It’s the Story, Stupid

Lately, I’ve come across a few forums where romance readers and writers debate whether children have a place in romance. While I understand and respect personal preferences, I don’t understand the need for an actual debate. To me, it's about the story.  

Do only childless people get to fall in love in romance novels?  I have wonderful friends who are single mothers, and they’re among the strongest women I know.  They’re great heroines and their children are an important part of their journey.

Then again, as a mother of two, I can always tell when a child is used purely as a prop. Seriously, is a child the only way to show a man or woman’s vulnerability or to add comedic relief? And why are children in books always so darn wise? A reader knows when a child is integral to the narrative, and when they’re there as a crutch.   

Each story is a little world unto itself. If children belong in that world, I believe they’ll be welcome by those who choose to read the book.

* Not calling anyone stupid, by the way. With elections right around the corner, I couldn't resist :-).