Anonymous wrote:I know it's immature but do you ever have get those fleeting thoughts, like if I could just have this one thing I would be happy. That's how I feel about this. I know that 5 kids is completely out of the question but four we could do.

It's not just "immature," it's engaging in a kind of thinking that is designed to avoid dealing with the real issue. The real issue is why aren't you happy now? Do you really believe any one thing will "make you happy"?


And when you say, "4 we could do," what's the definition of that. Personally, if I were wealthy enough to have 4 kids and be able to fully pay for all clothing, activities, needs and wants and fully fund college, then I might choose to only have 3 because bad stuff happens in life and what would enable me to "do" four children, gives me a buffer with the three I already have. For example, one of my children unexpectedly fell ill and required a lot of money and time to take care of over a long period. When you say you "could do" four children, can you really take on anything that comes with that? What if the 4th is special needs? What if your husband falls ill? What if one of your kids has some kind of problem?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um the gain of another person to love? Another person to round out our family who will be our children's sibling for the rest of their lives? I don't look at it in financial terms, I think that is silly. I don't look at our existing children and add up what they cost us.

I'm not postponing returning to work. That has nothing to do with this. It's a separate issue but he doesn't really want me to work anyway (work travel).

But what you are doing is postponing when he can retire. Maybe if you commit to going back to work and fully supporting you two and your youngest child through her middle and high school years so that he has the option to retire when she leaves grade school. Tell him that you'll support the family so that he can retire on his own schedule and that in your youngest's middle and high school years, you'll do what it takes to allow him more freedom to pursue other activities.

You are completely discounting the fact that he wants to be done with dependent parenting in 12 years and not 18. I think the only realistic way to convince him otherwise, is if you make the commitment now that you will assume the financial and parental responsibilities for a new child after the 3rd goes to college. That may mean you have to work and juggle work and errands and shutting the child to after school commitments, etc largely on your own. Because that time is what you're trying to take away from him. How will you feel when you are working full time, doing all the household errands, shuttling your child around and he is retired and playing golf or going out of town with the guys or taking up a new hobby? That's the type of commitment you need to make to convince him. Otherwise, you are just putting your own wants ahead of his. This is why most people say that the No always beats the Yes vote. Because you don't get to commit another person to the extra years and work of raising a child. And despite your hand waiving, there is still a lot of parenting that goes on from ages 4.5 to 17.

You and so many of the posters on this thread are so hung up on the fact that OP is a SAHM that you're ignoring the fact that it's not a financial issue for their family. They have enough money to support another child - the DH just doesn't want more children. That's a much harder issue to address. If it was just about money, the easy solution would be for OP to go back to work.

No, that's not the point. The point is that they can afford a child while he is working. But she has said nothing about whether they can afford the last six years of a new child's childhood without her husband actually producing an income. Retirement income is lower than working income. Are they still able to afford to pay for the child's middle and high school years, plus college on their retirement income? Or are they going to live on savings and investments for those 6 years? The supposition that they cannot afford to pay for a child's last 6 years of middle school, high school plus college on a single retirement income without significantly eating into their retirement is not just blaming a SAHP for staying at home. The point I was trying to make is that he may have plans for what to do when they become empty nesters and she's now delaying when that happens.

The point is that many parents who are done, make plans for when to retire and enjoy their golden years. It's hard to do that when you are looking at an additional $200K (or more) worth of college tuition payments not to mention the cost of raising a child through their teenage years. If you aren't working, that's a good chunk of change to be pulling out of savings/investments or retirement.

? We're 36. He has like 30 years left of working.

That's another very selfish attitude you have. I'm in my 50's and have been working about 30 years. If we were empty nesters, I would love to have the option to retire when I wanted and on my own terms. I made the conscious decision to have children later for various reasons, so I committed to working into my 60's. But if I didn't have to care for dependents, I would definitely be thinking about planning my retirement or changing my work patterns in the next few years. I have friends who are in their 50's who are empty nesters, who have started to phase back on working, taking shorter weeks (taking Fridays off). They get a pro-rated salary, so they make less money, but they have all the money that they need. One friend often goes golfing on Fridays when the weather is nice. He and his wife take 3-day weekends and go away for a wine and B&B weekends. They travel more. But they have the freedom to do this because their children were out of the house 10 years ago and they've saved up since then. For you, a fourth child would commit him financially to working at least 23 more years and possibly longer to pay off the college debts of 4 children. As it is now, your youngest will graduate from college in about 17 years, when he's 53. You'll be empty nesters when he's 49. At 49, he'll have the free time and leisure for more travel, more personal activities and be able to start focusing on himself, something he hasn't really been able to do since his early to mid 20's. You are proposing that he extend all that 6 more years. Empty nester at 55 and financially free of children at 59. I made a different choice than your husband, but I can definitely respect and understand his desire not to have another child.

Again, if you want to have another child, you make the commitment to handle the finances and care of your teenager and let him have his space when the third goes to college. You don't get to make that type of commitment for him, committing him to working and supporting a family for an extra six years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um the gain of another person to love? Another person to round out our family who will be our children's sibling for the rest of their lives? I don't look at it in financial terms, I think that is silly. I don't look at our existing children and add up what they cost us.

I'm not postponing returning to work. That has nothing to do with this. It's a separate issue but he doesn't really want me to work anyway (work travel).

But what you are doing is postponing when he can retire. Maybe if you commit to going back to work and fully supporting you two and your youngest child through her middle and high school years so that he has the option to retire when she leaves grade school. Tell him that you'll support the family so that he can retire on his own schedule and that in your youngest's middle and high school years, you'll do what it takes to allow him more freedom to pursue other activities.

You are completely discounting the fact that he wants to be done with dependent parenting in 12 years and not 18. I think the only realistic way to convince him otherwise, is if you make the commitment now that you will assume the financial and parental responsibilities for a new child after the 3rd goes to college. That may mean you have to work and juggle work and errands and shutting the child to after school commitments, etc largely on your own. Because that time is what you're trying to take away from him. How will you feel when you are working full time, doing all the household errands, shuttling your child around and he is retired and playing golf or going out of town with the guys or taking up a new hobby? That's the type of commitment you need to make to convince him. Otherwise, you are just putting your own wants ahead of his. This is why most people say that the No always beats the Yes vote. Because you don't get to commit another person to the extra years and work of raising a child. And despite your hand waiving, there is still a lot of parenting that goes on from ages 4.5 to 17.

You and so many of the posters on this thread are so hung up on the fact that OP is a SAHM that you're ignoring the fact that it's not a financial issue for their family. They have enough money to support another child - the DH just doesn't want more children. That's a much harder issue to address. If it was just about money, the easy solution would be for OP to go back to work.

No, that's not the point. The point is that they can afford a child while he is working. But she has said nothing about whether they can afford the last six years of a new child's childhood without her husband actually producing an income. Retirement income is lower than working income. Are they still able to afford to pay for the child's middle and high school years, plus college on their retirement income? Or are they going to live on savings and investments for those 6 years? The supposition that they cannot afford to pay for a child's last 6 years of middle school, high school plus college on a single retirement income without significantly eating into their retirement is not just blaming a SAHP for staying at home. The point I was trying to make is that he may have plans for what to do when they become empty nesters and she's now delaying when that happens.

The point is that many parents who are done, make plans for when to retire and enjoy their golden years. It's hard to do that when you are looking at an additional $200K (or more) worth of college tuition payments not to mention the cost of raising a child through their teenage years. If you aren't working, that's a good chunk of change to be pulling out of savings/investments or retirement.

? We're 36. He has like 30 years left of working.

Wow. You should stop talking. You really are not doing yourself any favors here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I REALLY want another child. Like, I know I will be disappointed for a very long time if I can't have one. It may be biologically driven as I'm 36 and the door is closing soon, so to speak. DH really does not want another child. I feel so sad about this and can't stop hoping that maybe I'll be able to change his mind (fwiw, we can afford it, it's not a financial thing).

Does it matter how many kids we already have? The people in my life - my mom, sisters, BFF, etc. - are not especially sympathetic because we have three and they tell me that should be "sufficient." I love them dearly but it doesn't change the fact that I feel someone is missing from our family, kwim?

You can feel sad and hope to change his mind. But don't go over his head.

Does it matter how may kids you have? Um..yes? This is the question that makes you sound cray cray.

Obv it matters. What I mean is, why is my yearning for a fourth child less deserving of sympathy and validation than someone who wants a second? (Not talking about infertility, just husbands who refuse).

Because you already have three!

Np. and do you tell women who have one "you already have a child!" ?

You can't help wanting what you want.

I'm not the OP but I do sympathize with her desire to have another baby. We have three too and are done but in our case it is financial (especially the worry about paying for college). I wonder if that is what is making it harder for her, in a way. She knows they can afford it so it's more of an arbitrary decision on the part of her husband.

Yes but here is the problem: the OP doesn't particularly value free time because she doesn't work. She'd like to spend the bulk of her time raising kids. WOHPs have less time and value time, especially when kids are more self sufficient, more highly. It's not a money thing; she discounts her husband's desire for freedom because she already has plenty of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um the gain of another person to love? Another person to round out our family who will be our children's sibling for the rest of their lives? I don't look at it in financial terms, I think that is silly. I don't look at our existing children and add up what they cost us.

I'm not postponing returning to work. That has nothing to do with this. It's a separate issue but he doesn't really want me to work anyway (work travel).

But what you are doing is postponing when he can retire. Maybe if you commit to going back to work and fully supporting you two and your youngest child through her middle and high school years so that he has the option to retire when she leaves grade school. Tell him that you'll support the family so that he can retire on his own schedule and that in your youngest's middle and high school years, you'll do what it takes to allow him more freedom to pursue other activities.

You are completely discounting the fact that he wants to be done with dependent parenting in 12 years and not 18. I think the only realistic way to convince him otherwise, is if you make the commitment now that you will assume the financial and parental responsibilities for a new child after the 3rd goes to college. That may mean you have to work and juggle work and errands and shutting the child to after school commitments, etc largely on your own. Because that time is what you're trying to take away from him. How will you feel when you are working full time, doing all the household errands, shuttling your child around and he is retired and playing golf or going out of town with the guys or taking up a new hobby? That's the type of commitment you need to make to convince him. Otherwise, you are just putting your own wants ahead of his. This is why most people say that the No always beats the Yes vote. Because you don't get to commit another person to the extra years and work of raising a child. And despite your hand waiving, there is still a lot of parenting that goes on from ages 4.5 to 17.

You and so many of the posters on this thread are so hung up on the fact that OP is a SAHM that you're ignoring the fact that it's not a financial issue for their family. They have enough money to support another child - the DH just doesn't want more children. That's a much harder issue to address. If it was just about money, the easy solution would be for OP to go back to work.

No, that's not the point. The point is that they can afford a child while he is working. But she has said nothing about whether they can afford the last six years of a new child's childhood without her husband actually producing an income. Retirement income is lower than working income. Are they still able to afford to pay for the child's middle and high school years, plus college on their retirement income? Or are they going to live on savings and investments for those 6 years? The supposition that they cannot afford to pay for a child's last 6 years of middle school, high school plus college on a single retirement income without significantly eating into their retirement is not just blaming a SAHP for staying at home. The point I was trying to make is that he may have plans for what to do when they become empty nesters and she's now delaying when that happens.

The point is that many parents who are done, make plans for when to retire and enjoy their golden years. It's hard to do that when you are looking at an additional $200K (or more) worth of college tuition payments not to mention the cost of raising a child through their teenage years. If you aren't working, that's a good chunk of change to be pulling out of savings/investments or retirement.

? We're 36. He has like 30 years left of working.

Um, not necessarily. People in careers high paying enough to support a SAHP and three kids often cannot work until 65 in such a high paying full time job. Do you know anyone who is now in their 50s or 60s? Do you know the longevity stats for your DH's field?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I REALLY want another child. Like, I know I will be disappointed for a very long time if I can't have one. It may be biologically driven as I'm 36 and the door is closing soon, so to speak. DH really does not want another child. I feel so sad about this and can't stop hoping that maybe I'll be able to change his mind (fwiw, we can afford it, it's not a financial thing).

Does it matter how many kids we already have? The people in my life - my mom, sisters, BFF, etc. - are not especially sympathetic because we have three and they tell me that should be "sufficient." I love them dearly but it doesn't change the fact that I feel someone is missing from our family, kwim?

You can feel sad and hope to change his mind. But don't go over his head.

Does it matter how may kids you have? Um..yes? This is the question that makes you sound cray cray.

Obv it matters. What I mean is, why is my yearning for a fourth child less deserving of sympathy and validation than someone who wants a second? (Not talking about infertility, just husbands who refuse).

Because you already have three!

Np. and do you tell women who have one "you already have a child!" ?

You can't help wanting what you want.

I'm not the OP but I do sympathize with her desire to have another baby. We have three too and are done but in our case it is financial (especially the worry about paying for college). I wonder if that is what is making it harder for her, in a way. She knows they can afford it so it's more of an arbitrary decision on the part of her husband.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was 7 I had three siblings. By the time I was 40 I had one. If you can afford more kids, I'd vote for more kids.

That is a ridiculous reason to have more children.

Your parents and siblings are your real family. They've been the only ones who ever had my back when I really needed help.

Not true for every family. My mother and I were very close. My father is Asperger's and remarried a selfish, strange woman. My brother lives in the Pacific. Neither my father or brother is a comfort or a help to me in any tangible way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I REALLY want another child. Like, I know I will be disappointed for a very long time if I can't have one. It may be biologically driven as I'm 36 and the door is closing soon, so to speak. DH really does not want another child. I feel so sad about this and can't stop hoping that maybe I'll be able to change his mind (fwiw, we can afford it, it's not a financial thing).

Does it matter how many kids we already have? The people in my life - my mom, sisters, BFF, etc. - are not especially sympathetic because we have three and they tell me that should be "sufficient." I love them dearly but it doesn't change the fact that I feel someone is missing from our family, kwim?

You can feel sad and hope to change his mind. But don't go over his head.

Does it matter how may kids you have? Um..yes? This is the question that makes you sound cray cray.

Obv it matters. What I mean is, why is my yearning for a fourth child less deserving of sympathy and validation than someone who wants a second? (Not talking about infertility, just husbands who refuse).

Because you already have three!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was 1 of 4 and wish my parents didn't have this many. Fun and cute when little - but now all 4 of us are dealing with life problems and it is stressing out my parents because they want to help, and can't because they can only help 1, not 4.

And to the person who thinks it is a gift to have a big family - speak for yourself, it an be very painful, too.

Anecdotally it can go either way.

I'm an only child and wish that I had siblings especially as an adult. It sounds like you had a fun childhood with your siblings, I was very lonely growing up, especially since we moved frequently so I don't even have an attachment to a hometown. Now that I'm an adult, I also have the added pressure of being the only one who will deal with my parents' health care and end of life decisions. My DH has siblings and it's a completely different dynamic with his side of the family. His brothers are there for support in difficult times and it makes a world of difference. With my parents, everything is on me. No help. No support. Just me. Alone. It sucks.

Well, I am one of two kids and my brother lives 5,000 miles away and is very selfish, so I have no support emotional or otherwise from him, and neither do our parents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Obv it matters. What I mean is, why is my yearning for a fourth child less deserving of sympathy and validation than someone who wants a second? (Not talking about infertility, just husbands who refuse).

It's like a poor person wanting $100 versus a rich person wanting $100. The rich person just sounds like a whiner.

Nailed it.

OP, please meditate on this comment for a good long time.

Three is sufficient.

The person who says "no" trumps.

And if he's serious, tell him to get a vasectomy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think either of you is being ridiculous, but the "No" always wins in this particular argument. Sorry.

+1 And being SAHM doesn't mean that your "yes" has more weight than his "no." That is not a healthy way to look at having a child.

His no means more than your yes because he's paying for everything. He would be paying for you to spend money you didn't earn on a child he didn't want. No means no.

This is ridiculous and rude to all SAHMs. You may not like the OP but there is no reason to be this insulting to SAHMs in general.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um the gain of another person to love? Another person to round out our family who will be our children's sibling for the rest of their lives? I don't look at it in financial terms, I think that is silly. I don't look at our existing children and add up what they cost us.

I'm not postponing returning to work. That has nothing to do with this. It's a separate issue but he doesn't really want me to work anyway (work travel).

But what you are doing is postponing when he can retire. Maybe if you commit to going back to work and fully supporting you two and your youngest child through her middle and high school years so that he has the option to retire when she leaves grade school. Tell him that you'll support the family so that he can retire on his own schedule and that in your youngest's middle and high school years, you'll do what it takes to allow him more freedom to pursue other activities.

You are completely discounting the fact that he wants to be done with dependent parenting in 12 years and not 18. I think the only realistic way to convince him otherwise, is if you make the commitment now that you will assume the financial and parental responsibilities for a new child after the 3rd goes to college. That may mean you have to work and juggle work and errands and shutting the child to after school commitments, etc largely on your own. Because that time is what you're trying to take away from him. How will you feel when you are working full time, doing all the household errands, shuttling your child around and he is retired and playing golf or going out of town with the guys or taking up a new hobby? That's the type of commitment you need to make to convince him. Otherwise, you are just putting your own wants ahead of his. This is why most people say that the No always beats the Yes vote. Because you don't get to commit another person to the extra years and work of raising a child. And despite your hand waiving, there is still a lot of parenting that goes on from ages 4.5 to 17.

You and so many of the posters on this thread are so hung up on the fact that OP is a SAHM that you're ignoring the fact that it's not a financial issue for their family. They have enough money to support another child - the DH just doesn't want more children. That's a much harder issue to address. If it was just about money, the easy solution would be for OP to go back to work.

No, that's not the point. The point is that they can afford a child while he is working. But she has said nothing about whether they can afford the last six years of a new child's childhood without her husband actually producing an income. Retirement income is lower than working income. Are they still able to afford to pay for the child's middle and high school years, plus college on their retirement income? Or are they going to live on savings and investments for those 6 years? The supposition that they cannot afford to pay for a child's last 6 years of middle school, high school plus college on a single retirement income without significantly eating into their retirement is not just blaming a SAHP for staying at home. The point I was trying to make is that he may have plans for what to do when they become empty nesters and she's now delaying when that happens.

The point is that many parents who are done, make plans for when to retire and enjoy their golden years. It's hard to do that when you are looking at an additional $200K (or more) worth of college tuition payments not to mention the cost of raising a child through their teenage years. If you aren't working, that's a good chunk of change to be pulling out of savings/investments or retirement.

? We're 36. He has like 30 years left of working.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I REALLY want another child. Like, I know I will be disappointed for a very long time if I can't have one. It may be biologically driven as I'm 36 and the door is closing soon, so to speak. DH really does not want another child. I feel so sad about this and can't stop hoping that maybe I'll be able to change his mind (fwiw, we can afford it, it's not a financial thing).

Does it matter how many kids we already have? The people in my life - my mom, sisters, BFF, etc. - are not especially sympathetic because we have three and they tell me that should be "sufficient." I love them dearly but it doesn't change the fact that I feel someone is missing from our family, kwim?

You can feel sad and hope to change his mind. But don't go over his head.

Does it matter how may kids you have? Um..yes? This is the question that makes you sound cray cray.

Obv it matters. What I mean is, why is my yearning for a fourth child less deserving of sympathy and validation than someone who wants a second? (Not talking about infertility, just husbands who refuse).

It's like a poor person wanting $100 versus a rich person wanting $100. The rich person just sounds like a whiner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um the gain of another person to love? Another person to round out our family who will be our children's sibling for the rest of their lives? I don't look at it in financial terms, I think that is silly. I don't look at our existing children and add up what they cost us.

I'm not postponing returning to work. That has nothing to do with this. It's a separate issue but he doesn't really want me to work anyway (work travel).

But what you are doing is postponing when he can retire. Maybe if you commit to going back to work and fully supporting you two and your youngest child through her middle and high school years so that he has the option to retire when she leaves grade school. Tell him that you'll support the family so that he can retire on his own schedule and that in your youngest's middle and high school years, you'll do what it takes to allow him more freedom to pursue other activities.

You are completely discounting the fact that he wants to be done with dependent parenting in 12 years and not 18. I think the only realistic way to convince him otherwise, is if you make the commitment now that you will assume the financial and parental responsibilities for a new child after the 3rd goes to college. That may mean you have to work and juggle work and errands and shutting the child to after school commitments, etc largely on your own. Because that time is what you're trying to take away from him. How will you feel when you are working full time, doing all the household errands, shuttling your child around and he is retired and playing golf or going out of town with the guys or taking up a new hobby? That's the type of commitment you need to make to convince him. Otherwise, you are just putting your own wants ahead of his. This is why most people say that the No always beats the Yes vote. Because you don't get to commit another person to the extra years and work of raising a child. And despite your hand waiving, there is still a lot of parenting that goes on from ages 4.5 to 17.

You and so many of the posters on this thread are so hung up on the fact that OP is a SAHM that you're ignoring the fact that it's not a financial issue for their family. They have enough money to support another child - the DH just doesn't want more children. That's a much harder issue to address. If it was just about money, the easy solution would be for OP to go back to work.

No, that's not the point. The point is that they can afford a child while he is working. But she has said nothing about whether they can afford the last six years of a new child's childhood without her husband actually producing an income. Retirement income is lower than working income. Are they still able to afford to pay for the child's middle and high school years, plus college on their retirement income? Or are they going to live on savings and investments for those 6 years? The supposition that they cannot afford to pay for a child's last 6 years of middle school, high school plus college on a single retirement income without significantly eating into their retirement is not just blaming a SAHP for staying at home. The point I was trying to make is that he may have plans for what to do when they become empty nesters and she's now delaying when that happens.

[i]The point is that many parents who are done, make plans for when to retire and enjoy their golden years. [b] It's hard to do that when you are looking at an additional $200K (or more) worth of college tuition payments not to mention the cost of raising a child through their teenage years. If you aren't working, that's a good chunk of change to be pulling out of savings/investments or retirement.

+1. We recently had a pregnancy scare. My DH, amazing father and husband, was seriously stressed out. We both work and could afford a 3rd. It was about being able to retire in his 50's versus postponing retirement to get a 3rd child (11 years younger ) thru college. It was about not returning to baby stage of sleepless nights, diapers, etc. It was about him seeing more time for us glimmering on the horizon and getting that snatched away. It was about him not being able to sustain the pace he has now, coaching for one child and both of them being busy in activities a combined 5 days out of 7.