United Airlines is introducing a new seating option aimed at making long flights more comfortable, especially for families traveling with young children. 
The airline recently unveiled &#8220;Relax Row,&#8221; which transforms three adjacent economy seats into a lie-flat space. The feature, announced on social media, is expected to roll out in 2027.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The entire row is alllllll yours.
Welcome to United Relax Row, three adjacent United Economy seats with adjustable leg rests that can each be raised or lowered to create a cozy lie-flat space for stretching out&#8230;
You&#8217;ll also get a mattress pad, blanket and two pillows. If… <a href="https://t.co/Q6gcOuXbXo">pic.twitter.com/Q6gcOuXbXo</a>
— United Airlines (@united) <a href="https://twitter.com/united/status/2036505633470431412?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“The entire row is alllllll yours,” the X caption says. “Welcome to United Relax Row, three adjacent United Economy seats with adjustable leg rests that can each be raised or lowered to create a cozy lie-flat space for stretching out.”
Passengers will also receive a mattress pad, blanket, and two pillows. Families traveling with children will be offered a plush toy. United said the option would be available on more than 200 Boeing 787 and 777 aircraft, with up to 12 designated rows per plane.
According to the airline, the setup is designed to give travelers more flexibility and comfort.
“Whether you’re traveling as a family, solo or as a couple, you’ll have the freedom to stretch out, cozy up and make the journey your own,” United said on its website.
The announcement drew mostly positive reactions online.
“Much needed. United is innovating faster than anyone,” one reply <a href="https://x.com/DrWilliamBrady/status/2036532429846917544">said</a>.
“Good idea. Finally, something new from the airlines,” another commenter <a href="https://x.com/LeviSpires/status/2036519609558262177">replied</a>.
“May this set the standard for more child-friendly travel!” a third <a href="https://x.com/The_Nomad_News/status/2036613595925303521">added</a>.
United has not yet released details on pricing or how the seats will be booked.
This is the second encouraging update from the airline, which made <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/united-airlines-threatens-to-ban-passengers-who-make-this-noisy-faux-pas">headlines</a> recently when it added language to its contract of carriage stating it may refuse to transport passengers who fail to use headphones while listening to audio or video content. 
A spokesperson for United noted that headphone use had long been encouraged.
“We’ve always encouraged customers to use headphones when listening to audio content — and our Wi-Fi rules already remind customers to use headphones,” the spokesperson said. “With the expansion of Starlink, it seemed like a good time to make that even clearer by adding it to the contract of carriage.”
The policy change was widely supported on social media, with many travelers saying it addressed a long-standing frustration and should become standard across the airline industry.

Traveling family

United Airlines Just Changed The Game For Families Traveling With Kids

Air Travel

Airlines

Parenting

United Airlines

Large American Family Group Gathering

Why Kicking Your Kids Out At 18 Is Actually Insane

Children

family

Family Values

Gen Z

Marriage

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Teenagers

A new ad for Disney Cruise Line is receiving rave reviews online thanks to its pro-family messaging and touching storyline.
The 90-second ad “Midnight Magic,” which debuted on Sunday during the Academy Awards, focuses on a father’s bond with his son. 
It opens with a father walking his infant son around on the ship in the middle of the night. The ad follows the pair as the son grows into an older kid and then a teen who briefly rejects the ritual. This heartwarming tale ends when the adult son knocks on the door and asks his now elderly father to go for a late-night walk on the cruise ship with him and his young daughter. 
Social media users loved the message of present fathers, family traditions, and making memories.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Where Magic Meets The Sea | Disney Cruise Line" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yw922nyPxZs?start=3&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
“Challenge any father to watch this without crying,” one commenter <a href="https://x.com/mondoggg/status/2033347711261348292">wrote</a>. 
“You crushed it with this one!!  Dads are amazing and well worth those quiet moments of reflection and the impact it has on kids. Love this!!!” another <a href="https://x.com/oyveynottoday/status/2033608013773148624">said</a>. 
Other commenters delighted in the company promoting traditional values once again.
“Back to the basics Disney..  your BRAND was built on this RIGHT HERE….,” one person <a href="https://x.com/THEprivbnkr/status/2033374671379247267">responded</a>.
“You guys really nailed it with this,” another reply <a href="https://x.com/JoshChavis65/status/2033351196174360701">said</a>. “More of this from this brand, please. It’s what it’s supposed to be.”
“The culture shift is real, this Disney cruise ship ad aimed at dads is fantastic,” echoed <a href="https://x.com/claytravis/status/2033719663624888745?s=43">another</a>.
“Disney has brought families closer together for generations,” <a href="https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/news/midnight-magic-cruise-line/">said</a> Asad Ayaz, Chief Marketing and Brand Officer for The Walt Disney Company. “This campaign embodies what guests tell us time and again: that the Disney experiences they cherish most are the ones spent with the people they love. We’re grateful to make that kind of Disney magic a reality.”
The ad comes as fans speculate over Disney veering away from the woke path it had been traveling down. The entertainment giant ended 2024 by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/will-woke-exit-stage-left-hollywoods-culture-clash-in-trumps-second-act">erasing a trans character</a> from one of their shows, followed weeks later by walking back their DEI policies.
While Disney hasn’t done a complete about-face, the company has been less controversial over the last year, especially as compared to when it was bragging about a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” in 2022.

Disney Cruise

Did Disney Finally Get The Memo? Surprising New Cruise Ad Has Viewers In Tears

Disney Got The Memo? New Cruise Ad Celebrating Dads Has Viewers In Tears

advertising

Disney

fatherhood

Fathers

Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an important ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta, a case addressing whether schools can implement policies that deliberately exclude parents from critical decisions about their children’s well-being. The Court answered that question with a clear and resounding no.
In its order, the Court reinstated a prior injunction, barring California schools from enforcing policies that conceal students’ gender transitions from parents or require teachers to use names or pronouns inconsistent with biological sex. Under these rules, this information was withheld from parents unless the child consented. Naturally, many parents and teachers challenged these policies, arguing that they violated constitutional rights.
The Court agreed that the parents raising religious objections are likely to win their claims under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause. The justices also found that the policies are likely to interfere with parents’ long-recognized constitutional right to direct the upbringing and care of their children under the Fourteenth Amendment.
In reaching that conclusion, the Court relied on decades of precedent that affirm the role of parents in guiding their children’s development, including Wisconsin v. Yoder and Troxel v. Granville. The message is straightforward: when it comes to consequential decisions affecting a child’s identity, mental health, and moral development, the government cannot simply push parents aside.
This ruling arrives amid a broader national debate over how schools respond to students experiencing gender dysphoria. In many districts, policies have emerged that treat transgender identity as a matter between the student and the school, <a href="https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/protecting-children-from-social-transition-act">rather than between the child and their family</a>. Supporters argue that such policies protect vulnerable students. But the Court’s decision highlights a critical problem: removing parents from the conversation can undermine the very support systems children need most.
Parents are typically the first line of care when a child is struggling emotionally or psychologically. The Court recognized this reality, noting that <a href="https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/gender-dysphoria-and-the-social-transition-intervention">gender dysphoria</a> is a condition with significant <a href="https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/gender-dysphoria-and-the-social-transition-intervention">mental health implications</a>. When schools conceal information about a child’s confusion with their biological sex from parents, they risk shutting out those most responsible for providing guidance, counseling, and medical care.
The Court’s reasoning also exposes an uncomfortable truth that has been too often ignored in public policy debates: decisions about “gender” identity during adolescence can have profound and lasting consequences.
That reality becomes particularly important as more individuals speak openly about the experience of detransition — discontinuing gender transition procedures after coming to regret them. While research on detransition remains limited, emerging evidence suggests that some young people who went through so-called “gender affirming care” did so because of social pressure. Others say the real reason for their psychological distress was not addressed, and the transition process only further complicated their existing pain.
This is why parental involvement matters. Adolescence is a time of rapid emotional and cognitive development. Decisions made during that process should not occur in isolation from parents who are legally and morally responsible for their children’s welfare.
This week, advocates and researchers will observe Detransition Awareness Day on March 12. The day highlights the experiences of individuals who have reversed or questioned their earlier identification as transgender and seeks to promote better research and support for those navigating a similar path.
Their stories underscore an important point: the debate surrounding our biological sex is not simply theoretical. It involves real people whose lives are shaped by the policies adopted by schools, medical institutions, and governments.
Acknowledging detransition means recognizing the complexity of adolescent identity and the need for careful, responsible approaches that prioritize long-term well-being.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Mirabelli does not resolve every problem that surrounds the gender topic, but the ruling establishes a vital principle: parents cannot be treated as obstacles in their children’s lives. In fact, they are the opposite – parents are the people primarily responsible for guiding their children through the most difficult and formative stages of adolescence. To exclude them from decisions that carry permanent, harmful, and lasting consequences is contrary to the very concept of what it means to raise a child.
As the nation reflects on detransition and the broader questions surrounding the gender issue, policymakers would do well to remember what the Court reaffirmed this week — families matter, and parents deserve a seat at the table.
* * *
Dr. Jennifer Bauwens is America First Policy Institute’s Director of American Values.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Mother hold hand schoolboy walking to bus. Energetic pupils running crossway.

The Parent Trap: The Detransition Reality Schools Tried To Hide From Moms And Dads

California

detransitioner

Parental Rights in Education

Parents rights

Public Schools

Supreme Court

Transgender

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
I’ve spent my entire life watching people’s eyes widen when they discover I have 10 siblings.
“Any twins?” they always ask.
&#8220;Nope.&#8221;
“All from the same parents?” they wonder.
“Yes!” I tell them.
“It must be loud around there,” they laugh.
It&#8217;s louder than you think. And I wouldn’t have it any other way.
So you can imagine my amusement when I stumble upon very-online big family debaters clutching their pearls over influencer Hannah Neelman — better known as Ballerina Farm — and her nine children.
Some argue that big families just aren&#8217;t for everyone. Others, like pro-abortion playwright Rebecca Reid, suggest parents of large families cannot give their children adequate “time, attention, and connection.”
Very few people, if any, are telling young women that they must have big families. We do hear constant warnings about how unfathomably hard and expensive children are and how children limit your freedom, your fun, and your time with your spouse. On the flip side, we also hear constant chatter about how women can balance career and family if they truly want to. Are we not allowed to hear about the women, like my mother, who defied the world and raised a clan at home?
As the oldest daughter and second-oldest child in a very large family, I can tell you firsthand that big families are not universally wealthy, and parents of such broods certainly aren’t calculating how much each child costs before they make the decision to have one more. These mothers and fathers look at life and family differently.
When you ask them how many children they are going to have, they’ll probably tell you with a big smile, “As many as God sends us.” And if you question how on Earth they plan to pull this off, they will probably say something to the effect of what my own mother told me: “God gives you the grace, one child and one day at a time.”
Families like mine don’t have a dozen children to “own the libs” or populate an aesthetic Instagram page. They’re open to life and to as many children as God blesses them with based on their deeply held religious convictions. They view each child as a gift from God, and they trust that He will provide for them.
I’m well aware that this reasoning sounds crazy to secular outsiders. But at the end of the day, does it matter? God has, in fact, provided for us, and my siblings and parents are the greatest blessings of my life.
<div id="attachment_1055369" style="width: 778px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1055369" class="size-large wp-image-1055369" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-768x576.jpeg" alt="" width="768" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-768x576.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-300x225.jpeg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-1536x1152.jpeg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_7618-2-2048x1536.jpeg 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 768px) 100vw, 768px" />The author and a smattering of siblings.</div>
I could never imagine life without my six brothers: Tommy, Patrick, Michael, Barry, Daniel, and Seamus. I certainly can’t picture a world without my sisters: Catherine, Theresa, Janey, and Brigid. While we may all look alike, thanks to some good Irish genes, each one of us was uniquely created and brings a diverse array of talents, interests, virtues, and vices to the table. It has been my parents’ role to sort through all of that and to raise us to be the men and women we were created to be.
A large family necessitates a different kind of lifestyle than a smaller family might have, of course: My parents didn’t take our growing family on exotic vacations, and when I was a child, we had PB&amp;J lunches and spaghetti dinners probably more often than my father and mother would have liked. There isn’t as much room in the budget for going out to eat after sports practice or daytime kid activities. The other big families I have known throughout the course of my life are largely the same.
I have never wished for anything different. When I think about my childhood, I don’t really even remember the PB&amp;Js, except maybe the 11 I made for an infamous road trip. (The siblings still accuse me of sitting on them. I maintain my innocence.)
<div id="attachment_1055393" style="width: 877px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1055393" class="size-large wp-image-1055393" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-867x576.png" alt="" width="867" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-867x576.png 867w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-300x199.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1-768x510.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/image1.png 1253w" sizes=" (max-width: 867px) 100vw, 867px" />The author giving piggybacks.</div>
What I do remember is eagerly waiting by the phone with my grandmother and the other kids as my parents called from the hospital to tell us that our ninth child would be a boy (Daniel, who now towers over me at 6&#8217;3&#8243; and texts me after my TV hits to say, “Well done, Marg”). Believe it or not, I cried that day because I wanted a girl. I got her when my mother had our 10th baby, Brigid, my goddaughter and close friend.
I remember sitting at the kitchen table with all the siblings, a toddler on my lap as always, as we begged my dad for stories about his childhood in Massachusetts, or standing, at his request, on the brick hearth of our fireplace with my sisters to sing Irish ballads to company.
I think of our cozy school days all working away in our makeshift classroom, my mom waking us up early to go to daily Mass, hours and hours of sister doll games, swinging the baby to sleep on the play set, and the fun we had teaching the little ones to walk, play games, and propose like Mr. Darcy (jury’s out on that one, but we tried).
In functioning big families, kids necessarily help out with chores, with babies, and with each other. We each had our designated chores every day, and we did them with gusto. To this day, we help each other review resumes, emails, job applications, middle school papers, you name it.
Eleven kids means 55 unique relationships between the siblings, and in big families, those relationships hold so many possibilities: the friend, the mentor, the confidante, the babysitter, the tutor, the partner in crime. As we grow older and start families of our own, those relationships necessarily evolve.
The constant in our lives remains the same: We are the Olohan family, and we will always be there for one another.
Of course, the life of a big family is not without its crosses. I grew up with a number of large families, including my own, who have dealt with hardship and tragedy. We know that nothing worth having is easily come by, and for my part, I know I’m very lucky to have been given the parents God gave me. As I’m sure my readers are well aware, every family is the product of the caliber of its parents, and mine are made of good stuff.
Being open to the children God sends you is absolutely a leap of faith. It’s a leap of faith that my parents took and the parents of most big families take. It&#8217;s a surrendering of your will, time and time again, and it&#8217;s a beautiful sacrifice with a beautiful reward. As my grandmother, the mother of 10, would tell us, “Love multiplies; it never divides.”
That is why failing to include God in the conversation about big families doesn&#8217;t make any sense. He’s woven into every step of the way.
***
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Father carrying baby son while pulling four children in a wagon

I’m One Of 11 Kids. Here’s Why The Internet Doesn’t Realize Big Families Are Great.

kids

Religion

Upstream

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
In the first two months of 2026, there were <a href="https://x.com/GunDeaths/status/2026794212671332570">more than 50</a> mass shootings in the U.S., many in schools and churches. Assassination attempts on public figures have swelled. We see constant talk about syndromes such as &#8220;gender dysphoria&#8221; that were once almost unknown. At elite institutions such as Stanford University, four out of 10 students now <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-university-student-accommodation/684946/">claim</a> they have a disability. These occurrences illustrate a troubling paradox.
Americans today are wealthier than ever before. We&#8217;ve jumped ahead of Europeans and other developed nations in national economic growth and household income. Our technology has dramatically improved. Our houses are much more comfortable. Our medical care and diets are richer. Yet all around us, especially among the young, we see record levels of depression and loneliness, addiction, crime, educational failure, economic disappointment, and community decline.
There is a root to these social and psychological maladies: the explosion of out-of-wedlock births, divorce, single-parenting, father flight, careerism, and child neglect that began in the 1960s. More than half of all young Americans now live separated from one or both of their parents for at least part of their childhood. Millions of kids from all income levels, races, and localities bear scars from family instability.
Youth suicide jumped 62% from 2007 to 2021. Drug-overdose deaths among young people were nearly twice as high in 2022 as 10 years earlier. In 2023, 4,450 kids were killed by guns, most of them by other youths. Family breakdown now drives many of our collective social problems: poverty, homelessness, street crime, drug abuse, educational failure, and economic lags.
These heartaches and these social problems will not go away until we manage to knit mothers and fathers and children more tightly together in natural families (biological parents committed to each other and their children). Such families are not perfect, but as a source of human happiness and success, they greatly surpass single-parent families, step-families, scientifically designed group homes, hired care, and every other alternative that has been tried.
You see, we Homo sapiens have a serious biological problem called childhood. As Harvard scientist Stephen Jay Gould pointed out, &#8220;Human babies are born as embryos, and embryos they remain for about the first nine months of life.&#8221; If humans were born at the stage of development more typical of other mammals, a baby would remain in utero for up to a year longer than the nine months it already does. The reason we are born &#8220;premature&#8221; instead is elemental: Very few female pelvises could expel a neonate the size of a one-year-old infant. Human labor is already quite difficult compared to that of other animals, and newborns are only 40% the size of the average one-year-old.
Premature birth solves a human physiological dilemma, but it creates a cultural one. Monkey infants can navigate independently and find and cling to their mother when they need her. Newborn horses can run from danger just a few hours after birth. Other animals can hunt, dig, swim, or fly within days of their arrival into the world. But human young remain utterly helpless for an extended period, unable even to control their own temperature, see clearly, grasp, or roll over. Even the healthiest of babies thus requires intensive care and supervision.
And the incapability of humans extends far beyond infancy. It is a long time before we are finally able to survive on our own. Most mammals are autonomous and essentially full-grown within a single season, but it takes our brains about 15 annual cycles to reach their final capacity, and our bodies even a little longer. We are far slower to develop to independent maturity than any other living creature.
This problem is made even knottier by the fact that human culture is so complex that no individual can begin to be a competent citizen until he or she has undergone years and years worth of intensive acculturation. We must absorb millions of bits of information from our progenitors — on everything from desirable foods to language — before we can safely navigate our world.
The combined result of our premature launch and our heavy dependence upon cultural transmission is an extraordinarily long and demanding childhood. Absent a critical cultural adaptation, human beings could never have thrived in the face of this constraint. But they did fashion an adaptation, and a brilliant one: the family. The traditional family was a way of capturing the energy of the male parent as well as the female and channeling it into the rearing of the young.
In this way, mothers gained an ally to help them through their vulnerable periods of pregnancy and lactation. Frail youngsters won the benefit of not one but two protectors, producers, and caretakers. And under this joint nurturing structure, reproductive success soared. Even prior to the advent of the civilized era, one out of every two human babies survived to adulthood, thanks to the aid of their families. This compares to between 10 and 30% for other primates and group-hunting carnivores, which lack any counterpart to the nuclear family. And parent-guided humans turned out to be unusually competent creatures, bearers of a rich culture.
By stitching fathers to mothers and mothers to fathers, and weaving both to their children in a mission of mutual aid, the traditional family allowed humans to transcend brutish self-interest and produce higher civilization in its full splendor.
The evidence for this is ample and ancient. In 1978, anthropologist Mary Leakey made a breathtaking discovery in a fossil lava bed in East Africa: the first human footprints, 3.6 million years old. They clearly indicate two creatures walking upright, between four and five feet tall, one larger than the other, apparently a male and a female. They were walking next to each other, perhaps holding hands, Leakey thinks. There is also a third set of prints, much smaller, belonging to a child. These are carefully placed within the larger prints — as a youngster playfully following his parents through soft ground would do. Leakey&#8217;s find disputes the claim that the traditional family was invented in Victorian Europe, or some other moment, and forced on humanity by narrow-minded manipulators.
Over the last generation, heaps of research findings have proven the irreplaceable benefits of the natural family, particularly when it comes to raising healthy children. I recently collected some of this evidence in a book, and it demonstrates clearly that where the traditional family is in trouble, there will be trouble all across society. This is no longer scientifically controversial. It is merely inconvenient for ideologues promoting the kind of radical individualism, sexual autonomy, and economic selfishness that are incompatible with loyal family life.
As I summarize in my book, biology, human history, recent psychological discoveries, and much more demonstrate that the traditional family is a natural and irreplaceable component of human society. It will be with us so long as our civilization flourishes. And if natural families continue to crumble, no amount of money, technology, personal liberation, artificial intelligence, or wishful thinking will be able to fend off the chaos that results when wounded youngsters grow into our next generation of citizens.
***
Karl Zinsmeister is author of the new book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Family-will-never-obsolete/dp/B0GQBD7JV3">&#8220;The Natural Family Will Never Be Obsolete.&#8221;</a> He has written 20 other books and served in the White House and U.S. Senate as a policy adviser.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

GettyImages-1345161790

America’s Kids Are In Crisis — One Cultural Shift May Explain Why

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
I have an MBA from the University of Florida but struggle with basic algebra. I have traveled to 36 states but can only confidently name the capitals of 12. I can name all nine Supreme Court justices but don’t know how desert plants adapted to conserve water. Apparently, it’s not because they “try really hard.” Fifth-grade homework sucks.
But here I am on most nights slapping down the assignment in front of one of my kids, puffing my chest out and saying, “Let’s knock this out!” Three minutes later, I’m googling the capital of Wyoming and reevaluating my life.
Homework creates as much frustration for my children as it does for me. We share equally in the struggle to get through it. It’s certainly not where I’d think we were forging our bond. It’s natural to think rules create resentment, but it turns out that homework may be building our relationship, not harming it. Hard parenting has positive consequences. 
Research from the Institute of Family Studies <a href="https://ifstudies.org/blog/hard-parenting-better-relationships-new-evidence">discovered</a> that “parental-enforced rules are mostly associated with better relationships with kids, both in the parent’s own assessment of their relationship, and the assessments of the subsample of teenage children surveyed.” 
The study looked at factors such as strict curfew, strict bedtime, screen time limits, dedicated homework time, and others. It found that “virtually every parental-enforced rule … is linked to better parent-child relationships.” 
As a dad who struggles with the “friend-parenting” model, this research is so revealing. All we want is for our kids to love us, and I do seriously consider my kids to be my friends. But it is my responsibility to forge that friendship in an appropriate way that breeds a healthy, long-term relationship.
I’ll admit that this research seemed counterintuitive to me. While I am hard on my kids, there is still an instinct to go “gentle” on so many things and avoid conflict. That’s usually the path of least resistance. I also sometimes fear that discipline will create emotional distance. But ultimately, the key to any healthy relationship is communication. And rules require interaction, which is the foundation of communication. 
Once I stepped back, it became obvious to me. Rules create necessary dialogue. When my daughter and I sit down to do homework, it is natural to discuss her day at school. When my wife and I tell the boys they’ve watched enough Dude Perfect for one day, it leads to conversations about content. Taking out the trash leads to conversations about teamwork and contribution. Bedtime leads to conversations about making healthy choices.
Permissiveness allows distance, but a parent who enforces rules must constantly be checking in, following up, correcting, and explaining. Trust is forged in that communication, and trust leads to healthy relationships. 
Since we&#8217;re a Florida family of six, a boating analogy is natural. Parenting is a lot like steering a boat. The longer the trip, the more important small corrections turn out to be and the more consequential even the tiniest veering off course becomes. Small adjustments early prevent huge corrections later. Unfortunately, parenting doesn’t come with an autopilot option, and disciplinary nudges are required to maintain the route to arrive at the desired destination.
A boater’s worst nightmare is a storm, and chaos is the storm inside our homes. If you think “enforcement” is hard, try chaos. Building relationships requires order. Rules repeated daily become habits, and habits bring order in the house. Order is the solution to chaos.
With four kids of my own, I can compare the amount of friction in each of our relationships. Over time, rules become habits and habits reduce the friction of rule-enforcement. As my kids age, we have fewer arguments and less friction around the rules. While chaos exhausts our relationship, order protects it. 
Finally, trust and freedom play important roles in this equation. Trust is the glue that holds relationships together. Through years of rule enforcement, I am training our kids to be reliable. Reliability builds trust, and trust earns freedom. Eventually, our kids are freed from us, and if we have built enough equity in the relationship, they will use that freedom to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-so-many-grown-kids-are-cutting-off-their-fathers">invest</a> that equity back into our relationship.
Ultimately, the homework will only get harder — for me. The algorithms will get more competitive. And the trash will always come on Tuesday and Friday. But maybe these are all blessings. In them, this dad holds the secret. 
I’ll close with one admission. There is one thing we don’t limit in our house: country music. It is our love language. While I was driving home from the office recently, George Strait’s hit “Love Without End, Amen” came on. As King George belted out, “Let me tell you a secret about a father’s love,” I knew I had it.
* * *
Gates Garcia is the host of the YouTube show and podcast “We The People.” Follow him on Instagram and X @GatesGarciaFL.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Father and daughter crafting a special Mother’s Day card in the cozy kitchen

The Parenting Secret That Might Surprise ‘Gentle Parents’

You’re not ready to become a mother.
I wasn’t &#8220;ready&#8221; when I became one at 29. I definitely wasn’t ready to be married at 22, either. Happily, I did it all anyway. And then I watched as I steadily grew into these roles, finding my footing with a little grace, a lot of missteps, and more joy than I would’ve ever expected.
For this, I’m probably an anomaly — and definitely not a good feminist, according to The New York Times, which on Friday published its latest <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/27/us/politics/us-birthrate-decline-women.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/27/us/politics/us-birthrate-decline-women.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1772321232845000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3hYnYfwr9CW_joLMOUB1GT">article</a> about the precipitous decline in the U.S. birthrate. The framing was predictable: this is a good thing, insisted the gaggle of childless twenty-something women interviewed for the piece, because it means women are finally waiting until they’re &#8220;ready&#8221; to have children.
The most obvious first rebuttal to this argument are the statistics on marriage, motherhood, and happiness. According to the Institute for Family Studies (IFS), the <a href="https://www.compactmag.com/article/get-married-young/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.compactmag.com/article/get-married-young/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1772321232845000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3-NbsFdVUogNa1Ku-mQhlO">happiest</a> young women in America are married moms, and it’s not close.
And the longer women wait to marry and have children, the less likely they’ll be able to reach those milestones — socially and biologically. Recent IFS <a href="https://ifstudies.org/insights?id=3886" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://ifstudies.org/insights?id%3D3886&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1772321232845000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0TJTJPhmOurlAEs7kT_KPJ">research</a> indicates that women’s odds of having children fall dramatically after they turn 30.
But the deeper issue with framing the debate over falling birthrates as a feminist win is the suggestion that anyone is ever &#8220;ready&#8221; to become a mother. By today’s cultural standard — what Brad Wilcox has called the “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFzU4ND77tA" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v%3DNFzU4ND77tA&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1772321232845000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1FLr-6BB0wE7G5jU5CLi1-">Midas Mindset</a>” — the term &#8220;ready&#8221; usually has capitalist connotations. It’s defined by having a certain income, reaching a certain level of professional success, or having racked up enough life experiences, like traveling and dating around before settling down.
Indeed, the women <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/27/us/politics/us-birthrate-decline-women.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/27/us/politics/us-birthrate-decline-women.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1772321232845000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3hYnYfwr9CW_joLMOUB1GT">interviewed</a> by the Times — the young marketing student who regrets having to care for her siblings while her mom hustled to make ends meet; the recent grad who wants to build her career first; and the gym employee who “enjoys the [childless] peace” with her husband — are all under the impression that being ready for kids is primarily a logistical and financial proposition.
But if this standard were real, we should expect there to come a moment in most women’s lives when they’ve reached some or all of these benchmarks, prompting them to wake up and suddenly find they’re ready to become mothers.
But that’s not what’s happening. Because that’s not how any of this works.
The women featured in the Times seem to believe that becoming a mother is something they can accurately imagine ahead of time. They believe it’s an endeavor that will someday fit into pictures of their lives they’ve already painted. The problem is that motherhood doesn’t lend itself to that kind of logic. There is no analog to having children by which women (or men, for that matter) can ever really make an informed decision not to do it. That would be like saying, “I’ve looked at this from every possible angle, and I’ve decided not to live on Mars.” To say such a thing would be to have no actual idea what we’re choosing or not choosing.
What many of the women interviewed by the Times don’t seem to understand is that to become a mom is to fundamentally change. A woman in her early twenties can look at the prospect of motherhood as if it were simply another life choice. She might think “maybe I’ll move to another city,” or “maybe I’ll break up with my boyfriend,” and she can pretty fairly imagine what those experiences would be like, because she’d still be herself when or if they happened. But to contemplate motherhood as the same sort of question is a category error. Because when she becomes a mom, she will change so fundamentally that she, frankly, has no business making decisions today on behalf of that stranger.
That probably explains why childless women who try to defend their decision tend to overestimate the hard parts of motherhood and wildly underestimate the wonderful parts. Rose Paz, a young college student who spoke to the Times, said she doesn’t want to have kids right now because it would be a financial struggle, and she remembers the painful experience of watching her own parents stress out over money.
I can empathize with that fear, and it’s true that below poverty, motherhood can be a daily crisis. But if Ms. Paz is imagining some future point in her life in which she won’t feel stressed about money — that is, I’m sorry to say, a fundamental misunderstanding of both stress and money. Life just doesn’t work that way, and motherhood has nothing to do with it.
Another woman, a social demographer, told the Times that the falling birthrate is a “success story” because women are finally making sure they have their &#8220;lives in order&#8221; before having kids. &#8220;We spent decades shaming women for having kids under the wrong circumstances, for not having their ducks in a row… now they are holding up their end of the bargain,” she said.
Certainly, no woman should ever be shamed for having a child; much less a woman whose deadbeat partner has chosen to abandon her to single motherhood. But the social stigma on teen and single motherhood was never really about women having kids when they were poor; it was about women having kids when they weren’t married. These supposedly empowered women claiming to have taken back control of their own lives aren’t talking about making sure a man commits to them before having babies; they’re talking about making enough money.
Again, that’s not the right perspective. The happiest women in America are married moms. Past a certain level of basic material security, the hardships of parenthood aren’t really mitigated by more money, because they’re much deeper and much more existential than the merely financial. They are mitigated by marriage, though. And that’s because, just as it takes a man and a woman to make a baby, it also takes a man and a woman to raise a baby.
It turns out, the best parts of marriage and motherhood have nothing to do with money, either. In my experience, they are surprising and unscripted. The best parts are finding your babies in bed, reading under the covers with a flashlight. It’s when they say “ex-shepally” when they mean “especially.” It’s watching their hair grow wild and curly. It’s catching them being kind to a young stranger. It’s seeing yourself care more about them than your own comfort, when you hadn’t really known that was possible.
I’m almost 40 now, with two young daughters and a marriage going on 17 years. I can’t imagine a deeper source of both vulnerability and joy than this family of mine. I can reasonably imagine what life would have been like if I hadn’t gotten married young. I remember what it was like to travel alone, to answer to no one but myself, to sleep in on Saturdays, and to pee in solitude.
Women who haven’t married or had children, however, don’t have the same insight into their own what-ifs. They may really believe that not having children during their healthiest childbearing years is the path toward their deepest happiness. But they don’t know it, and they’re almost certainly wrong. From a Christian perspective, I believe this is why God made childbearing something totally outside our control.
The hard things in life are usually the very best things, but most of us don’t have the strength, on our own, to choose the hard things. Young women should get married and have babies anyway. They’ll see — I mean this literally — exactly what I mean.
Maria Baer is a contributing writer at the Institute for Family Studies and co-host of the Breakpoint podcast with The Colson Center for Christian Worldview.
<div>
<section class="css-88lhuq">
<div id="post-body-text" class="css-o2tmhu">
<div class="e1lu91wr0 css-5a7pfj" data-narration-container="true">
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
</div>
</div>
</section>
</div>

Mother of Girls

No One’s Ready To Be A Mom

babies

Motherhood

New York Times

The new “Toy Story 5” trailer has the internet buzzing as the popular animated franchise will take on the growing problem of children having too much screen time.
As the teaser trailer, which was released in November, indicated, the villain this time around is a new tablet called “Lilypad,” which steals main character Bonnie’s attention as she forgoes playing for screen scrolling. This recognizable storyline is resonating with parents and justifying the idea of yet another “Toy Story” sequel.
The voice cast includes Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, and Joan Cusack, who return to their roles of Woody, Buzz, and Jessie. Greta Lee voices Lilypad.
The official synopsis says, &#8220;The toys are back and this time, Buzz Lightyear, Woody, Jessie and the rest of the gang&#8217;s jobs are challenged when they come face-to-face with Lilypad (voice of Greta Lee), a brand-new tablet device that arrives with her own disruptive ideas about what is best for their kid, Bonnie. Will playtime ever be the same?&#8221;
In the trailer, Jessie says to Lilypad, &#8220;Me and the toys have been working all summer to try and get Bonnie to make friends, but then YOU had to ruin it.&#8221; She decides to call Woody, who tells her, &#8220;Toys are for play but tech is for everything.&#8221; 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Toy Story 5 | Official Trailer | In Theaters June 19" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/c51ND9Hdbw0?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The full trailer was released on February 19. “Toy Story 5” hits theaters June 19. 
“I’m generally opposed to milking these franchises dry until they’re nothing but a shriveled husk, but if this movie is going to villainize iPads and scold parents who use screens to babysit their kids then I wholly support it. This may be the only &#8216;part 5&#8217; movie that has ever had a valid reason to exist,” Daily Wire podcast host Matt Walsh <a href="https://x.com/MattWalshBlog/status/2024561411423109343">wrote</a> in response to the trailer.
“Finally, a movie calling out the iPad baby epidemic,” another X user <a href="https://x.com/KingZahyd/status/2024570820375236820">agreed</a>. “It’s about time we admit that parking a kid in front of a screen 24/7 isn’t parenting, it’s just surrendering. Woody and Buzz are basically fighting for the soul of childhood at this point.”
“Facts, if Part 5 is finally calling out iPad parenting and the screen babysitter culture, I’m in. Make Hollywood preach something useful for once,” another person <a href="https://x.com/Joe1Awe/status/2024562945691123748">agreed</a>.

Woody and Buzz

Buzz And Woody Team Up Again To Battle Big Tech In New ‘Toy Story 5’ Trailer

'Toy Story 5' Targets Too Much Screen Time With New Trailer

Entertainment

Hollywood

Movies

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Nothing can disprove a belief in the interchangeability of the sexes like having children. When I had my first baby, I assumed my husband and I would split things as evenly as we could. I’d be breastfeeding, sure, but when it came to other tasks, the work would be 50-50. How idealistic I was.
Our baby was clingy and needy, as babies usually are. But the problem was that what he often wanted was not just to be held and rocked to sleep; it was to be held and rocked to sleep by mom — aka, me. I remember watching other fathers bounce fussy babies at church or on a plane and feeling defensive of my husband. He would like to be doing that too, I thought. But it just doesn’t work. (And here is where I add the disclaimer that he did often bounce our baby to sleep and was as involved as possible. But there are some things only moms can do.)
As much as we might like to be, people are not robots. We can’t organize our lives according to a theoretically optimal system without setting ourselves up for failure. Nothing puts that in such stark relief as a baby, who has no interest in holding his poops until dad is around so mom can skip a diaper change, or saving his latest bout of screaming for mom after dad has finally gotten him down to sleep. Babies want what they want, and they couldn’t care less about your so-called equality. 
This hasn’t stopped some parents from pursuing the elusive even distribution of work. A recent <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/01/opinion/baby-formula-marriage-equality.html">opinion column</a> in the New York Times offers a solution: “The Secret to Marriage Equality Is Formula.”
“It’s time to explicitly tell parents-to-be, before they’re in the trenches, that the two worthwhile enterprises of exclusive breastfeeding and equal parenting are a zero-sum game — and that it can be utterly life-changing to choose the latter,” writer Nona Willis Aronowitz concludes. 
She’s correct that the two are mutually exclusive; there is no equality in baby feeding when one parent is literally sustaining a child and the other is just there for moral support and water bottle refills. But she’s wrong in her implication that equality should trump other considerations where children’s wellbeing is concerned.
The problem appears to be one of perspective. “The bonding effect” of breastfeeding her first child “was real,” Aronowitz writes, “but it also meant my ability to understand the contours of her needs deepened as Dom [her husband] became more and more sidelined. The resulting resentment nearly broke us as a couple. The unfair burden and sleep deprivation nearly broke me.”
I can attest to overwhelming effects of sleep deprivation, having just gotten my second child to sleep through the night in the past month. I chose to exclusively breastfeed him knowing my husband would be able to sleep mostly peacefully while I was waking hour after hour to resettle our baby. Instead of getting up throughout the night, my husband was changing diapers and spending hours walking our neighborhood in desperate attempts to get our baby to take his naps. Was it equal? No. Did I resent my husband for it? Well, only until I’d had my morning coffee.
READ MORE FROM UPSTREAM: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/weight-loss-medication-may-have-dangerous-side-effects-i-dont-care?author=Bethany+Mandel&amp;category=undefined&amp;elementPosition=7&amp;row=3&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+News&amp;rowType=Vertical+Carousel&amp;title=Weight-Loss+Medication+May+Have+Dangerous+Side+Effects.+I+Don%E2%80%99t+Care.">Weight-Loss Medication May Have Dangerous Side Effects. I Don’t Care.</a>
My husband and I have been married for almost six years, and if there’s one piece of advice I feel qualified to pass down, it’s that the pursuit of equality is a path to a miserable marriage. It’s best to think of the workload in your marriage swinging like a pendulum: Sometimes the wife does more while the husband does less and vice versa. Sometimes the duties just look different. When it comes to small children, their mother is biologically wired to take on a larger portion of their childcare. For the kids’ sake, and for the sake of avoiding resentment, that’s worth accepting.
Brené Brown, the researcher most well known for her TED Talk on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCvmsMzlF7o">vulnerability</a>, calls the idea of a 50-50 marriage “one of the worst myth[s] in the world.” She and her husband have two kids together and have been married since 1994, so I’m guessing she knows what she’s talking about. 
“Strong, lasting relationships are rarely 50-50, because life does not work that way,” she <a href="https://brenebrown.com/podcast/brene-on-comparative-suffering-the-50-50-myth-and-settling-the-ball/">said</a> on her podcast in 2020. “Strong, lasting relationships happen when your partner or friend or whoever you’re in relationship with, can pony up that 80% when you are down to 20, and that your partner also knows that when things fall apart for her, and she only has 10% to give, you can show up with your 90, even if it’s for a limited amount of time.”
Equality in marriage sounds nice, but it’s an ideal not rooted in reality. Husbands and wives get sick or sleep-deprived, take high-pressure jobs, have high-needs children, struggle with mental health issues, and more. Sometimes one spouse will be doing more than the other. And holding yourself to an unrealistic ideal will necessarily result in resentment. 
This doesn’t mean you can’t communicate your needs to your spouse. Quite the opposite. If there are ways in which the workload seems unfair to you, and your partner is able to do more, then he or she should. What you want is a spouse who is willing to step up when you’re feeling down, not one who is hyperfocused on making sure you each wash the same number of dishes. 
Marriage is a partnership, but it can’t — and shouldn’t — always be equal.
Have an idea for Upstream? We welcome submissions; interested writers can send pitches to upstream@dailywire.com.

parenting_equality_v1_720

The Marriage Myth We’ve Been Told To Believe — And Why It Backfires

Culture

Disney is preparing to fundamentally reshape the streaming landscape. After taking full ownership of Hulu in 2023, the company is now moving to shut the platform down and fold its entire library into Disney+ as part of a “one app experience.” That migration could occur imminently, and the scale of change is staggering.
When Disney launched Disney+ in 2019, the streaming marketplace was already crowded. Amazon Prime Video debuted in 2006, Netflix in 2007, and Hulu in 2008. With few external restrictions on content — no oversight from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and no advertisers, at that time, to hold content in check. As a result, these platforms broke boundaries that even premium cable channels like HBO and Cinemax would not have dared. offering more vulgarity, more graphic violence, more sex and nudity.
Disney+ promised to be different. 
From the beginning, Disney positioned its platform as a safe haven for families; a platform parents could trust implicitly. That promise worked. More than 10 million subscribers signed up within the first 24 hours, many of them parents desperate to escape the exhausting and never-ending task of shielding young eyes from suggestive poster art and racy titles like “Zac and Miri Make a Porno” or “Nymphomaniac” while they searched menus for the handful of child-appropriate titles that might be available. 
Market research confirmed this distinction. One industry analysis <a href="https://morningconsult.com/articles/disney-plus-streaming-market-brand-data">called</a> Disney+ “the category’s most intentionally chosen service.” Morning Consult found Disney+ scored +45 for “entertaining the kids,” while competitors posted negative scores across the board. “Disney+ is not interchangeable here,” the analysis concluded. “In household decision-making, this is Disney+’s moat.”
Disney executives publicly reinforced this family-first positioning. Months before launch, entertainment reporter Eric Vespe recalled asking a Disney representative whether R-rated content would appear on Disney+. The answer: Disney+ would remain PG-13 or softer, while more mature material would live on Hulu. Disney invested heavily in Hulu so adult-oriented material could remain off the Disney+ platform.
That intentional separation is now being completely dismantled. 
In the summer of 2025, executives signaled plans to shut down Hulu and migrate its entire library into Disney+.
Concerned Women for America (CWA) <a href="https://concernedwomen.org/2026-cwa-netflix-research/">looked at</a> the numbers and discovered that while Disney+ currently hosts fewer than 20 R-rated films, after the merger, that number will exceed 400 — a more than 2,200% increase. Mature-rated television series will escalate from 45 to nearly 400 — a more than 800% increase. Families who subscribed specifically for child-friendly programming will suddenly find their child’s favorite streaming platform flooded with volumes of adult material.
Parents have already seen glimpses of what this future looks like. Last year, families reported surprise and frustration when mature-themed series promotions appeared on Disney+ home screens, prompting uncomfortable questions from young children. Many parents believed Disney+ was designed to prevent exactly this scenario.
This shift represents more than a technical update. It represents a fundamental brand reversal.
Disney was once synonymous with wholesome family entertainment. Parents built household media habits around that identity. Children were given access to Disney+ because families trusted the brand.
That trust is now being put at risk.
Even more concerning is the creative direction Disney leadership appears eager to embrace. One of the most striking examples is the company’s reported interest in hiring producer Ryan Murphy as soon as his development deal with Netflix ends; Murphy’s career has largely focused on dark, adult-themed dramas. 
Murphy’s previous projects have centered on crime, horror, and provocative themes that were never intended for children. Yet Disney executives appear willing to fold this creative approach into a corporate ecosystem historically built around family audiences.
Walt Disney famously said, “Our greatest natural resource is the minds of our children.” That philosophy guided decades of storytelling built around imagination, optimism, and moral clarity.
Today’s leadership seems increasingly disconnected from that legacy.
And while Disney may point to parental controls as a solution, technology cannot solve a branding problem. The issue is not whether filters exist. The issue is whether adult content belongs on the same platform that parents deliberately chose for preschoolers and elementary-age children.
Mixing Mickey Mouse with mature television may make business sense on a spreadsheet. But it erodes the trust that made Disney+ successful in the first place.
The question now is simple: Will Disney honor the promise that built its streaming success — or abandon the families who made it possible?
The future of Disney+ may depend on how loudly parents answer that question.
* * *
Melissa Henson is the Senior Policy Advisor for Media and Culture for <a href="http://www.concernedwomen.org/">Concerned Women for America</a>, the nation’s public policy women’s organization, dedicated to promoting biblical values and constitutional principles in public policy. On X: @CWforA
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Rear View Of Two Boys Watching Movie Together, Lena, United States

Disney+ Is About To Be Flooded With Adult Content, And Parents Are Right To Be Alarmed

Film

Hulu

sexual content

Television

Violence

Singer Meghan Trainor spoke out this week about her decision to use surrogacy after welcoming her third child through a third party.
The 32-year-old recording artist shared photos of herself on Tuesday holding the newborn skin-to-skin against her bare chest, prompting a mix of reactions online. 
<blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/DTwH1tvEoqs/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14">
<div style="padding: 16px;">
&nbsp;
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div>
<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"></div>
</div>
&nbsp;
<p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DTwH1tvEoqs/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Meghan Trainor (@meghantrainor)</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
<script async src="//www.instagram.com/embed.js"></script>
Trainor gave a lengthy defense of surrogacy during an <a href="https://people.com/meghan-trainor-explains-why-she-used-surrogate-third-baby-exclusive-11889284">interview</a> with People, saying people shouldn’t “whisper” about or “judge” anyone who does it. 
&#8220;It wasn’t our first choice, but we had endless conversations with our doctors on this journey, and this was the safest way for us to be able to continue growing our family,&#8221; the pop star, who has two other children she birthed herself, said of choosing surrogacy. &#8220;We are forever grateful for that option.&#8221;
&#8220;I want people to know that surrogacy is just another beautiful way to build a family. It’s not something to whisper about or judge. It’s rooted in trust, science, love, and teamwork,&#8221; Trainor told the outlet. &#8220;Every family’s journey looks different, and all of them are extremely valid.&#8221;
The Grammy winner announced the baby’s birth in the caption of the Instagram post.
&#8220;Our baby girl Mikey Moon Trainor has finally made it to the world thanks to our incredible, superwoman surrogate. We are forever grateful to all the doctors, nurses, teams who made this dream possible,&#8221; she wrote in the caption. &#8220;We had endless conversations with our doctors in this journey and this was the safest way for us to be able to continue growing our family.&#8221;
Some critics online questioned Trainor for posting the image, including one widely shared comment that Trainor dismissed as a misunderstanding of both surrogacy and post-birth bonding.
“Skin to skin here is doing nothing. The purpose is so that the baby can smell the one they’ve been inside for 9 months, hear the heartbeat she’s heard for 9 months, and get the hormones flowing to the mother for milk production,” one popular <a href="https://x.com/thebereanmillen/status/2013804422782980572">comment</a> on X says.

Megan Trainor

Meghan Trainor Speaks Out About Choosing Surrogacy

Meghan Trainor Defends Using Surrogacy As Fans Question Skin To Skin Photo Of Newborn

Celebrities

Surrogacy

Menu