37 single, want a baby, make about 95k a year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until there is a generation of men raised to treat women as equals in the home and workplace and to participate equally in all aspects of child-rearing and home management, many women won't have a choice but to set out on their own.

I have one child where that may be possible but still they don't seem to have the same capacity that I do as a woman with multitasking and another one that will never get there in a lifetime. I try and I try but not all brains are built the same way and I daresay that a lot of women could not or are not interested in many jobs that men do. I dont think this is realistic. I do think more men could be taught to value parenting and marriage. Many men these days don't even value them to even start much less try to be on equal terms with a woman in the home.

Wow. Either your sons have special needs that can't be extrapolated to the entire gender, or you are the problem with your soft bigotry of low expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That may be but the answer to financial instability isn’t to have more kids. I’m the single mom of one and NFW could I have handled two or more.

Be that as it may, I’m talking about what would be better for the children.

Why is it better for kids to have an even more financially stressed parent?

It’s better for the children to have someone to share the burden and not have a single mom who is solely dependent on them both in her old age and often as lines tend to get blurred even when they are young.

Both my brother and my dad died young so now it's just me taking care of my mom in her old age (and it's a lot as she has dementia). So, best laid plans can certainly go awry. For OP to have only one child because that's what she can handle versus having two kids with a husband doesn't mean things won't be the same in 40 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Infant childcare in the DMV is more than. $2k per month. Can you afford that?

It is only that high for a small infant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until there is a generation of men raised to treat women as equals in the home and workplace and to participate equally in all aspects of child-rearing and home management, many women won't have a choice but to set out on their own.

I have one child where that may be possible but still they don't seem to have the same capacity that I do as a woman with multitasking and another one that will never get there in a lifetime. I try and I try but not all brains are built the same way and I daresay that a lot of women could not or are not interested in many jobs that men do. I dont think this is realistic. I do think more men could be taught to value parenting and marriage. Many men these days don't even value them to even start much less try to be on equal terms with a woman in the home.

So men are very interested in the process that produces children but the we allow them to “lose interest” when the children are born because they are so busy doing society’s “important “ (ie, highly paid) work.

I don’t buy it. Your views are hopelessly outdated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That may be but the answer to financial instability isn’t to have more kids. I’m the single mom of one and NFW could I have handled two or more.

Be that as it may, I’m talking about what would be better for the children.

Why is it better for kids to have an even more financially stressed parent?

It’s better for the children to have someone to share the burden and not have a single mom who is solely dependent on them both in her old age and often as lines tend to get blurred even when they are young.

Ouch!

-Widowed mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That may be but the answer to financial instability isn’t to have more kids. I’m the single mom of one and NFW could I have handled two or more.

Be that as it may, I’m talking about what would be better for the children.

Why is it better for kids to have an even more financially stressed parent?

It’s better for the children to have someone to share the burden and not have a single mom who is solely dependent on them both in her old age and often as lines tend to get blurred even when they are young.

Both my brother and my dad died young so now it's just me taking care of my mom in her old age (and it's a lot as she has dementia). So, best laid plans can certainly go awry. For OP to have only one child because that's what she can handle versus having two kids with a husband doesn't mean things won't be the same in 40 years.

Of course they can, but that doesn’t mean that you should deliberately set out to strive for a scenario that is easier for you but harder on your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Infant childcare in the DMV is more than. $2k per month. Can you afford that?

It is only that high for a small infant.

But childcare rates also tend to increase each year so even as your kid moves up to the “cheaper” rates the actual costs rarely go down much, if at all.

[Anonymous]

Waiting to find a partner comes with a real risk that is just not worth it, in my opinion. I wish I had gone the single mom by choice route (but I know the younger me would have thought that was crazy) . Co-parenting with an abusive/disordered/negligent ex-husband is far, far, FAR worse. I met my ex in my 20s when I was young and so very sheltered and naive. I unfortunately entangled myself with someone who turned out to be a horrible person. I think about how peaceful and free my life and my kids lives would be if I had been a single mom by choice. Being a single mom is not easy, but it is orders of magnitude worse and harder when you have a horrible other parent in the mix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That may be but the answer to financial instability isn’t to have more kids. I’m the single mom of one and NFW could I have handled two or more.

Be that as it may, I’m talking about what would be better for the children.

Why is it better for kids to have an even more financially stressed parent?

It’s better for the children to have someone to share the burden and not have a single mom who is solely dependent on them both in her old age and often as lines tend to get blurred even when they are young.

Both my brother and my dad died young so now it's just me taking care of my mom in her old age (and it's a lot as she has dementia). So, best laid plans can certainly go awry. For OP to have only one child because that's what she can handle versus having two kids with a husband doesn't mean things won't be the same in 40 years.

Of course they can, but that doesn’t mean that you should deliberately set out to strive for a scenario that is easier for you but harder on your kid.

I can’t believe how hard you are perseverating on this and how selfish and blind you are to reality. Conditions that are hard on the mother of young children, such as having more children than she can stably support or take care of, are ALSO hard on the child/children. NO ONE should have more children than they can reliably care for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try to find a partner with the same values and goals

This. Don’t take shortcuts. You can do this.

She is almost out of time
If she couldn’t find anyone until now why would she now?

They can adopt or use reproductive technology. The key is to try to have children grow up in a stable 2 parent household if possible

You are offering the woman to inflict significant physical discomfort on herself or let go of the hope to have a bio child? Hmmm

Get your meds straight.

Haha how many did you adopt despite being able to have bio kids? lol

How many single moms are you helping?

I am one myself

How many are helping? None.

[Anonymous]

If you want this deep in your heart and you have a family that will help support you, go for it. I had my twins through donor sperm and it was the best decision of my life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you want this deep in your heart and you have a family that will help support you, go for it. I had my twins through donor sperm and it was the best decision of my life.

Of your life, not theirs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want this deep in your heart and you have a family that will help support you, go for it. I had my twins through donor sperm and it was the best decision of my life.

Of your life, not theirs.

DP.

Did the twins personally tell you that, random Internet twit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want this deep in your heart and you have a family that will help support you, go for it. I had my twins through donor sperm and it was the best decision of my life.

Of your life, not theirs.

DP.

Did the twins personally tell you that, random Internet twit?

Common sense and statistics tell us that, real life twat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want this deep in your heart and you have a family that will help support you, go for it. I had my twins through donor sperm and it was the best decision of my life.

Of your life, not theirs.

DP.

Did the twins personally tell you that, random Internet twit?

How would they know, they’ve never had a dad? How sad that is.