Why do people in financial need plan to have more children?

[lovinmomma]

 

No. Nothing like that. It was a vent about people who aren't willing to work/look for work, and not so much about them having children :)

 

 

Absolutely. :) Understood.

[Hannah]

See, I was raised with the thinking that family is supposed to help one another (and some areas, neighbours and churches help one another in a variety of ways...we've been on the giving and receiving ends), and that parents care for children when they can't care for themselves and children (grown) care for parents when they can no longer care for themselves.

 

Family helps family, but family also respects family. Maybe this is where I don't get it. Is it not totally disrespectful to make a personnal choice that will put a burden on someone else? Need due to unforeseen circumstances is different to me than a conscious decision.

[mommaduck]

 

No. Nothing like that. It was a vent about people who aren't willing to work/look for work, and not so much about them having children :)

 

THAT would bother me regardless if they had children or not, as it's not about having children or how many children, but rather about work ethic.

[DarlaS]

 

 

Can I just say, I adore you beyond measure... :wub:

 

If we all lived closer, we could get together and have a baking party!! :D

 

 

I'll bring the cupcake vodka (forget the baking)! :w00t:

[Audrey]

While I agree it's their life to live, I resent having to pay for their food stamps, health care because neither one of them steps up to change to a job which would provide it. We are in an area where it would be relatively easy to get a full time job w/benefits. In their case, they choose not to be responsible for their family. I'm frustrated because I see children suffering-they talk about their struggles-because these two couldn't control their hormones long enough to set their family up for success. I know this isn't a popular view and there will be flames. But after years of working with families, I feel that our country is losing its sense of self responsibility.

 

ALL children are a blessing, unfortunately, not all parents are a blessing to their children.

 

 

 

I understand what you are saying. I see the resentment factor a lot from others. Personally, I don't resent where my taxes go -- to myself for my healthcare, to others for theirs, to income assistance for others. But, I don't live in your country, and attitudes about taxes here are very different because the whole system is just different about it. Here, there is still stigma against being on the dole in many areas. In others, not so much.

 

This is where the eye-rolling part comes in, you see. Then you just move on from it. It just is what it is.

 

To the last bolded part... I have to say that I do not agree. I do not think that all children are blessings. I certainly do not think all babies are to be celebrated -- a popular sentiment here, but one which I do not share, and which I cannot pretend to share. Far from it. Irresponsibly conceived children are not cause for congratulations. I say nothing in those instances, as it would be completely disingenuous for me to paste on a phony smile and congratulate them. Some children are great burdens on their parents, their families and their other siblings. Now... we may still love these children, and most of the time we love them very, very much, but that does not negate the fact that they are, indeed, burdens. Some people willfully take on such burdens. I find that irresponsible.

 

But quite thankfully, it is still not my life to have to live, so I move on, saying nothing. As to those people in my family and elsewhere IRL who are irresponsible in that manner. I neither help nor hinder them. I neither condone nor condemn them. As I said, I can think whatever I like. Outwardly, I express nothing. It is up to them to live their lives.

[milovany]

Family helps family, but family also respects family. Maybe this is where I don't get it. Is it not totally disrespectful to make a personnal choice that will put a burden on someone else? Need due to unforeseen circumstances is different to me than a conscious decision.

 

 

Burden? I hope my parents will allow me the privilege of caring for them in their old age rather than choosing to go to a nursing home (which from what I understand might be their current thought based on comments I've heard). We wouldn't think of this as a burden, but as a natural part of life and love.

[mommaduck]

Family helps family, but family also respects family. Maybe this is where I don't get it. Is it not totally disrespectful to make a personnal choice that will put a burden on someone else? Need due to unforeseen circumstances is different to me than a conscious decision.

 

Okay, that is because you are ONLY seeing children as a burden.

 

Children cost money and must be cared for.

Adults cost money and care for themselves.

Aging adults cost money and must be cared for.

 

Eventually, children pay for themselves and/or are a boon to a family. Maybe your thinking should be more about children being a blessing and how they can be more of a blessing in the future than thinking of them as financial burdens and bloodsuckers.

[I.Dup.]

I had a cousin who did choose this with his wife. "No babies because we want to enjoy each other and don't want to be tied down." He got cancer and died five years ago. I'm guessing (although I fully admit, I don't know this for sure) that they regretted their decision in the end.

 

 

I think there are a lot of people who choose to live this way. Look at how low our birth rates are and how full the nursing homes are with lonely old people with no children who care about them, or no children at all.

[Momof3littles]

OP, I don't think this is what you are implying, but check out this bill proposed in PA. Women who get pregnant while receiving TANF benefits would not see an increase in their benefits unless they can prove they reported it as rape.

 

http://www.forbes.co...-keep-benefits/

http://www.salon.com...can_prove_rape/

 

From the bill according to salon:

 

Elimination of benefits … shall not apply to any child conceived as a result of rape or incest if the department: (1) receives a non-notarized, signed statement from the pregnant woman

stating that she was a victim of rape or incest, as the case may be, and that she reported the crime, including the identity of the offender, if known, to a law enforcement agency having the requisite jurisdiction

.

 

 

 

This isn't too appealing either.

[Murphy101]

It is not a burden to care for someone.

It's a privilege.

Growing old, being born - these are blessings.

 

Our inability to appreciate the gifts we are given doesn't change that it is still a gift.

 

Thus children are always a blessing.

 

I always find these discussions so sad.

 

Whether someone enjoys their child should have nothing to do with their ability to order out for dinner or accessorize their new baby like s/he is some commodity.

 

Why do better off people have babies they spend little actual time with who grow to be kids with all the same problems yet would disparage their daycare worker for getting pregnant while suffering financially. Oh wait. We aren't supposed to think too hard about social inequality. Just assume all poor people with several kids are crack heads, hussies, mooches, and leaches.

 

Personally, I had no idea what an incredible blessing being broke, young, and having children was at the time. Never mind caring for a dying mother too. Necessity made me a better mother than money could have bought. I had no idea at the time. And I'm glad for it today. It wasn't a burden. It was a privledge. One I wish I had appreciated more at the time.

[mommaduck]

Hey, another blessing! The fact that I used to do laundry in the tub helped an online friend find me! :D

[Murphy101]

And as a person who wasn't wanted or planned at birth -

 

To imply that because my parents had whatever wrong headed goings on means I was a burden better not conceived or born?

 

Pardon me for disagreeing.

[justLisa]

We are still talking about this?

 

I might as well give an opinion about it. So I think yeah, junkies popping out babies left and right or teens having one after another after another.....sure I think that is something awful. But those babies are still HERE. And as for families who choose loving a baby over being more financially stable? Well they probably have enough love to go around and teach those kids something good about life. So yeah, I guess I'd rather THOSE parents be populating Earth rather than some of the ball busting career centered and selfish parents I've come across. And no I don't mean hard working to make ends meet. I mean parents who put their career and stuff above everything else and don't pay much attention to their kids because they both work 24/7 and have after hour business parties etc. How do you think a kid would rather grow up? Being loved and cuddled or in daycare and with a nanny 24/7 having no family stability? Stability and comfort come from FAR more than dollar bills.

[Cera]

I understand surprise babies during difficult times. But I have struggled with people who are actively trying to have another child when they cannot provide for the ones they have. It seems irresponsible to me, but others might disagree with my choices also.

 

 

 

 

This is basically how I feel. But I will add that after the first surprise baby my opinion on that even changes a little.

[astrid]

How do you think a kid would rather grow up? Being loved and cuddled or in daycare and with a nanny 24/7 having no family stability? Stability and comfort come from FAR more than dollar bills.

 

It's not just children of "ball busting career parents" who grow up not being cuddled, and in daycare (or worse) 24/7 without family stability.

 

astrid

[justLisa]

It's not just children of "ball busting career parents" who grow up not being cuddled, and in daycare (or worse) 24/7 without family stability.

 

astrid

 

 

Well I know. My point is LOVING families who choose to have more kids. I don't know how exactly to explain something without at least someone misinterpreting. I should have also added the crazy people who don't like their kids yet continue to have more.

[I.Dup.]

 

Yeah, but that isn't the reality anymore for a lot of people. If something happens to us, there is nobody who will help us.

 

I agree. I wish that was our reality. I would love the family culture of, say, India.

[mommaduck]

 

Yeah, but that isn't the reality anymore for a lot of people. If something happens to us, there is nobody who will help us.

Well, I guess it's up to us to change that and change the thinking of the next generation. The friends we are with now have only had three years in this house without someone living with them. Last winter, I had done the same for another family (not related), not for as long a period, but for as long as they needed. Someone had advised that I send them to a shelter. I told that person, "not as long as I have floor space in my house and can come up with an extra blanket or two!"

[justLisa]

 

Hell, I'd just love to have family. Anyone want to adopt me?

 

 

I call sister :lol:

[mommaduck]

 

Hell, I'd just love to have family. Anyone want to adopt me?

(((hugs))) WendyK Duckling!

[mommaduck]

Dangit, Lisamarie beat me to it!

[astrid]

 

 

Well I know. My point is LOVING families who choose to have more kids. I don't know how exactly to explain something without at least someone misinterpreting. I should have also added the crazy people who don't like their kids yet continue to have more.

 

 

No, my point is that while I think we can all agree that the idea of a loving family is the way we think all babies should enter the world, the reality is that poverty, addictions, abuse, etc. all play a role in both repeat pregnancies and robbing those babies of stable, loving homes. I work every day with women who have more "blessings" than they can afford financially or emotionally. They know this, and they continue to get pregnant. More babies make their lives more chaotic and the existing children suffer further. It's a vicious cycle that I see. They are neither "crazy" or "don't like their kids." They are just overwhelmed with a huge variety of overwhelming circumstances, some of which are not all of their own making.

 

But then, I'm a working mom of an only child. Two major strikes against me in most minds here. Do I have an opinion about this topic? Yes. A strong one at that, that heretofore I've withheld.

 

Oh--- disclaimer: I have no stars, so anyone feels like disagreeing and retaliating by giving me only one star, you'll be actually helping my rating. ;-)

 

astrid

[mommaduck]

 

 

No, my point is that while I think we can all agree that the idea of a loving family is the way we think all babies should enter the world, the reality is that poverty, addictions, abuse, etc. all play a role in both repeat pregnancies and robbing those babies of stable, loving homes. I work every day with women who have more "blessings" than they can afford financially or emotionally. They know this, and they continue to get pregnant. More babies make their lives more chaotic and the existing children suffer further. It's a vicious cycle that I see. They are neither "crazy" or "don't like their kids." They are just overwhelmed with a huge variety of overwhelming circumstances, some of which are not all of their own making.

 

But then, I'm a working mom of an only child. Two major strikes against me in most minds here. Do I have an opinion about this topic? Yes. A strong one at that, that heretofore I've withheld.

 

Oh--- disclaimer: I have no stars, so anyone feels like disagreeing and retaliating by giving me only one star, you'll be actually helping my rating. ;-)

 

astrid

Addictions and abuse, I agree with. Poverty, I do not.

[lovinmomma]

Addictions and abuse, I agree with. Poverty, I do not.

 

Eww. Yes, I didn't agree with that either. I don't think all 3 of those should be lumped into the same category.

[Audrey]

And as a person who wasn't wanted or planned at birth -

 

To imply that because my parents had whatever wrong headed goings on means I was a burden better not conceived or born?

 

Pardon me for disagreeing.

 

That's jumping to conclusions. Yes, SOME babies are a burden. SOME babies are conceived irresponsibly. No one singled you out, though, as an example of either. And I don't think anyone said anything about any children being "better not conceived or born." I know I didn't. Wanted, not wanted, loved, not loved, burden, blessing... they're all still somebody's children. It just is what it is.

[Elinor Everywhere]

 

 

I would love it. Everyone could bring a favorite recipe and some booze.

 

And I have a parrot.

 

 

Can I come even though I don't really cook and I'm afraid of birds? I do like to drink. :D

[justLisa]

 

 

No, my point is that while I think we can all agree that the idea of a loving family is the way we think all babies should enter the world, the reality is that poverty, addictions, abuse, etc. all play a role in both repeat pregnancies and robbing those babies of stable, loving homes. I work every day with women who have more "blessings" than they can afford financially or emotionally. They know this, and they continue to get pregnant. More babies make their lives more chaotic and the existing children suffer further. It's a vicious cycle that I see. They are neither "crazy" or "don't like their kids." They are just overwhelmed with a huge variety of overwhelming circumstances, some of which are not all of their own making.

 

But then, I'm a working mom of an only child. Two major strikes against me in most minds here. Do I have an opinion about this topic? Yes. A strong one at that, that heretofore I've withheld.

 

Oh--- disclaimer: I have no stars, so anyone feels like disagreeing and retaliating by giving me only one star, you'll be actually helping my rating. ;-)

 

astrid

 

i do not disagree. I think you are mistaking what I mean. I don't think "planning" for several "blessings" is a good idea when you are not able to feed them or give them basic needs. I guess I am imagining more the kind of family just making ends meet and if they want one more child. I don't mean having zero for food and having 10 more kids. I don't see how you get any strikes for being a working mom. That is not what I meant at all. I mean a loving and stable home is created with more than money.

[astrid]

 

i do not disagree. I think you are mistaking what I mean. I don't think "planning" for several "blessings" is a good idea when you are not able to feed them or give them basic needs. I guess I am imagining more the kind of family just making ends meet and if they want one more child. I don't mean having zero for food and having 10 more kids. I don't see how you get any strikes for being a working mom. That is not what I meant at all. I mean a loving and stable home is created with more than money.

 

No, I think we actually agree on a lot. I'll just go ahead and say that IN MY OPINION it's the height of irresponsibility for one to continue to have unprotected sex if one is not able to feed/clothe/nurture the children one has. Except in the cases of rape, pregnancy is, as my dad used to say, "self-inflicted." :-)

 

And I know it's not what YOU meant, but you'd be surprised the nasty-grams I've received for chosing to not only work but to raise my child without siblings. Tantamount to abuse, some think! ;-) <insert winking smilie here....they don't work on my office computer>

 

astrid

[astrid]

 

Umm, since the star thread you've had 5 stars :cheers2:

 

 

LOL well lookit that! ;-) Five stars and a dollah will get me a cup of Dunkin' Donuts (which I sorely need right now!)

 

astrid (who seriously didn't know those existed before that thread today!)

[justLisa]

No, I think we actually agree on a lot. I'll just go ahead and say that IN MY OPINION it's the height of irresponsibility for one to continue to have unprotected sex if one is not able to feed/clothe/nurture the children one has. Except in the cases of rape, pregnancy is, as my dad used to say, "self-inflicted." :-)

 

And I know it's not what YOU meant, but you'd be surprised the nasty-grams I've received for chosing to not only work but to raise my child without siblings. Tantamount to abuse, some think! ;-) <insert winking smilie here....they don't work on my office computer>

 

astrid

 

 

My point came out wrong but I completely agree with you.

[astrid]

Addictions and abuse, I agree with. Poverty, I do not.

 

Inner-city. Lack of transportation to/from ANY job. Lack of child care, even if a job was available. Lack of education past fourth grade. Lack of mental health sufficient to hold down a job, in many cases developmentally delayed or profoundly mentally ill or challenged such that they are unable to hold a job if they get one. No roof overhead, but rotating with kids from shelter bed to shelter bed to street.

 

THIS is the kind of poverty I"m talking about. Very VERY little chance of ANY WAY OUT.

 

astrid

[astrid]

 

 

My point came out wrong but I completely agree with you.

 

See? I knew we really just agreed! :-)

 

astrid

[mommaduck]

Inner-city. Lack of transportation to/from ANY job. Lack of child care, even if a job was available. Lack of education past fourth grade. Lack of mental health sufficient to hold down a job, in many cases developmentally delayed or profoundly mentally ill or challenged such that they are unable to hold a job if they get one. No roof overhead, but rotating with kids from shelter bed to shelter bed to street.

 

THIS is the kind of poverty I"m talking about. Very VERY little chance of ANY WAY OUT.

 

astrid

Okay, I knew people that were just above that. Most of those people had extended family that helped when needed. One young man worked himself through Catholic High School and is now a Sophomore at Duquesne University. He rode his bicycle across the city to get to school till I started giving him rides. My son was also on partial scholarship. The difference was the shelter to shelter thing...that is what I meant by one step above. This is where extended family can be a tremendous blessing. I knew a woman that was in that spot insisting on wanting a reversal so her boyfriend could have a baby. Did I agree? No, but my opinions don't matter. Would I have done what I could to be helpful to their family? Yes. I would not have turned my back on them nor would I have ever been derogatory towards them. Inner city poverty is a very difficult thing. My husband used to work with the inner city poor, homeless, drug addicted, etc. We've lived in it. I would not want to do it again. It's difficult. At the same time, I would not insist that these people never be able to have children. It's a fine line and one where we have to be careful about judging each and every situation.

 

btw, bless you for any work you do with these people.

[annandatje]

.. I actively tried to avoid it getting pregnant during tough financial times...

 

I agree. Assuming access to birth control and absent fertility problems, if someone is having sex without birth control, then they can, by default, expect a pregnancy. The pregnancy is not an "accident;" it is the functioning of the human reproduction system. Sometimes I wonder if people claim accident because of their fear of condemnation from others.

 

Babies are inexpensive if you nurse, use hand me down clothing and cloth diapers, and baby has no serious medical problems. The bigger costs are down the road. My husband lost his job when we had a three month old, so I had to return to work almost full time until he found something else. For me personally, I am not comfortable having more children than I could provide for if my husband died.

 

When my daughter was conceived I was married to a man I had been with for seven years, who made a six figure income, and had been living in the same town for a decade (and the same house for three years). We decided to make a baby. Seems like logical thinking, right? Then 9/11 happened. The job disappeared, the bubble burst, he couldn't get a new job and I was unemployable. My point is that life changes. The family in question may be planning on a good and near future. They may be looking at the fact that their fertility is coming to an end. Maybe they are depressed and aware of it and think that a baby will cheer them up. Nobody but them knows what logic went into their decision.

 

 

 

 

I ask myself the same question frequently. I have very little tolerance for blatant, willful irresponsibility. I just roll my eyes and move on, though. I can think what I like, but in the end, it's not my life to live.

 

:iagree:

[I.Dup.]

The pregnancy is not an "accident;" it is the functioning of the human reproduction system. Sometimes I wonder if people claim accident because of their fear of condemnation from others.

 

You mean like the condemnation that comes through in posts like yours?

[annandatje]

Astrid, living around the type of poverty you described, but in a rural setting, has greatly affected my viewpoint on uncontrolled reproduction, particularly when there is access to birth control.

[Mrs Mungo]

"Accidents" do happen even with birth control. I conceived my eldest while on Depo-Provera. My doctor was SHOCKED.

[Murphy101]

It's not just children of "ball busting career parents" who grow up not being cuddled, and in daycare (or worse) 24/7 without family stability.

astrid

 

Absolutely true. And why I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with a low income mother deciding she wants to take care of her own child instead of put them in daycare to bring home pennies.

 

I don't feel that way at all. Really, to each their own. I simply am saying I don't always understand other people's reasoning. But why would I? I'm not them.

I have met people who are pretty terrible to their kids, but keep thinking it's a good idea to have more. Rich or poor. So there's that too.

 

Again. The problem here is people are asking the wrong question.

 

The question is why are they having babies?

 

The questions should be:

Why are they terrible people?

Why are they having sex?

Why are they haing relationships with losers?

Why are they not getting an education?

Why do we tolerate jobs that don't pay a living wage?

Why do we pay daycare workers crappy salaries to watch other people's children and then complain that they have the nerve tI want more of their own? (Heck. My question is how'd they manage to keep that desire after working in daycare?!)

 

The problem is NOT having babies.

Babies are nothing more than the natural result of having sex between two people.

Yet babies are the fixted decision we are questioning.

 

That is what I don't understand.

 

No, my point is that while I think we can all agree that the idea of a loving family is the way we think all babies should enter the world, the reality is that poverty, addictions, abuse, etc. all play a role in both repeat pregnancies and robbing those babies of stable, loving homes.

 

I have yet to see a single problem poverty presents that rich folks don't have too. Morons? Check. Jerks? Check. Poorly educated? Check. Broken or abusive or uncaring families? Check. Drugs? Check. Bad parenting? Check. The difference is rich people can buy breaks and poor people just have toslink or swim with the weight of it.

 

I work every day with women who have more "blessings" than they can afford financially or emotionally. They know this, and they continue to get pregnant.

 

Again. Why blame the babies? The decisions that are the problem are decision made way before getting pregnant. Why is the focus on this one decision?

 

But then, I'm a working mom of an only child. Two major strikes against me in most minds here. Do I have an opinion about this topic? Yes. A strong one at that, that heretofore I've withheld.

Oh--- disclaimer: I have no stars, so anyone feels like disagreeing and retaliating by giving me only one star, you'll be actually helping my rating. ;-)

astrid

 

I don't think working or having one child is strike against anyone.

My only point was that to me asking why I would want number 10 is ridiculous. It's the same reason I would want number 1.

 

When I see a woman who has a child, 1 or more, in bad circumstances, I don't think, "Why is she having that baby?!" I think instead, "Why was she in that foolish relationship to begin with?! Why was she dating that turd? Why doesn't she get her act together?" and many other wonderings of what decisions created this problem situation. Because the problem isn't the pregnancy or the child. The problem is the decisions 9 months prior to that.

[Joan in GE]

I normally don't post on threads like this and the observation that I want to throw into the mix is not exactly related to the OP question - it is just that you can get these conditions with many children....

 

In the last few years I've observed families with many children and compared them to my own four. We had more than enough for ours but overall I don't think it has made them better people only that their expectations of what their daily bread contains is much higher than those in the families I mentioned.

 

I'm seeing that lower expectations for the supposed 'good things' in life (as measured in a consumer economy) can end up helping children grow up to be less demanding adults.

 

If I had to do it over again, I'd have chosen a path that was less well funded (I realize that's always easier to say after it is all over). :-)

Joan

[SunnyDays]

 

 

But then, I'm a working mom of an only child. Two major strikes against me in most minds here. Do I have an opinion about this topic? Yes. A strong one at that, that heretofore I've withheld.

 

 

 

Well, I don't currently work, but I also have an only child. While we *could* have had more children, there are reasons we didn't beyond just pure selfishness. :D And I know others don't agree with it, but that's okay. Nor would I assume that people who didn't have kids end up regretting it... many of them really don't and have very full, happy lives.

 

 

 

Can I come even though I don't really cook and I'm afraid of birds? I do like to drink. :D

 

Absolutely. I don't cook much either. You and I can sit in the corner and measure out the vodka. We should bring rum, too. Rum (cake) is delicious. :D

[momtoamiracle]

Absolutely true. And why I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with a low income mother deciding she wants to take care of her own child instead of put them in daycare to bring home pennies.

 

 

 

Again. The problem here is people are asking the wrong question.

 

The question is why are they having babies?

 

The questions should be:

Why are they terrible people?

Why are they having sex?

Why are they haing relationships with losers?

Why are they not getting an education?

Why do we tolerate jobs that don't pay a living wage?

Why do we pay daycare workers crappy salaries to watch other people's children and then complain that they have the nerve tI want more of their own? (Heck. My question is how'd they manage to keep that desire after working in daycare?!)

 

The problem is NOT having babies.

Babies are nothing more than the natural result of having sex between two people.

Yet babies are the fixted decision we are questioning.

 

That is what I don't understand.

 

 

 

I have yet to see a single problem poverty presents that rich folks don't have too. Morons? Check. Jerks? Check. Poorly educated? Check. Broken or abusive or uncaring families? Check. Drugs? Check. Bad parenting? Check. The difference is rich people can buy breaks and poor people just have toslink or swim with the weight of it.

 

 

 

Again. Why blame the babies? The decisions that are the problem are decision made way before getting pregnant. Why is the focus on this one decision?

 

 

 

I don't think working or having one child is strike against anyone.

My only point was that to me asking why I would want number 10 is ridiculous. It's the same reason I would want number 1.

 

When I see a woman who has a child, 1 or more, in bad circumstances, I don't think, "Why is she having that baby?!" I think instead, "Why was she in that foolish relationship to begin with?! Why was she dating that turd? Why doesn't she get her act together?" and many other wonderings of what decisions created this problem situation. Because the problem isn't the pregnancy or the child. The problem is the decisions 9 months prior to that.

 

I don't see it as the baby being the problem, it's bringing the baby into a situation where it will suffer.

 

 

In my area in the past year at least a dozen small children and babies have been killed by abuse. They are innocent victims. I don't understand women in these situations that allow their children to suffer like that. If you're going to stay with someone abusive, don't have a child that will end up dead in a year. If you want children that will survive, get out.

 

 

that's my biggest beef, I think.... has nothing to do with money, more with the potential for death within the first 5 years of life at the hands of another.

[bettyandbob]

I had a cousin who did choose this with his wife. "No babies because we want to enjoy each other and don't want to be tied down." He got cancer and died five years ago. I'm guessing (although I fully admit, I don't know this for sure) that they regretted their decision in the end.

 

 

Why do you think that? One of my good friends knew from an early age that she did not want children. She started dating her dh when she was 20. They love their life. She's not a "what if" kind of person (I am). She is a fabulous aunt. She provided most of the family stability for her now college age step brother who was born when she was 26. Regularly taking him to museums and establishing traditions like making Christmas cookies. Even though he never lived with her. She provided many loving things for her half brother that his parents couldn't pull themselves together to do. Her nieces (by another brother) are upper elem age. She's taught them film making among other things. She has amazing connections to family and never felt the need for children. She also has a full life with work travel and friends. She makes time for a lot of people in her life. I think there are lots of childless by choice people out there who are happy, connected to people and the world and have no regrets.

 

I have heard of people who regretted not having children and their main complaint was no one to spend time with them. Honestly, if you are self absorbed as a parent raising children you may not have anyone caring for you in your old age. I don't think think my good friend will lack for visitors as she ages.

 

For the record:

I think there are people irresponsible about all kinds of decision making in this world.

I like cupcakes.

I like kilts.

I had a pet parrotkeet when I was a kid. She was a lot fun.

[momtoamiracle]

 

I think you are answering your own question. Some people are bigger planners than others. That's all. Some people aren't phased by the "what if". I can't stop thinking about the "what if" so that's a huge reason I don't have more kids. But the whole having babies thing is just a human thing.

 

 

 

 

I"m the same way. I'm always thinking the "what if" and the next step ahead. I guess because of things that happened to us and to our friends.

 

 

I don't take anything for granted either...

[astrid]

Absolutely true. And why I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with a low income mother deciding she wants to take care of her own child instead of put them in daycare to bring home pennies.

 

 

 

Again. The problem here is people are asking the wrong question.

 

The question is why are they having babies?

 

The questions should be:

Why are they terrible people?

Why are they having sex?

Why are they haing relationships with losers?

Why are they not getting an education?

Why do we tolerate jobs that don't pay a living wage?

Why do we pay daycare workers crappy salaries to watch other people's children and then complain that they have the nerve tI want more of their own? (Heck. My question is how'd they manage to keep that desire after working in daycare?!)

 

The problem is NOT having babies.

Babies are nothing more than the natural result of having sex between two people.

Yet babies are the fixted decision we are questioning.

 

That is what I don't understand.

 

 

 

I have yet to see a single problem poverty presents that rich folks don't have too. Morons? Check. Jerks? Check. Poorly educated? Check. Broken or abusive or uncaring families? Check. Drugs? Check. Bad parenting? Check. The difference is rich people can buy breaks and poor people just have toslink or swim with the weight of it.

 

 

 

Again. Why blame the babies? The decisions that are the problem are decision made way before getting pregnant. Why is the focus on this one decision?

 

 

 

I don't think working or having one child is strike against anyone.

My only point was that to me asking why I would want number 10 is ridiculous. It's the same reason I would want number 1.

 

When I see a woman who has a child, 1 or more, in bad circumstances, I don't think, "Why is she having that baby?!" I think instead, "Why was she in that foolish relationship to begin with?! Why was she dating that turd? Why doesn't she get her act together?" and many other wonderings of what decisions created this problem situation. Because the problem isn't the pregnancy or the child. The problem is the decisions 9 months prior to that.

 

 

Who is blaming babies?

 

And no, I don't think many people see the kind of poverty and its repercussions that I was referencing. Hollow-cheeked, several-generations-of-crack-addicted-family-members, profoundly mentally ill. Literally no way out. Duquesne University is a major accomplishment; bravo to that boy! But most of the profoundly urban poor have more of a chance of winning the lottery than graduating from a school like Duquesne. It's just not a possibility for the vast majority of the population with which I am most familiar.

 

astrid

[Dmmetler]

Because waiting to have children "later" often means waiting to have children "never". Or, like us, having one child only after significant loss, risk, and complications. In 20/20 hindsight, I wish I'd started trying to get pregnant about age 25, once we were both out of school and working, even though we didn't have the savings, nice house, etc yet. Waiting until I was in my 30s was too long-and I'm now 40 and facing that I'm almost certainly NOT going to have a 2nd living biological child. I don't feel too old-but my body has other ideas.

[Joan in GE]

I think it is the attitude with which one faces difficulties that makes all the difference......

 

Some of our best memories came out of challenges faced and mastered rather than everything being 'perfect'....

 

Sometimes when all the financial aspects were 'perfect' the attitudes were horrible and no one was happy although according to all the commercials, everyone should have been....

 

What do truly happy children have? I think it is 'love'...not things...

 

Joan

[Murphy101]

You mean like the condemnation that comes through in posts like yours?

 

Yeahhh. That was a prime pot vs kettle moment.

 

"Accidents" do happen even with birth control. I conceived my eldest while on Depo-Provera. My doctor was SHOCKED.

 

Usually when people call it an "accident", they seem to be referring to failed birth control.

 

Though even then I don't think it is an accident. Sex causes babies. I swear I need to make that my avatar or something because for all the sex education in our country, people really do not seem to comprehend that fact.

 

Dh and I have an on going family joke. Years ago we were trying to think how someone could get pregnant by accident. We decided *maybe* if the couple was running about naked in the house and one of them slipped in a banana peel and fell very strategically on an unusually happy man - well maybe, just maybe , THAT would be an accident.

 

If you have reproductive organs and you have sex, you are risking pregnancy. That's not an accident just because the odds were against it to some degree. Heck, no one ever says they won the lottery by accident and the odds of that are less than of getting pregnant!

 

So I guess I think the whole attitude of they should use birth control is rather ridiculous. Because that is basically saying it's okay to risk pregnancy in "dire situations" (whatever that means) as long as the chances are low, but that doesn't seem to be what people are actually implying. If they really want to judge that they shouldn't get pregnant, then be honest about it and say flat out that what they shouldn't be doing is having sex. It seems rather disingenuous to me to act as though having sex is some uncontrollable mandate, but then be all disgruntled and angry about the natural result of it.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

That's it, I can't follow this thread anymore, because now I have this hilarious visual (that won't leave my mind) of a naked woman slipping on a banana peel and falling strategically on an unusually happy man.

 

:laugh:

[Mrs Mungo]

Martha,

I don't disagree that babies result from sex. I was directly responding to the post disparaging people who don't use bc. I was married, we had insurance, dh had a good job, etc. We were fine with it. But, given how doctors talk about DP? I can understand thinking you were okay for sex and being very surprised by a pregnancy. I never trusted my fertility to hormonal birth control again and we never had another unplanned pregnancy.

 

 

[Murphy101]

I don't see it as the baby being the problem, it's bringing the baby into a situation where it will suffer.

In my area in the past year at least a dozen small children and babies have been killed by abuse. They are innocent victims. I don't understand women in these situations that allow their children to suffer like that. If you're going to stay with someone abusive, don't have a child that will end up dead in a year. If you want children that will survive, get out.

that's my biggest beef, I think.... has nothing to do with money, more with the potential for death within the first 5 years of life at the hands of another.

 

 

So you do what you can to change the situation. Because that's the problem. An awful senseless completely preventable problem. Which is why it makes me want to bang my head on a wall to contemplate it. I just don't get it either. How you make it through a day without thumping their heads together is beyond me. (ETA: that last sentence was in reference to Astrid who says she works daily in this stuff.)

 

 

I think you are answering your own question. Some people are bigger planners than others. That's all. Some people aren't phased by the "what if". I can't stop thinking about the "what if" so that's a huge reason I don't have more kids. But the whole having babies thing is just a human thing.

 

 

I am a HUGE planner. I lament God's lack of sharing His plans with me daily. *sigh*