husband wants to keep baby and I don't

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You could live to be 100 yrs old or older. Your kid better be able to support herself without the inheritance. Ultimately it is your choice. Make sure you are okay being a single parent though.

And your kid will have to take care of you all by herself.

Luckily when my mom was dying of breast cancer I had my sister around for support and to share the work load.

There is nothing written down to say that children have to take care of their parents. Ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s no middle ground, I’m afraid. One or potentially all of you is going to be unhappy no matter how your proceed. Contact a divorce lawyer and a family therapist today. You’re going to need both. Good luck!

This. This is your body so ultimately you get to decide to have the baby or not.

The baby has a body also. There are two bodies here.

Nope. 1) There is no baby. Just a clump of cells. 2) The woman has to consent to carrying those cells and in this case the woman does not. The woman’s choice will ALWAYS come first. ALWAYS.

DP. I am very pro-choice and agree with you that it is ultimately OP’s decision whether to continue this pregnancy. What happens after that is not entirely in her control, though. Her husband would be entirely within his rights to file for divorce over this, and OP would be powerless to stop it. If OP’s daughter ever found out about it, she may have her own feelings about OP’s choice that could affect her relationship with OP. So while the ultimate decision is OP’s, I think it’s important for her to be realistic about how the various scenarios might play out as part of her decision-making.

Both of those scenarios are far superior to OP being forced to have a second, unwanted child and for said child to enter into a world having been so unwanted.

Unless you are OP, you don’t know that choosing to have the baby would be worse than the alternatives. Part of being pro-choice is accepting that it’s OP’s choice to make, whether it’s the same one you think you would make or not.

Exactly. Glad you agree. OP has said she wants an abortion. So posting comments that she should continue with the pregnancy, that it’s her husband and daughters decision as well, are inappropriate and uncalled for.

OP has stated she wants to terminate AND have her DH be onboard and not divorce or have any consequence for her decision to terminate. However, she doesn't get both. I think many posters are pointing out that each choice (to have or not) has consequences beyond the immediate decision. For example, If she and her DH divorce, the financial hit to her DC may be similar to "sharing the pot".

Quit making things up. OP has said none of the bold. Try reading what OP wrote and stop bringing your anti-choice agenda into this thread.

I am not making anything up (and I am as pro-choice as they come) In the OP's initial post she wrote "If I terminate he threatened divorce. " Her initial post also makes it clear that she does not want a divorce.

[Anonymous]

You get an abortion, he gets a divorce and you both live happily ever after.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s your body.

And her husband's baby and her DD's sibling.

Not enough reason to make her do something with her body that she doesn’t want to do.

Just. Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You get an abortion, he gets a divorce and you both live happily ever after.

And you split your monies 50-50 in the divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s your body.

And her husband's baby and her DD's sibling.

No, it's a fetus. Not a baby.

Yet, OP cuts through the euphemisms and calls it a "baby" her subject line. She knows what's at stake -- do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s your body.

And her husband's baby and her DD's sibling.

No, it's a fetus. Not a baby.

Yet, OP cuts through the euphemisms and calls it a "baby" her subject line. She knows what's at stake -- do you?

Try again.

1. Pro Choice still the law of the land.
2. Learn science it's not a "baby"

Stop trying to push your agenda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s your body.

And her husband's baby and her DD's sibling.

No, it's a fetus. Not a baby.

Yet, OP cuts through the euphemisms and calls it a "baby" her subject line. She knows what's at stake -- do you?

Try again.

1. Pro Choice still the law of the land.
2. Learn science it's not a "baby"

Stop trying to push your agenda.

Np. OP use “baby”, so clearly she considers it a baby. You should stop trying to push your agenda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s no middle ground, I’m afraid. One or potentially all of you is going to be unhappy no matter how your proceed. Contact a divorce lawyer and a family therapist today. You’re going to need both. Good luck!

This. This is your body so ultimately you get to decide to have the baby or not.

The baby has a body also. There are two bodies here.

As does the baby's father, who will be obligated to work 18 years to support said baby. Of course it is a family decision!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s no middle ground, I’m afraid. One or potentially all of you is going to be unhappy no matter how your proceed. Contact a divorce lawyer and a family therapist today. You’re going to need both. Good luck!

This. This is your body so ultimately you get to decide to have the baby or not.

The baby has a body also. There are two bodies here.

Nope. 1) There is no baby. Just a clump of cells. 2) The woman has to consent to carrying those cells and in this case the woman does not. The woman’s choice will ALWAYS come first. ALWAYS.

DP. I am very pro-choice and agree with you that it is ultimately OP’s decision whether to continue this pregnancy. What happens after that is not entirely in her control, though. Her husband would be entirely within his rights to file for divorce over this, and OP would be powerless to stop it. If OP’s daughter ever found out about it, she may have her own feelings about OP’s choice that could affect her relationship with OP. So while the ultimate decision is OP’s, I think it’s important for her to be realistic about how the various scenarios might play out as part of her decision-making.

Both of those scenarios are far superior to OP being forced to have a second, unwanted child and for said child to enter into a world having been so unwanted.

Unless you are OP, you don’t know that choosing to have the baby would be worse than the alternatives. Part of being pro-choice is accepting that it’s OP’s choice to make, whether it’s the same one you think you would make or not.

Exactly. Glad you agree. OP has said she wants an abortion. So posting comments that she should continue with the pregnancy, that it’s her husband and daughters decision as well, are inappropriate and uncalled for.

OP has stated she wants to terminate AND have her DH be onboard and not divorce or have any consequence for her decision to terminate. However, she doesn't get both. I think many posters are pointing out that each choice (to have or not) has consequences beyond the immediate decision. For example, If she and her DH divorce, the financial hit to her DC may be similar to "sharing the pot".

Quit making things up. OP has said none of the bold. Try reading what OP wrote and stop bringing your anti-choice agenda into this thread.

+!00

Agree too. It's more like OP took husband at his word, and he's flipped. That's jarring for anyone, not that she wants him on board with "her agenda." She thought "they" had an agenda.

OP’s husband already changed his mind once about having kids (hence the 11yo), so it’s a little ridiculous for her to claim she never could have imagined he would change his mind again.

Taking him at his word/promise is not ridiculous. It's sad to me that he would flip on that. Whether he would really like another child or not, he did promise her. And he's now going back on that. That's a huge promise to break. You should be able to believe that he meant what he said, hence her reason for telling him. So not only is he breaking his promise, he's staking the entire marriage on his ability to break that promise. This is why I think the marriage is doomed.

[Anonymous]

I understand the whole “my body my choice” thing. Really, I do. But in a situation like this it really is just a little more complicated. Is it really fair to say that the husband’s opinion should not count at all, ever? Really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You get an abortion, he gets a divorce and you both live happily ever after.

And you split your monies 50-50 in the divorce.

Then he remarried younger, has 3 more kids and your first child still gets less than 109% of what you currently have.

Win-win for all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another point of view: my friend has a sister 12 years younger. They are in 50s and 60s. When my friend got breast cancer, her sister was there for her. Parents are deceased. They have a beautiful relationship with shared vacations and outings. So this sibling may be a source of joy for your daughter in years to come that may be worth more than money.

I totally agree. Things are happen for a reason, OP. Just accept it, and see what life will going to bring you. You might be surprised!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP I bet your child will love the baby. But having been in a similar situation, where my mom didn't want to have me, I suggest you go to therapy if you do decide to.keep the child.

If you only wanted one and no.more, why didn't you have your tubes tied when you had your first, instead of messing around with birth control? Something isn't adding up in this story.

Another option would be to have the baby, get tubes tied, get a divorce and give dad full custody of both children and you have visitation rights. That way you are done, and he gets to have the kids he wanted.

NP. I would never have my tubes tied, even though I do not want more children. You still ovulate and the eggs build up in the tubes, causing other risks. Having my tubes tied is against my religion as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You could live to be 100 yrs old or older. Your kid better be able to support herself without the inheritance. Ultimately it is your choice. Make sure you are okay being a single parent though.

And your kid will have to take care of you all by herself.

Luckily when my mom was dying of breast cancer I had my sister around for support and to share the work load.

This is a dum reason to bring a "child" into this world. You have no idea if the siblings will get along. If they will want to help. There are so many reasons this is stupid.

Yes - much better to kill it. Maybe kill the DD also while there at it.

You are pro birth.

I'm saying it again Pro Choice is a choice. You don't want an abortion don't have one. You don't get to judge someone who does. Again get educated! It's called SCIENCE.