Conflict around family size

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP is it not possible to "get pregnant on purpose"?

I forgot the "accidentally" part - critical to my question!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What were your vows then? I promise to love you but only if you always do everything I want the way I want it?

So you're saying it's OK for the husband to back on his promise but not OK for the OP to go back on her vows?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is it not possible to "get pregnant on purpose"?

I forgot the "accidentally" part - critical to my question!

As long as she doesn't mind being a single parent, it sounds like a great idea!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here - I think part of the issue is expectations about marriage - mine, my husband's, and a lot of yours -PPs. I'm not guided by strict religious or cultural traditions, nor is my husband. If we were strictly Catholic, e.g., we'd have those "rules" to guide us. If we believed that marriage was about pro-creation, then we'd likely have gotten married much younger, and started a family far sooner.

What I've realized about myself, is that I married partially for companionship, but a large part of marrying for me was also about having a family - children - not just one.

That's why family size is so integral to my "relationship" to my husband. Now if my husband were somehow unable to reproduce a second time, I wouldn't divorce him for that. But his stance reflects a value different than mine of what our marriage is about.

NP here. Yes, OP, but while you're wallowing in the "I do it my way" routine please remember that you have ALREADY brought a child into the world with this man. That little human that you created (and you obviously think you are a blue ribbon mom at raising, because hey, you're up for doing it again) NEEDS A FATHER. It's not just about YOU and your baby eyes anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - I think part of the issue is expectations about marriage - mine, my husband's, and a lot of yours -PPs. I'm not guided by strict religious or cultural traditions, nor is my husband. If we were strictly Catholic, e.g., we'd have those "rules" to guide us. If we believed that marriage was about pro-creation, then we'd likely have gotten married much younger, and started a family far sooner.

What I've realized about myself, is that I married partially for companionship, but a large part of marrying for me was also about having a family - children - not just one.

That's why family size is so integral to my "relationship" to my husband. Now if my husband were somehow unable to reproduce a second time, I wouldn't divorce him for that. But his stance reflects a value different than mine of what our marriage is about.

NP here. Yes, OP, but while you're wallowing in the "I do it my way" routine please remember that you have ALREADY brought a child into the world with this man. That little human that you created (and you obviously think you are a blue ribbon mom at raising, because hey, you're up for doing it again) NEEDS A FATHER. It's not just about YOU and your baby eyes anymore.

Would you say the same thing if the husband cheated? Or stole? The child would still need a father, no, A FATHER, then, wouldn't he/she?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - I think part of the issue is expectations about marriage - mine, my husband's, and a lot of yours -PPs. I'm not guided by strict religious or cultural traditions, nor is my husband. If we were strictly Catholic, e.g., we'd have those "rules" to guide us. If we believed that marriage was about pro-creation, then we'd likely have gotten married much younger, and started a family far sooner.

What I've realized about myself, is that I married partially for companionship, but a large part of marrying for me was also about having a family - children - not just one.

That's why family size is so integral to my "relationship" to my husband. Now if my husband were somehow unable to reproduce a second time, I wouldn't divorce him for that. But his stance reflects a value different than mine of what our marriage is about.

NP here. Yes, OP, but while you're wallowing in the "I do it my way" routine please remember that you have ALREADY brought a child into the world with this man. That little human that you created (and you obviously think you are a blue ribbon mom at raising, because hey, you're up for doing it again) NEEDS A FATHER. It's not just about YOU and your baby eyes anymore.

OP here - how many children do you have, and how did you and your spouse/partner decide on how many to have? Are you still together?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - I think part of the issue is expectations about marriage - mine, my husband's, and a lot of yours -PPs. I'm not guided by strict religious or cultural traditions, nor is my husband. If we were strictly Catholic, e.g., we'd have those "rules" to guide us. If we believed that marriage was about pro-creation, then we'd likely have gotten married much younger, and started a family far sooner.

What I've realized about myself, is that I married partially for companionship, but a large part of marrying for me was also about having a family - children - not just one.

That's why family size is so integral to my "relationship" to my husband. Now if my husband were somehow unable to reproduce a second time, I wouldn't divorce him for that. But his stance reflects a value different than mine of what our marriage is about.

NP here. Yes, OP, but while you're wallowing in the "I do it my way" routine please remember that you have ALREADY brought a child into the world with this man. That little human that you created (and you obviously think you are a blue ribbon mom at raising, because hey, you're up for doing it again) NEEDS A FATHER. It's not just about YOU and your baby eyes anymore.

Would you say the same thing if the husband cheated? Or stole? The child would still need a father, no, A FATHER, then, wouldn't he/she?

Are you seriously not able to make a distinction between these situations? Those are moral/ criminal offenses. But yes, it would still be heartbreaking for the child to lose his dad in this way. But for OP to intentionally break up the family over something that is, in reality, all about her, is the height of self-centeredness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - I think part of the issue is expectations about marriage - mine, my husband's, and a lot of yours -PPs. I'm not guided by strict religious or cultural traditions, nor is my husband. If we were strictly Catholic, e.g., we'd have those "rules" to guide us. If we believed that marriage was about pro-creation, then we'd likely have gotten married much younger, and started a family far sooner.

What I've realized about myself, is that I married partially for companionship, but a large part of marrying for me was also about having a family - children - not just one.

That's why family size is so integral to my "relationship" to my husband. Now if my husband were somehow unable to reproduce a second time, I wouldn't divorce him for that. But his stance reflects a value different than mine of what our marriage is about.

NP here. Yes, OP, but while you're wallowing in the "I do it my way" routine please remember that you have ALREADY brought a child into the world with this man. That little human that you created (and you obviously think you are a blue ribbon mom at raising, because hey, you're up for doing it again) NEEDS A FATHER. It's not just about YOU and your baby eyes anymore.

OP here - how many children do you have, and how did you and your spouse/partner decide on how many to have? Are you still together?

Not that it really matters because the specific circumstances don't change the underlying moral principles involved, but... I have two. DH and I didn't "decide," exactly, because as in many cases fate decided for us. Of course we are still together. We made vows to each other and committed to raise the child(ren) we were blessed with having.

[Anonymous]

I've only skimmed this thread so not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but OP you need to seek therapy stat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've only skimmed this thread so not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but OP you need to seek therapy stat.

I think one can generally assume that in a thread that goes on for 11+ pages, someone has most likely mentioned therapy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What were your vows then? I promise to love you but only if you always do everything I want the way I want it?

So you're saying it's OK for the husband to back on his promise but not OK for the OP to go back on her vows?

IIRC, OP's spouse said he would consider it, after she made her ultimatum that she wouldn't marry him - after they already conceived a kid.

OP, if you are going to criticize people for not discussing kids in the earlier phases of dating, you need to take a good hard look at yourself. You knew that having a kid with this guy was going to bind you to him in some way forever - and you didn't have the nerve to discuss family size with him BEFORE you became pregnant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've only skimmed this thread so not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but OP you need to seek therapy stat.

I think one can generally assume that in a thread that goes on for 11+ pages, someone has most likely mentioned therapy.

Ah yes, the American conviction that all problems can be solved with talking.

[Anonymous]

I am not opposed to divorce, but I think it is interesting how you can't stand you have your dream of another child shattered, but you are fine with shattering your child's dream (assuming most kids value this as long as the marriage is decent) of having both mother and father together. Why does your dream win?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've only skimmed this thread so not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but OP you need to seek therapy stat.

I think one can generally assume that in a thread that goes on for 11+ pages, someone has most likely mentioned therapy.

She needs individual therapy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What were your vows then? I promise to love you but only if you always do everything I want the way I want it?

So you're saying it's OK for the husband to back on his promise but not OK for the OP to go back on her vows?

IIRC, OP's spouse said he would consider it, after she made her ultimatum that she wouldn't marry him - after they already conceived a kid.

OP, if you are going to criticize people for not discussing kids in the earlier phases of dating, you need to take a good hard look at yourself. You knew that having a kid with this guy was going to bind you to him in some way forever - and you didn't have the nerve to discuss family size with him BEFORE you became pregnant?

OP here - I agree. It's strange we didn't discuss family size - especially because we discussed our views on having children on the first date. Looking back, my take on it is that I assumed that because I said I wanted children - and he never said, ok - but only one - I thought children meant at least two. And I wasn't craving 4 or 5, or something unusual. So, yes, stupid, but that's how it went.