If three or four people want to raise a family together,* the kids would be probably be even better off than a double parenting. There’s probably a point of diminishing returns—I wouldn’t want to be raised by a hundred parents. But I doubt two is the optimal number.
From the parents perspective, most people aren’t interested in a poly relationship. And most poly relationships aren’t stable for the 20 years it takes to create an adult. So while a poly relationship might be better for the kids, it isn’t always feasible.
Now I wouldn’t begrudge anyone, even a single person, who wanted to reproduce and had the money and time to do so. Even if a child is raised in a sub-optimal family structure, she’s still better off than if her parent(s) had decided not to reproduce at all. But we can value the contributions of sub-optimal family structures without pretending that they are optimal.
*”Together” is the operative word here. Two couples living in separate houses trading kids every other weekend isn’t going to cut it.
And most poly relationships aren’t stable for the 20 years it takes to create an adult.
looks at divorce rate I’d say there’s not really a lot of evidence that most monogamous relationships are stable either. Do you have any particular reason to be claiming that poly relationships would produce a less stable environment for the kid?
Poly groups tend to be well-educated well-paid white people; the proper comparison of poly instability rates to monogamous divorce rates is not to ‘the general population’ but to the comparable demographic group. My understanding was that divorce rates in that comparable group are relatively low...
Poly groups tend to be well-educated well-paid white people
I’m baffled by this. Are you saying most studies tend to be done on this group? Do you mean in the US? Are you referring to groups who call themselves poly, or the general practice of honest nonmonogamy?
As you discuss in the dropbox link, this is a pretty massive selection bias. I’d suggest that this invalidates any statement made on the basis of these studies about “poly people,” since most poly people seem not to be included. People all over the world are poly, in every country, of every race and class.
It’s as if we did a study of “rationalists” and only included people on LW, ignoring any scientists, policy makers, or evidence-based medical researchers, simply because they didn’t use the term “rationalist.”
You state:
While polyamory communities have blossomed for decades in the USA (cf. Munson and Stelboum 1999a; Anderlini-D’Onofrio 2004c), polyamory is still quite unknown in Europe. The social organisation of polyamorous communities is not very advanced in most European countries.
Clearly polyamory is not unknown in Europe, though the word “polyamory” might be. Let’s not confuse polyamory, which exists anytime someone openly dates two people, with socially organized communities using the term “polyamory.”
Sorry, I couldn’t tell what was a quote and what wasn’t.
Polyamory is usually defined as honest nonmonogamy. In other words, any time someone is dating two people openly, that’s poly. It’s how many humans naturally behave. It doesn’t require exposure to US poly communities, or any community in general for that matter.
Many humans behave in a serial monogamy manner—which is not poly. Many humans behave in a covert polygamy manner—which is not poly. Whether there is very much left after that which matches US polyamory, I wouldn’t know...
I was wondering, more, has there been any actual research done on this question, or is this just speculation based on personal anecdote? Are we comparing actual “married” poly groups, or are we comparing monogamous marriage to polyamorous dating?
I’ve never seen anything beyond personal opinion and armchair philosophy that suggests that mature polyamorous relationships are less stable than mature monogamous ones. The bias mostly seems to be from observing people who are new to polyamory (where the proper comparison would be with people new to monogamy—a group that mostly consists of teenagers and an incredible amount of drama :))
If three or four people want to raise a family together,* the kids would be probably be even better off than a double parenting. There’s probably a point of diminishing returns—I wouldn’t want to be raised by a hundred parents. But I doubt two is the optimal number.
From the parents perspective, most people aren’t interested in a poly relationship. And most poly relationships aren’t stable for the 20 years it takes to create an adult. So while a poly relationship might be better for the kids, it isn’t always feasible.
Now I wouldn’t begrudge anyone, even a single person, who wanted to reproduce and had the money and time to do so. Even if a child is raised in a sub-optimal family structure, she’s still better off than if her parent(s) had decided not to reproduce at all. But we can value the contributions of sub-optimal family structures without pretending that they are optimal.
*”Together” is the operative word here. Two couples living in separate houses trading kids every other weekend isn’t going to cut it.
looks at divorce rate I’d say there’s not really a lot of evidence that most monogamous relationships are stable either. Do you have any particular reason to be claiming that poly relationships would produce a less stable environment for the kid?
Poly groups tend to be well-educated well-paid white people; the proper comparison of poly instability rates to monogamous divorce rates is not to ‘the general population’ but to the comparable demographic group. My understanding was that divorce rates in that comparable group are relatively low...
I’m baffled by this. Are you saying most studies tend to be done on this group? Do you mean in the US? Are you referring to groups who call themselves poly, or the general practice of honest nonmonogamy?
Yes, yes, and former.
As you discuss in the dropbox link, this is a pretty massive selection bias. I’d suggest that this invalidates any statement made on the basis of these studies about “poly people,” since most poly people seem not to be included. People all over the world are poly, in every country, of every race and class.
It’s as if we did a study of “rationalists” and only included people on LW, ignoring any scientists, policy makers, or evidence-based medical researchers, simply because they didn’t use the term “rationalist.”
You state:
Clearly polyamory is not unknown in Europe, though the word “polyamory” might be. Let’s not confuse polyamory, which exists anytime someone openly dates two people, with socially organized communities using the term “polyamory.”
I think that remains to be seen, unless one is quietly defining away polyamory as a dull negation of monogamy.
I didn’t state that; Klesse did. Between you and Klesse, I know who I will put more weight on.
Sorry, I couldn’t tell what was a quote and what wasn’t.
Polyamory is usually defined as honest nonmonogamy. In other words, any time someone is dating two people openly, that’s poly. It’s how many humans naturally behave. It doesn’t require exposure to US poly communities, or any community in general for that matter.
Many humans behave in a serial monogamy manner—which is not poly. Many humans behave in a covert polygamy manner—which is not poly. Whether there is very much left after that which matches US polyamory, I wouldn’t know...
I was wondering, more, has there been any actual research done on this question, or is this just speculation based on personal anecdote? Are we comparing actual “married” poly groups, or are we comparing monogamous marriage to polyamorous dating?
I’ve never seen anything beyond personal opinion and armchair philosophy that suggests that mature polyamorous relationships are less stable than mature monogamous ones. The bias mostly seems to be from observing people who are new to polyamory (where the proper comparison would be with people new to monogamy—a group that mostly consists of teenagers and an incredible amount of drama :))
Actual research? I’m not sure. There’s not a whole lot that I found: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5317066/2012-gwern-polyamory.txt
The third parent’s title is typically something like “nanny” or “governess” or “tutor,” and they specialize in a particular age bracket.