caring families.” Are there those that read this blog who are intact and non-abusive/supportive parents and yet their children are educational slackers and as they have to stand over them just to do homework? Intact/non-abusive/supportive family does not really correlate with child’s success in school. It is intrinsically driven. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink”
It really IS correlated though. Of course there are kids who just either aren’t cut out for education or are just naughty and lazy, even with excellent parents, just like there are kids with horrible parents who do really well. Trust me, I researched the crap out of all this over the summer because I was so worried I wouldn’t give my son the best chance for doing well in school when he started kindergarten this year. Educational success is highly correlated with proper nutrition, a stable and safe environment, and parents that are involved in their child’s actual school work (as in, going to parent’s night, knowing the teacher, going over homework with the child, setting boundaries when it comes to studying, etc). That doesn’t mean every child who has these things is going to do well, but it does make a difference. Especially when it comes to if you’re missing out on one of the factors that helps success. For example, kids that aren’t given a good bedtime (say their parent lets them stay up until midnight) and who don’t eat a decent breakfast tend to have lower test scores and more attention problems than kids that have these things, even all other things being more or less equal.
I do agree there are intrinsic factors. Some people simply have driven personalities and would succeed literally anywhere. Some people are simply not intelligent at all and would have trouble succeeding scholastically given any circumstances. People are different. That doesn’t change the fact that family structure and how they value education has a huge effect generally on how successful a kid is in education.
“And for the love of God I was not pretending anything nor calling kids lazy. I am so tired of you misrepresenting my posts.”
Ok, I think you might just be misunderstanding my writing style. I use a lot of hyperbole (I talk that way too, people get mad at me a lot lol) and it’s not meant to misrepresent you. That wasn’t even directed solely at you. It was more an exaggerated remark about the subset of people who think that scholastic achievement is almost entirely due to intrinsic factors, rather than external and environmental factors.
“Is it not a fact that many in the US call it quits and drop-out at 16? How many of these children do so in accordance with your theory that they do so due to having been abused or not having the support, and how many do so because they forfeit the opportunity of education for whatever reason even though they were from intact/non-abusive/supporftive families? The US has the highest drop-out rate in the world. Is it all because of circumstances you described?”
Of course it’s not all because of abusive circumstances (now you’re misrepresenting ME! :P). It’s not even entirely due to family structure (which isn’t nearly all abuse, some families simply don’t value education, some don’t understand or care about good nutrition, etc). Peer group is also a huge factor. The drop out rate is huge in certain areas and certain schools, because of this peer thing. People like to do what their friends are doing, that’s simply human nature, and dropping out becomes a really vicious cycle in certain areas because of this factor (more kids do it because other kids have, it just goes on and on). There’s also drug and alcohol use, which is more common in some areas and does contribute to school truancy and poor performance and drop out rates.
But anyway, like I said, intrinsic factors play a part for sure. Even people with tons of support drop out sometimes. I actually don’t agree that everyone should go on to get a college education or needs academic achievement. I think it’s a shame people don’t emphasize trades more, especially to children who are struggling academically. The world is always gonna need plumbers, mechanics, welders, etc and none of that requires formal education. So, dropping out doesn’t have to be 100% a bad thing, if we had our educational system set up to account for those who simply are never going to be able to or want to achieve academically.
“I live for the future Jack (and for your info I have skeletons in my closet from my childhood as well so this is not just empty talk).”
I don’t get why you say things like this to me. I am not talking about me, it’s not my parents fault I don’t have an education (though it was at least some their fault when I was a kid, I haven’t been a kid for a long time), it’s my fault because I can’t figure out how to afford an education and I don’t know what I would do with my kids, I can’t work full time plus full time kids plus full time school. Just haven’t figured that out yet. When I talk about the effects of abusive families, I’m usually just talking in general with maybe using myself as an EXAMPLE. I’m not making excuses for me being a loser or anything, so I don’t get why you keep making these remarks to me.
I responded to your general assertion that some do not succeed academically because of abusive parenting. I disagreed and argued my dissent. That was it. I am still unsure why you take everything personally? I respectfully ask that you re-read my comment again…
If you wish for me not to respond to your posts that I disagree with or just give you “likes” or affirm your every comment , just let me know (LOL)…
YOU ARE NOT A LOSER…..
“I responded to your general assertion that some do not succeed academically because of abusive parenting. I disagreed and argued my dissent. That was it. ”
Yeah, I think we just disagree on whether nature or nurture has a greater effect on development, is that where we are disagreeing? I do think nature plays a part but I think good nurture can often overcome some nature, and bad nurture can affect negatively even naturally talented or driven people.
“I am still unsure why you take everything personally? I respectfully ask that you re-read my comment again… ”
I’m not sure why I take things so personally, I certainly don’t do it intentionally. I think it’s a defense mechanism, but I really do try to honestly do it less. I’m sorry if I took things personally that weren’t meant that way, I do make up things in my head a lot without realizing it. It’s either my nature or the way I was “nurtured”, lol.
“If you wish for me not to respond to your posts that I disagree with or just give you “likes” or affirm your every comment , just let me know (LOL)…”
No I enjoy debating people! I’m just not always very good at it!
I hate Freud Jack but his defense mechanisms are still a part of today’s psychoanalytic theory for some reason (when all else has been abandoned). Just don’t buy too much into it as it surely will keep you in yesterday. The “why” question is such a can of worms so to speak..
I don’t know anything about Freud, and I don’t really understand your comment, and I’m not going to speculate for fear of misinterpreting you, lol.
But anyway Thomas, even if you are right and it doesn’t matter how kids are treated, that it doesn’t affect how they turn out and it’s something intrinsic that makes you do well, don’t you think people should err on the side of caution? I’d rather live in a world where people are worried about how their actions towards their children will affect their futures, rather than one where they don’t think it matters. I think some people will be more careful to consider how they are treating their kids if they think it might harm them permanently.
I am so tired of you misrepresenting my posts “thomas r.”. And you even do it to your own!
We weren’t talking about socialist nations. You spoke of Scandinavia in regards to taxation and liberalism, not the Baltic States or the Eastern Bloc. So your sentence The equity factor is more of an abstract delusion. What you see in movies and read in the US pro-socialist propaganda ain’t it Sherlock…is totally irrelevant and a thinly-veiled attempt at denial of the facts.
You are also positing that those in need in the US, have no access to support services? That’s laughable…. – and here you are misrepresenting my posts again.
There is no need to discuss “access to support services” because there is access and always will be. The actual need some “services” do not serve is the more relevant issue…
Social policies (no matter their effectiveness even in Scandinavia) do not guarantee or even cause social equity so my response is still 100 percent valid. Social equity in any nation that offers social programs is non-existent. High and progressive taxation is not going to affect that..
“I don’t know anything about Freud, and I don’t really understand your comment, and I’m not going to speculate for fear of misinterpreting you, lol.”
I was responding to your comment in which you indicated that you may take things personally as a defense mechanism Jack. So you do understand the concept methinks. If not read up on Freud and defense mechanisms. Make sure you are securely sitting down though (LOL)…
There is no need to discuss “access to support services” because there is access and always will be. – what ignorance. The amount of services available, their ease and timeliness of accessability and their cost is highly relevant.
The actual need some “services” do not serve is the more relevant issue… – exactly. And that’s where Scandinavia puts the US to shame.
Social policies (no matter their effectiveness even in Scandinavia) do not guarantee or even cause social equity so my response is still 100 percent valid. – no, it’s 100 percent refusal to accept the facts because of your base doctrines.
Social equity in any nation that offers social programs is non-existent. – what a pure display of sheer, unadulterated ignorance.
High and progressive taxation is not going to affect that.. – it is self-evident that it does.