Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!
Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.
So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.
They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipendwhich is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.
Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?
You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.
I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."
He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.
You know that's called blackmail. What if he calls her bluff and says no payment for you then what.
How is it blackmail? This could ruin her whole life or her kids life. He can go adopt or get a kid in some other way. But she takes a leap of faith here that really is not comparable. She needs to make sure that she and her existing kids will be ok if she does this. That is not blackmail it is being a responsible parent.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Marry him?
I’ve thought about this. I worry, though, because he hasn’t even met my children, and it would be a huge change for everyone involved in a very short amount of time. Seems like a recipe for disaster.
Well, you're friends, you love him and he's suggested marriage. At 5 weeks, you both need to have the fast hard talk. Get an overnight sitter and hole up for 24 hours to figure it out. He has the means and from what he says, the desire to be with you and baby. He knows you have kids and still offered this commitment which means he is committed to your family. It's the best possible scenario.
Lot of details to work out but it can work. As long as your kids are loved and included in the process, they will be ok! You're not blending family, this will be their baby too! 9 months is a long time in kid time, they'll be ok!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:All you DCUMers saying to marry the guy are blinded by his supposed "millions". Reminds me of 50 Shades of Grey. If he was some bus driver making $30K a year, we all know what the answer to OP's question would be. The hypocrisy is astounding. Personally, I don't think highly of people who end up in OP's situation..men or women...but it does sound like OP is one of those single moms.
Nope, just being practical. It is an absolute fact that money can bring more stability to a marriage, and take out a whole list of stressors. Or course it is easier to marry a rich man who loves you vs. a poor one. If OP is a pregnant single mom, the stability that an established man who loves her would bring to her life would be a good thing.
On a side note, I'd be curious to know the general source of this guy's money. Is he self-made? Is he a layabout over grown party boy with a trust fund? Is he feeding at the trough of his parents' wealth, in which case they could cut off support at any time? Is he a responsible guy with a trust fund?
He is financially conservative and had a modest trust that he invested well. Well-educated, super smart, very hard worker. He’s a business executive.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!
Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.
So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.
They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipendwhich is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.
Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?
You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.
I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."
He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.
You know that's called blackmail. What if he calls her bluff and says no payment for you then what.
Anonymous wrote:OP there’s also your career to think about. Taking 2-3-4 years to raise another child while also minding your 2 others is not going to help your career. As for his millions — they are HIS millions. He hasn’t parted with them yet and you have no guarantee that he will in the future.
Anonymous wrote:OP there’s also your career to think about. Taking 2-3-4 years to raise another child while also minding your 2 others is not going to help your career. As for his millions — they are HIS millions. He hasn’t parted with them yet and you have no guarantee that he will in the future.
Anonymous wrote:Can you just give him the kid to raise on his own?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!
Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.
So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.
They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipendwhich is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.
Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?
You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.
I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."
He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.
You know that's called blackmail. What if he calls her bluff and says no payment for you then what.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!
Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.
So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.
They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipendwhich is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.
Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?
You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.
I'm not the pp. But I think it's reasonable for OP to say something like, "if you want me to keep this baby you need to provide enough financial support for me to be able to provide equal resources to all children in my household."
He got himself into this, if he wants her to keep it when she doesn't want to then he needs to address why she doesn't want to. Which means that just covering the costs of that kid doesn't work. He needs to cover the increased cost to her whole lifestyle and consider with her the impacts to her existing kids and work to mitigate those.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!
Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.
So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.
They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipendwhich is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.
Read what you wrote there with your clever little wink. A stipend? You mean a cash payment for OP's kids to make it OK that their sense of security is messed up because, hey, the guy paid them to be OK with it?
You're pitiful and don't even see it. All the posters here reducing this situation to money and what money buys ("housekeeper for all," hooray) are reprehensible.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You have hit the jackpot. Have him pay very good alimony and child support, hire a nanny and a housekeeper and keep on living your life. This kid will be taken care of.
Dad can also have custody! Dang I would be thrilled!
Alimony? She and the non-boyfriend are not married. Alimony is paid in a divorce. Your greedy drooling over this "jackpot" is dulling your mind.
So you have no thought at all for OP's own children and how this might affect them and their relationship with OP? Because that is the real consideration. All the cash and nannies and housekeepers in the world won't alter the fact that this baby or marriage or not marrying all will affect OP's kids' lives. And don't assume the change will be entirely for the better.
They can agree on whatever, call it what you will. A stipendwhich is spent on older kids among other things. Nanny for baby, housekeeper for all. I don’t know how well the older kids’ father is providing for them.
Anonymous wrote:Why in the world did you tell him?