Single celebrities pregnancies?

Question

why do you suppose no one expects single pregnant celebs to give their children up? example: jamie lynn spears.

Answer 1

Jamie Lynn is not just a single celebrity, she is a 16 year old, that's completely different from other unmarried pregnant celebs like Jessica Alba.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say; people don't expect non-celebrity single pregnant women to give up their babies.  It's presented as an option if they don't want to raise the baby.  In the case of teen pregnancies, a girl may feel more pressure to consider adoption because she has no means to support a baby, but Jamie Lynn does.

Answer 2

Probably because placing a child for adoption still has such a huge stigma attached to it. First mothers are not honored and respected for their choice to  place their children, instead they are called s***s, and told they should have kept their legs closed if they didn't want to keep their baby.

People can be very smug about how they were in the exact same situation( which can't possibly be true, no ones situation is exactly the same) and they still kept their child, so why can't you?

Answer 3

because they're rich and can afford nannies and every other luxury....their babies will never go without material things.

Answer 4

i wouldn't EXPECT any single person to give their baby up, but everyone has their own reasons.  maybe because it's not "socially acceptable" and everybody would judge them or because they have the money to take care of them.

Answer 5

I dont think people think PAP's are better parents. But they may be in a better situation to take care of the babies.  Jamie Lynn Spears has so much stuff she is going to be missing out on in her life once she has her baby.

Answer 6

Usually people give up their kids because of financial reasons, and celebs don't have that problem, so they get nannies and in spears' case she will also grow up and hopefully take charge unlike her older sis.

Answer 7

Honestly, I think it is more about being famous than the money.  I'm referring to Jamie Lynn Spears here, if she were not famous, or had a famous sister, there would be far less scrutiny on her pregnancy and subsequent decisions.

But seriously, even if it were a "closed" adoption, don't you think that it would somehow be leaked to the press who were the adoptive parents?  Photographers showing up at your house, putting your life under a microscope and you can't raise your child in peace.  What a nightmare!

It is going to be very hard for this baby regardless.  Money doesn't ensure good parenting, by any means, and is often used to try to substitute quality time and love.  Jamie Lynn will be criticized for parenting, criticized if she has an abortion, criticized if she places for adoption, criticized if she puts her career on hold and tries to be the best mom she can, and criticized if she keeps working on her career and employs a nanny.  The price of fame, I suppose, but the girl is only 16.  It's  a no-win situation.

Answer 8

Who says she shouldn't ;0)  I don't expect anyone to give up their child, that is a decision, along with abortion or raising the child each mother must decide for herself.  I do not begrudge her that decision.

Maybe when people have money though they assume they have the supports that a younger less finaicial stable woman does.  Also when adopting you bet they are looking for financial stable people, not that we can parent better for having money, but in fact we wouldn't even consider parenting until we knew we wouldn't have to struggle, adn to give our children advantages, but that is a decision for ourself.

Answer 9

they have money. Besides, a lot of folks do think the little spears kid should give up the kid.