DH wants to have only one child because of the environment

[Anonymous]

He's right.
It also means he feels absolutely no need for a second child, so this decision is purely a rational, not emotional, decision.
Which means it's easy for him, not so easy for a baby-yearning mother.

[Anonymous]

How dare the sperm donor piggy bank dare try to thwart the plans of the all knowing wife!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This has got to be a troll

You don't say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh whatever. In the meantime India will probably double their population in 20 years.

LOL, no shit...or some Muslim extremist in Michigan will squir out 7 babies and raise them all to hate everything about the country they were born in and make it their life goal to impose Sharia law here.

That's the real inconvenient truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a factor for people, I have heard more than one parent say they are worried for the world their adult children and grandchildren will have to have. Not so much that it will be hotter, but that there could be widespread migrants, war, food/water insecurity and a breakdown in the rule of law due to climate change.

+1. I feel terrible for the kids I have. I can't imagine that they will grow old happily. I look at the old people in pictures of refugees and think that will probably be America in another 50-150 years. Maybe they'll manage to eek by before it gets awful, but probably not my grandchildren. It's so sad.

You need a stronger SSRI. Seriously, I'm not being an asshole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a factor for people, I have heard more than one parent say they are worried for the world their adult children and grandchildren will have to have. Not so much that it will be hotter, but that there could be widespread migrants, war, food/water insecurity and a breakdown in the rule of law due to climate change.

I have a good start. Let's just STOP with the vaccination programs and clean water efforts. If you REALLY were serious, we'd let nature take care of things and the strones that would prevail. Let's start with Africa. The cities in that continent and unlike able. No emissions, smog so thick it blocks the sun and more vaccines, more treatments and those people are having babies by the dozen that all survive.

[Anonymous]

^^fucking phone. You see where I'm going. Stop with the social programs. Let the stone survive and weed out the stupid and the lame. The population will shrink much faster than some idiotic and unnatural program limiting children.

[Anonymous]

You need an heir and a spare. Fact.

[Anonymous]

Any chance you could convince him to go the whole way and have zero children?

[Anonymous]

You don't have to have kids at all.

[Anonymous]

Why did he marry you? He's right, btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tell him that in Africa and South Asia they're breeding like rabbits and one less North American kid is not going to make a damn bit of difference.

Also tell him to stop being such a weakling.

1. People in Western countries have a much larger footprint than Africa and South Asia.
2. It's not about one kid. It's about the need for people to stop be so selfish and realize the world is going to be a really shitty place for their kids if everyone insists on having many of them. Just reducing by .4 births per woman would have a drastic impact on making the world habitable for your kids.

OP, if you want the kids badly enough, you should want to bring them into a sustainable world. On our current track, the world is not going to be a pleasant place in 50 years. Your kids kids will be even worse off. Your DH is thinking about your first child's well-being in this decision. Why not consider adoption if multiple children are that important?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a factor for people, I have heard more than one parent say they are worried for the world their adult children and grandchildren will have to have. Not so much that it will be hotter, but that there could be widespread migrants, war, food/water insecurity and a breakdown in the rule of law due to climate change.

+1. I feel terrible for the kids I have. I can't imagine that they will grow old happily. I look at the old people in pictures of refugees and think that will probably be America in another 50-150 years. Maybe they'll manage to eek by before it gets awful, but probably not my grandchildren. It's so sad.

You need a stronger SSRI. Seriously, I'm not being an asshole.

Not PP. You are probably right because it's not healthy to spend day-to-day in as much anguish as PP describes. But, many of you on this thread need a serious reality check. What do you think is going to happen to magically reverse the trends we are seeing? Do you just not believe they are happening because you don't see it personally in your town? The worlds getting warmer and the weather more extreme. There will be food shortages. People from less developed countries will suffer terribly and there will be more refugees. Sea levels will rise and the US landscape will change dramatically.

DCUM children are some of the most privileged children to have ever lived, compared across history and the current state of the world. Our children will likely survive another couple of generations. But quality of life will decline even for them before the world becomes truly inbearable.

[Anonymous]

The way I see it, there is nothing wrong with someone to forgo children for environmental reasons. There is nothing wrong with having children either. Much like fundamental disputes over politics, religion, money - this just seems like a dealbreaker for OP and her husband.

FWIW, humans aren't going to be around for more than a few thousand more years - a blip on the cosmic timeline. The planet will go on much longer. See e.g. dinosaurs. Live it up while you can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope DH also supports fiscally conservative policies. Stop supporting government programs that extend life or feed people. We'll all die faste, and won't need 3.5 people for every person on welfare. Otherwise, he's full of crap.

OMFG. Taking care of people who exist on this earth and are suffering =/= creating additional life that will expedite suffering. It's is not ethically inconsistent at all to believe we should care for the humans who are here while considering creating fewer humans in the future to protect those humans that will exist.