My husband doesn't want kids

[Anonymous]

Do you love him? You can be happy childfree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you love him? You can be happy childfree.

Why does he get what he wants and she doesn't?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you love him? You can be happy childfree.

Does he love her? Love is not lying about your intentions to manipulate a person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that no one has focused on OPS language: “I couldn’t have been clearer and he agreed.” Note that she doesn’t say “and he said he wanted them too.“

Not so sure he “changed his mind.”

Who gives a shit? She’s 31 and can still have kids elsewhere!!! Run OP!!

I am not saying she should or shouldn’t. What I am saying is that it’s not necessarily fair to blame the guy. It sounds like OP went into the marriage with a lot of wishful thinking.

Who cares about blame. She is on the tail end of fertility and he is playing games and wasting her time.

But because she's on the tail end of fertility, she needs to accept the real possibility that she won't have a child if she leaves him either.

Huh? 31 is not the tail end of fertility. She has plenty of time, and suggesting she stay and actively have children with someone who specifically said they didn't want them is NOT a good plan.

1 year divorce, 3 years to find someone, 1 year to get married, 2 years of marriage before having kids.

That's 37 years. Kids at 38 years old is how you end up with kids with ASD or Downs.

Dp

That’s not an unreasonable timeline. 3 years would be finding and dating someone to determine whether they are capable of being a good father and husband.

I think 31 is definitely still in the cut and run range. If she is dating very intentionally, and looks for men slightly older, I think this could easily be under 3 years.

Maybe. She's cutting it very, very close. Men are well aware of increased risks that come with geriatric pregnancies- particularly among men interested in having kids. They're not going to want to marry someone who is already in her mid-30s.

Oh please. All of my friends married well into their thirties to men who wanted children. They all had kids, and all the kids are thriving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But because she's on the tail end of fertility, she needs to accept the real possibility that she won't have a child if she leaves him either.

It is selfish to even consider knowingly bringing a child into a family where the father does not want them.

I didn't say she should. She'll may need to decide between keeping her current partner and being alone forever.

What’s preventing her from finding a new partner? She may not be able to become pregnant but that’s another matter.

There's no guarantee she'll find someone knew or have a child.

That’s life. There are few guarantees. There is nothing to prevent OP from trying.

That's right. She could try, but things could end up worse.

Worse how?

What might happen that won’t happen if she remains in her present situation? She might not find a partner that wants a child? That’s her present situation.

Define worse.

She could end up alone.

Alone is better than being with a man she resents. Plus she can have a child alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But because she's on the tail end of fertility, she needs to accept the real possibility that she won't have a child if she leaves him either.

It is selfish to even consider knowingly bringing a child into a family where the father does not want them.

I didn't say she should. She'll may need to decide between keeping her current partner and being alone forever.

What’s preventing her from finding a new partner? She may not be able to become pregnant but that’s another matter.

There's no guarantee she'll find someone knew or have a child.

I'd rather have a child alone with 100% custody than co-parent with this guy.


That’s life. There are few guarantees. There is nothing to prevent OP from trying.

That's right. She could try, but things could end up worse.

Worse how?

What might happen that won’t happen if she remains in her present situation? She might not find a partner that wants a child? That’s her present situation.

Define worse.

She could end up alone.

Alone is better than being with a man she resents. Plus she can have a child alone.

[Anonymous]

At 31 I would lean towards divorcing and trying to quickly move on with a man who wants the same things as you.

But really make sure your husband isn’t willing to have kids first, if you do want it to work with him.

[Anonymous]

Total deal breaker. I’m sorry OP. I would consider getting pregnant ASAP then leave him. Better a single mom with child support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So what if there is an increase of .5 to 1 percent at 40 of a chromosonal abnormality? That is hardly an increase overall. You need to understand math better. There is nothing scary about these charts at all. Women have been having kids into their late 30s and early 40s for 100s of years.

The OP literally has 10 years before she needs to freak out.

You've got to be someone with little exposure to kids with significant special needs. And you can't test for many of them in utero, like ASD. These graphs should scare you.

Please stop. There is a lot we don't know about what leads to ASD, and the overwhelming majority of older mothers do not have SN kids. And younger moms also have kids with SN. Yes, the risk goes up. But the risk of OP having a kid with a father who does not want a child is 100%. You have to balance the risks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So what if there is an increase of .5 to 1 percent at 40 of a chromosonal abnormality? That is hardly an increase overall. You need to understand math better. There is nothing scary about these charts at all. Women have been having kids into their late 30s and early 40s for 100s of years.

The OP literally has 10 years before she needs to freak out.

You've got to be someone with little exposure to kids with significant special needs. And you can't test for many of them in utero, like ASD. These graphs should scare you.

Please stop. There is a lot we don't know about what leads to ASD, and the overwhelming majority of older mothers do not have SN kids. And younger moms also have kids with SN. Yes, the risk goes up. But the risk of OP having a kid with a father who does not want a child is 100%. You have to balance the risks.

We know the risks go up with age. For some conditions, significantly. It's irresponsible to not acknowledge and consider that in family planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

1 year divorce, 3 years to find someone, 1 year to get married, 2 years of marriage before having kids.

That's 37 years. Kids at 38 years old is how you end up with kids with ASD or Downs.

You don’t need this much time to meet someone or decide to marry when you’re older. Met dh in the fall of 2007; married early summer 2009; kids late 2009 and 2012.

Not everyone wants a shotgun wedding...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So what if there is an increase of .5 to 1 percent at 40 of a chromosonal abnormality? That is hardly an increase overall. You need to understand math better. There is nothing scary about these charts at all. Women have been having kids into their late 30s and early 40s for 100s of years.

The OP literally has 10 years before she needs to freak out.

You've got to be someone with little exposure to kids with significant special needs. And you can't test for many of them in utero, like ASD. These graphs should scare you.

Please stop. There is a lot we don't know about what leads to ASD, and the overwhelming majority of older mothers do not have SN kids. And younger moms also have kids with SN. Yes, the risk goes up. But the risk of OP having a kid with a father who does not want a child is 100%. You have to balance the risks.

We know the risks go up with age. For some conditions, significantly. It's irresponsible to not acknowledge and consider that in family planning.

Yet the people most touting these risks are 45+ men who want to scare 20 something women into having their children. Great family planing!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So what if there is an increase of .5 to 1 percent at 40 of a chromosonal abnormality? That is hardly an increase overall. You need to understand math better. There is nothing scary about these charts at all. Women have been having kids into their late 30s and early 40s for 100s of years.

The OP literally has 10 years before she needs to freak out.

You've got to be someone with little exposure to kids with significant special needs. And you can't test for many of them in utero, like ASD. These graphs should scare you.

Please stop. There is a lot we don't know about what leads to ASD, and the overwhelming majority of older mothers do not have SN kids. And younger moms also have kids with SN. Yes, the risk goes up. But the risk of OP having a kid with a father who does not want a child is 100%. You have to balance the risks.

We know the risks go up with age. For some conditions, significantly. It's irresponsible to not acknowledge and consider that in family planning.

Yet the people most touting these risks are 45+ men who want to scare 20 something women into having their children. Great family planing!!

That's not good, either. The risk also goes up with the father's age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So what if there is an increase of .5 to 1 percent at 40 of a chromosonal abnormality? That is hardly an increase overall. You need to understand math better. There is nothing scary about these charts at all. Women have been having kids into their late 30s and early 40s for 100s of years.

The OP literally has 10 years before she needs to freak out.

You've got to be someone with little exposure to kids with significant special needs. And you can't test for many of them in utero, like ASD. These graphs should scare you.

Please stop. There is a lot we don't know about what leads to ASD, and the overwhelming majority of older mothers do not have SN kids. And younger moms also have kids with SN. Yes, the risk goes up. But the risk of OP having a kid with a father who does not want a child is 100%. You have to balance the risks.

We know the risks go up with age. For some conditions, significantly. It's irresponsible to not acknowledge and consider that in family planning.

Tell me you don't understand statistics and risk without telling me you don't understand statistics and risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Total deal breaker. I’m sorry OP. I would consider getting pregnant ASAP then leave him. Better a single mom with child support.

This sounds horrible! He told her he doesn't want kids so make him an involuntary dad and collect child support?