Pregnant with non-boyfriend - he wants me to keep it

[Anonymous]

Do what you believe to be best for you and your family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why in the world did you tell him?

I'm betting OP is a little more into him than he is into her. She was hoping he would have this come to Jesus moment where he'd decide to commit, cut back on hours, etc and be a legitimate boyfriend who was ready to be in her kids lives.

This whole "he works a lot so he doesn't want to commit, but he's in love with me" is BS. If he was in love with OP, he'd call her his girlfriend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!

Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.

So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.

They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipend which is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.

Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?

You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!

Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.

So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.

They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipend which is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.

Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?

You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.

I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."

He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!

Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.

So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.

They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipend which is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.

Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?

You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.

I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."

He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.

You know that's called blackmail. What if he calls her bluff and says no payment for you then what.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!

Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.

So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.

They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipend which is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.

Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?

You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.

I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."

He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.

You know that's called blackmail. What if he calls her bluff and says no payment for you then what.

Then his being an anti-abortion zealot (or so-called "pro-life) means he doesn't care about the actual life of the baby and its siblings. She should abort and then kick him to the curb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you just give him the kid to raise on his own?

Why be a free surrogate and nanny for this guy?

[Anonymous]

OP there’s also your career to think about. Taking 2-3-4 years to raise another child while also minding your 2 others is not going to help your career. As for his millions — they are HIS millions. He hasn’t parted with them yet and you have no guarantee that he will in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP there’s also your career to think about. Taking 2-3-4 years to raise another child while also minding your 2 others is not going to help your career. As for his millions — they are HIS millions. He hasn’t parted with them yet and you have no guarantee that he will in the future.

I mean, he can though. That’s what irrevocable trusts are for. Anyone suggesting a child support payment plan is insane.

[Anonymous]

If you decide to have this kid he needs to put a large sum of money aside for the child and you two need to go to a lawyer and draw up papers that outlines specifics for custody, care, caretaking etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP there’s also your career to think about. Taking 2-3-4 years to raise another child while also minding your 2 others is not going to help your career. As for his millions — they are HIS millions. He hasn’t parted with them yet and you have no guarantee that he will in the future.

This. And if he's pulling this "I'm Catholic so no abortion" stuff first, rather than talking about how to make things work, I would be careful. Sounds like he's more into control than being happy about a baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!

Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.

So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.

They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipend which is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.

Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?

You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.

I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."

He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.

You know that's called blackmail. What if he calls her bluff and says no payment for you then what.

How is it blackmail? This could ruin her whole life or her kids life. He can go adopt or get a kid in some other way. But she takes a leap of faith here that really is not comparable. She needs to make sure that she and her existing kids will be ok if she does this. That is not blackmail it is being a responsible parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you DCUMers saying to marry the guy are blinded by his supposed "millions". Reminds me of 50 Shades of Grey. If he was some bus driver making $30K a year, we all know what the answer to OP's question would be. The hypocrisy is astounding. Personally, I don't think highly of people who end up in OP's situation..men or women...but it does sound like OP is one of those single moms.

Nope, just being practical. It is an absolute fact that money can bring more stability to a marriage, and take out a whole list of stressors. Or course it is easier to marry a rich man who loves you vs. a poor one. If OP is a pregnant single mom, the stability that an established man who loves her would bring to her life would be a good thing.

On a side note, I'd be curious to know the general source of this guy's money. Is he self-made? Is he a layabout over grown party boy with a trust fund? Is he feeding at the trough of his parents' wealth, in which case they could cut off support at any time? Is he a responsible guy with a trust fund?

He is financially conservative and had a modest trust that he invested well. Well-educated, super smart, very hard worker. He’s a business executive.

I was (maybe still am) in the "marry him" camp, but your last couple of posts describing him as married to work and not into commitment are kind of an issue.

Have you talked to him about how he's going to be an involved father when he's working and traveling for work all the time? Does he see the discord between desperately wanting you to have the baby and also maintaining his current work/life balance.

That would bother me - a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Marry him?

I’ve thought about this. I worry, though, because he hasn’t even met my children, and it would be a huge change for everyone involved in a very short amount of time. Seems like a recipe for disaster.

Well, you're friends, you love him and he's suggested marriage. At 5 weeks, you both need to have the fast hard talk. Get an overnight sitter and hole up for 24 hours to figure it out. He has the means and from what he says, the desire to be with you and baby. He knows you have kids and still offered this commitment which means he is committed to your family. It's the best possible scenario.

Lot of details to work out but it can work. As long as your kids are loved and included in the process, they will be ok! You're not blending family, this will be their baby too! 9 months is a long time in kid time, they'll be ok!

Ditto the comment immediately above WITH a prenup. If you continue the pregnancy, you need your own attorney stat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!

Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.

So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.

They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipend which is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.

Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?

You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.

I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."

He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.

You know that's called blackmail. What if he calls her bluff and says no payment for you then what.

How is it blackmail? This could ruin her whole life or her kids life. He can go adopt or get a kid in some other way. But she takes a leap of faith here that really is not comparable. She needs to make sure that she and her existing kids will be ok if she does this. That is not blackmail it is being a responsible parent.

You are defining "be OK" above as "have money." You don't understand that money/nannies/housekeepers/tuition do not equate to her kids being "OK" with the emotional and mental effects of all this: Sudden half-sibling much younger than they are, possibly a new stepdad who can't get to know them anyway because he's gone so much, loss of feeling secure when this gets presented to them mere months before it all happens....

This thread's lack of anything but monetary concern for her existing kids is weird and wrong.

Also, to OP: Is there any chance that your ex might decide he isn't thrilled (with whatever--new baby, unmarried, or married, new husband who has barely met the kids) and that he might make custody issues for you over this? Before someone jumps in to say that OP's remarrying or not, or her having a baby while married or not, is not legally relevant to her custody arrangements with her ex: I know that. Legally that's so. But some exes can be nasty if there's a change they just don't like. And they can make life a pain even if they don't have a legal leg to stand on. If OP's ex might do that, it's something for which she needs to be prepared.