Ok, so a high percentage of families break up due to financial problems. Obviously many women and men marry for financial security and prestige first and other things like "True Love" a distant secondary motive.
My question is this: Do you think two people that have children while really living together for material reasons rather than "chemistry" has any bearing on the health and genetics of their children?
Do you think these children can be more likely to be born with health problems than children of those people that truly love each other?
Nature has a weird way of punishing people for being greedy and untrue to one's true feelings and I think this can have an effect on health of such people's offspring.
Thoughts?
And many kids in America have many health problems. They range from physical problems to psychological problems such as depression that lead to drug therapy. Many American kids are on drugs from very early ages.
I dont think that kids have problems because the parents dont trulely love eachother but if there is some kind of abuse in the home that causes the mother to have mental or physical issues I believe it does affect the child. If a mother is depressed or angry all the time it can have a negative affect but not because they simply dont love eachother IMO.
The Father is involved with the issue only if he is causeing harm either mentaly or physicaly to the mother. I dont see how the emotions of the father y himsalf or the lack of love he has for the mother cause any type of brth complication or child illness/handicap unless the mother goes through some type of trauma due to the acts.
Now having said that and being a child of parents who did not love eachother and a father who left when I was young, I will say that after the child is born there can be serious adverse affects on the child due to the situation at home caused by both parents. These are common issue like violence, depression, aboandonment issues resulting in overly dependent children and causinf the child to be unable to function in a relationship no matter how serious sometimes even friendship is hard.
I absolutely agree Clone the development up to age 5 is crucial and it is best for the child to have both parents present at least during that time is the situation is healthy.
You guys have missed my point a little. Yes, a child's development can have problems with parents that don't really love each other. However, there are many factors such as environment that can do that as well.
My main question was different. See, Nature doesn't adapt very fast to people's changing socio-economic environment. This is evident from the high rates of obesity for example due to the ability of food, sedentary jobs and a lot of comfort from technology. All those things are great and yet people become sick from it.
So, I believe that Nature's mechanism for human selection of mates has a purpose in it where people "truly" love only those people with whom they can have the best offspring. Now, this changing socio-economic notion where a person's feelings can be ignored if there are a lot of numbers in his mate's personal bank account or his family comes from "rich blood" in my opinion upsets the right physiological environment necessary for a healthy offspring.
Now, this of course doesn't happen every time but I think it is highly likely.
My question is this: Do you think two people that have children while really living together for material reasons rather than "chemistry" has any bearing on the health and genetics of their children?
Do you think these children can be more likely to be born with health problems than children of those people that truly love each other?
What is the nexus between the two? People across this planet, from a variety of cultures marry for a variety of reasons. How do you isolate “chemistry” or define its presence or quantify consequences? It seems you are chasing an undefined enigma.
Using nature as your standard, there are very few animals that mate for life. Among those that do, do you attribute it to love or just instinct? How do these and those animals that do not mate for life fit into your model?
My simple answer is: no.
[Long term] physical health [trends] has probably more to do with the adjustment to the vagaries of the human condition.
Family and children health problems 
Linear Mode
