Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It is not indefensible to express a desire to have children, and I didn't say it was. And BTW, I don't believe you....I think you did post the post I responded to.

What IS indefensible is the attitude of "oh well, husbands come and go, but children are forever" as if husbands can simply be thrown away when they don't amuse us anymore. That is a shallow as hell view of marriage, whether you are traditional/religious/conservative or not. And if that's how you feel about your husband, don't think for one minute that he doesn't know it. It's an utterly selfish view of marriage that renders you obviously incapable of sustaining one.

Believe her. That wasn't her. That was me, "husbands come and go" poster.

You are being hypocritical. The refusal to have children is not exactly like a shirt color that's not to your liking. This has nothing to do with amusement. This has everything to do with the fundamental discrepancy in the vision of the future - the vision that was once shared, and now is not, and for you to tell the OP to sit down and shut up and be grateful is...I dunno...unimaginative.

I will also tell you this. You think your commitment to your husband is unconditional? It isn't. Your husband simply hasn't taken you to your breaking point. Everybody has one. For OP and me, that breaking point is near the refusal to have children. Maybe for you or others it would be near adultery, theft, murder, cruelty, whatever. But don't kid yourself: you have a breaking point. If you don't yet know where it is, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your DH is 50, the age of a typical new grandfather. This is a no brainer.

+1 DH was 50 when we had our one and only. He is retiring at 56. I cannot imagine having 2 young kids, one a baby, at his (and my) age.

Anonymous wrote:

It is not indefensible to express a desire to have children, and I didn't say it was. And BTW, I don't believe you....I think you did post the post I responded to.

What IS indefensible is the attitude of "oh well, husbands come and go, but children are forever" as if husbands can simply be thrown away when they don't amuse us anymore. That is a shallow as hell view of marriage, whether you are traditional/religious/conservative or not. And if that's how you feel about your husband, don't think for one minute that he doesn't know it. It's an utterly selfish view of marriage that renders you obviously incapable of sustaining one.

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.

You could have saved yourself a lot of time and aggravation. You don't want a marriage of any kind. You want a sperm donor. I feel sorry for your husband. YOU promised to love and honor him, and I don't see you making good on that. I see a selfish and narcissistic person. Maybe you've always been this way, or maybe you have a hormone imbalance. I don't know. But I'm sure you are making your husband, and probably your child too, utterly miserable. I was sympathetic to you before but these recent comments are indefensible.

OP here - I didn't promise to honor my husband. And we actually have a lovely family, and I love being a mother and being a wife to my husband, and that's why I'd like to include another child.

I'm not sure why it's "indefensible" to discuss marriage in terms of having children. I actually thinks it's laughable, and sad, that expressing the desire to have children has become so taboo among the generation of well-educated, liberal 30 somethings, who are are afraid to discuss having kids in the initial stages of dating or post it on Match.com.

Having children isn't exactly like playing tennis - if your husband doesn't want to be your partner, you can find another. But mine would be pretty pissed if I decided to procreate with another available partner.

Anonymous wrote:Your DH is 50, the age of a typical new grandfather. This is a no brainer.

Anonymous wrote:To PP 19:25 (OP again here) - so, to try to put the discussion back on track - what do you think is the defensible attitude of how/if children fit into expectations re: marriage?

Anonymous wrote:PP 19:25 - OP here - not really sure why you would think I would lie about the posts that I've posted, since this is an ANONYMOUS group.

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.

You could have saved yourself a lot of time and aggravation. You don't want a marriage of any kind. You want a sperm donor. I feel sorry for your husband. YOU promised to love and honor him, and I don't see you making good on that. I see a selfish and narcissistic person. Maybe you've always been this way, or maybe you have a hormone imbalance. I don't know. But I'm sure you are making your husband, and probably your child too, utterly miserable. I was sympathetic to you before but these recent comments are indefensible.

OP here - I didn't promise to honor my husband. And we actually have a lovely family, and I love being a mother and being a wife to my husband, and that's why I'd like to include another child.

I'm not sure why it's "indefensible" to discuss marriage in terms of having children. I actually thinks it's laughable, and sad, that expressing the desire to have children has become so taboo among the generation of well-educated, liberal 30 somethings, who are are afraid to discuss having kids in the initial stages of dating or post it on Match.com.

Having children isn't exactly like playing tennis - if your husband doesn't want to be your partner, you can find another. But mine would be pretty pissed if I decided to procreate with another available partner.

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.

You could have saved yourself a lot of time and aggravation. You don't want a marriage of any kind. You want a sperm donor. I feel sorry for your husband. YOU promised to love and honor him, and I don't see you making good on that. I see a selfish and narcissistic person. Maybe you've always been this way, or maybe you have a hormone imbalance. I don't know. But I'm sure you are making your husband, and probably your child too, utterly miserable. I was sympathetic to you before but these recent comments are indefensible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ I really don't understand this bitterness. Yes, your husband changed his stance, but maybe having the first was harder than he anticipated. Do you really want to have a kid with someone who does not want to be a parent? Do you think your life will be better as a divorced, single parent? Sometimes, you need to grateful for what you have and maximize that experience instead spending so much of your energy thinking of what could have been.

You don't understand it because perhaps your dreams haven't been abruptly shattered by someone who is supposed to make you happy, and promised you he wanted the same things. Yes, go ahead and betray your husband and then tell him to suck it up and be grateful to even be married. That's an awesome recipe. I am grateful for my healthy son but I am not grateful to my husband. If he told me before marriage he only wanted one and done, I would not have married him. He is flushing my last fertile years down the toilet and you are telling me I have to suck it up and be grateful he even exists. Forgive me if this doesn't appeal.

And yes, actually, if we had a second child together and got divorced, it wouldn't be so bad. I'd have my children. Husbands come and go. Kids are forever.

Well, my dreams of a second child were shattered by infertility. Sometimes life throws you a curve ball. I understand that you are in pain but you really need to work with someone to discover why having another child is so important to you - more important apparently than your relationship with your husband. What I'm reading suggests that you've lost the ability to think rationally about this. You're considering breaking up your family, and you talk about husbands as a throwaway when IMO you have it all backwards - your relationship with your spouse should always be primary. Children can succeed with only one dedicated parent, but there is no developmental expert alive who would suggest that anything trumps two committed and loving parents. I speak from experience as a child of divorce.

You need to be calm when speaking to your husband about this and ask him if he would consider therapy so you can both work through your feelings on this issue and try to come to a conclusion that satisfies you both. He probably cannot "help" how he feels about it anymore than you can. But in your pain and anger you are only seeing your side of it, and you need someone to blame.

I understand what you're saying but I don't understand why you say that the relationship with the spouse is a primary value REGARDLESS of what the spouse does. Would you say the same thing if the spouse cheated? Abused drugs? Stole money? Separated the other spouse from friends and family? You're acting as if reneging on the promise of a second child is a value-free, consequence-free choice, like rye or whole wheat. It isn't. When someone causes you pain, you don't look at them with the same eyes any more. You begin to love them less. You wonder why they can be so blind to your pain. You wonder why the promise they made means so little. You wonder where else they would turn out to be not who they promised. So you see, it's not quite as easy as "husband is more important than anything else, sit down, shut up and be grateful you're married, and don't forget to kiss his feet while you're at it. You owe your child an intact family, even with the husband you despise and have no respect for." So I don't know why you think it's irrational to think that the husband is not quite the man you thought he was. I don't know why you insist the wife is in the wrong for resenting her husband for this. Not only is she wrong to want a second child, she's wrong to feel pain when she's kept from it.

OP, people change. Including spouses. When my husband and I married, neither one of us wanted children. Then I changed my mind, and my husband eventually did too. Once we had a child, he said he wanted three, I said I wanted two. Now we have one because we can't have more.
We have weathered all of this together, listened to each other, and maintained open lines of communication because we are a team and we respect each other as individuals.

In your anger, you are attributing things to me that I didn't say and imputing meanings that I neither inferred nor intended. I assume you are doing the same thing to your husband and he resents it. I don't blame him. My honest opinion is that YOU need help. This is YOUR problem, and you need to own it. You are not committed to your marriage unless everything is on your terms, which is selfish, immature and unrealistic. Sorry but it's true.

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.