Someone I know is desperately trying to have a child with husband #2. She has 2 tweens from #1, and has had to talk #2 into the idea of one of their 'own'. The main motivation is her feelings of being hurt by #1 during her earlier pregnancies, that he wasn't fully engaged. That seems true, but not a great idea for having another child. She's borrowed tens of thousands of dollars from her mother for desperate IVF attempts that have thus far not worked. None of her friends really get it, but it's her deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No of course not. It’s selfish if he prioritizes family #2 over family #1. Unfortunately, that seems to be par for the course.

I'm a guy and I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but there's just no way I could love an existing child that wasn't mine equally as a child that was mine. I'm not saying kid #2 gets a higher standard of living than child #1 or that child #1 gets treated poorly but everything just seems like it would be so different. With the bio child I'm there for all of it and can begin bonding with the child from birth whereas I wouldn't have that same experience with an existing child. That's not to say I couldn't grow to also love the existing child but I couldn't honestly say that it would be the same.

Omg get over yourself. Kid #1 and kid #2 are both yours in this scenario; you marry wife #1, have baby #1, divorce, then marry wife #2, have baby #2. The kids are half-siblings. You’re a moron.

Also there are many men who are able to love children not biologically related to them. Case in point, my husband with our adopted child.

That's totally different. That child is legally his as well. Someone else's child versus your own is another matter. They will always be the priority and that's ok. They have their own bios.

Anonymous wrote:Asking for myself.

No, of course not. Plus now that Democrats want to pay $100s per kid per month indefinitely, or at least until 2025 and this benie will be mucho difficult to take away, it is a good time to have more kids!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No of course not. It’s selfish if he prioritizes family #2 over family #1. Unfortunately, that seems to be par for the course.

I'm a guy and I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but there's just no way I could love an existing child that wasn't mine equally as a child that was mine. I'm not saying kid #2 gets a higher standard of living than child #1 or that child #1 gets treated poorly but everything just seems like it would be so different. With the bio child I'm there for all of it and can begin bonding with the child from birth whereas I wouldn't have that same experience with an existing child. That's not to say I couldn't grow to also love the existing child but I couldn't honestly say that it would be the same.

Omg get over yourself. Kid #1 and kid #2 are both yours in this scenario; you marry wife #1, have baby #1, divorce, then marry wife #2, have baby #2. The kids are half-siblings. You’re a moron.

Also there are many men who are able to love children not biologically related to them. Case in point, my husband with our adopted child.

PP here and obviously in the OP both kids will be hers but I was offering a perspective raised in the thread about how the child will be viewed in the new family. Of course not all men will feel the way I do but as you can see in the thread even some women feel the way I do.

Adoption is a totally different situation than what is contemplated here unless, perhaps, OP is a widow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No of course not. It’s selfish if he prioritizes family #2 over family #1. Unfortunately, that seems to be par for the course.

I'm a guy and I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but there's just no way I could love an existing child that wasn't mine equally as a child that was mine. I'm not saying kid #2 gets a higher standard of living than child #1 or that child #1 gets treated poorly but everything just seems like it would be so different. With the bio child I'm there for all of it and can begin bonding with the child from birth whereas I wouldn't have that same experience with an existing child. That's not to say I couldn't grow to also love the existing child but I couldn't honestly say that it would be the same.

Omg get over yourself. Kid #1 and kid #2 are both yours in this scenario; you marry wife #1, have baby #1, divorce, then marry wife #2, have baby #2. The kids are half-siblings. You’re a moron.

Also there are many men who are able to love children not biologically related to them. Case in point, my husband with our adopted child.

Some of it is the relationship. We adopted as well. My husband is much closer to our children regardless of genetics as he is parenting them and involved in their lives. His ex did everything possible to block his relationship with his older kids and he wasn't able to have the same kind of relationship.

There is zero reason why OP should not have more kids if she and her husband agree.

Anonymous wrote:I have three children with my first husband and three with my second husband. I LOVE my kids.
There's your answer, OP.

No, that's your answer

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No of course not. It’s selfish if he prioritizes family #2 over family #1. Unfortunately, that seems to be par for the course.

I'm a guy and I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but there's just no way I could love an existing child that wasn't mine equally as a child that was mine. I'm not saying kid #2 gets a higher standard of living than child #1 or that child #1 gets treated poorly but everything just seems like it would be so different. With the bio child I'm there for all of it and can begin bonding with the child from birth whereas I wouldn't have that same experience with an existing child. That's not to say I couldn't grow to also love the existing child but I couldn't honestly say that it would be the same.

Omg get over yourself. Kid #1 and kid #2 are both yours in this scenario; you marry wife #1, have baby #1, divorce, then marry wife #2, have baby #2. The kids are half-siblings. You’re a moron.

Also there are many men who are able to love children not biologically related to them. Case in point, my husband with our adopted child.

Anonymous wrote:No of course not. It’s selfish if he prioritizes family #2 over family #1. Unfortunately, that seems to be par for the course.

This

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No of course not. It’s selfish if he prioritizes family #2 over family #1. Unfortunately, that seems to be par for the course.

I'm a guy and I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but there's just no way I could love an existing child that wasn't mine equally as a child that was mine. I'm not saying kid #2 gets a higher standard of living than child #1 or that child #1 gets treated poorly but everything just seems like it would be so different. With the bio child I'm there for all of it and can begin bonding with the child from birth whereas I wouldn't have that same experience with an existing child. That's not to say I couldn't grow to also love the existing child but I couldn't honestly say that it would be the same.

The honesty is appreciated and to be honest this is how the majority of men feel.

Its not how all men feel. Some feel like this, some don't. It is different having a step-child vs. your own especially with a very involved Dad but the 1st child/ren have a father and its not the stepdad's job to replace dad.

No its not selfish. Especially if your future husband doesn't have any kids. It would be selfish to tell him no, if he has no kids and he not get to experience it especially if you both want one.

Yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No of course not. It’s selfish if he prioritizes family #2 over family #1. Unfortunately, that seems to be par for the course.

I'm a guy and I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but there's just no way I could love an existing child that wasn't mine equally as a child that was mine. I'm not saying kid #2 gets a higher standard of living than child #1 or that child #1 gets treated poorly but everything just seems like it would be so different. With the bio child I'm there for all of it and can begin bonding with the child from birth whereas I wouldn't have that same experience with an existing child. That's not to say I couldn't grow to also love the existing child but I couldn't honestly say that it would be the same.

The honesty is appreciated and to be honest this is how the majority of men feel.

I have three children with my first husband and three with my second husband. I LOVE my kids.
There's your answer, OP.

I wouldn't have a new child with my new spouse because we are both happy and done with the children we had in our previous marriages.

Blending families is hard and divorce is hard on kids. My DC and I were both very open (our home, our hearts) to DH's two kids. They wanted not much to do with us and we haven't seen one of them for a long time (way before the shutdown) and the other one only a few times during the shutdown. It's a shame and it makes me sad because I (and my DC) both wanted to welcome them and were willing to love them even though they aren't my bio children. It is what it is and it took me a long time to get to "it is what it is".

It's not selfish, per se, but it's also not ideal for your existing kid. I love my half siblings and consider them to be just "siblings" rather than "halfs." However, it was not fun to grow up essentially in someone else's family. I was never treated differently. I loved my step-father. There was no favoritism, but it was just...their family and not totally mine. You may think you can avoid that but you can't. For example, I would get christmas gifts from my paternal grandparents at christmas which would mean that I would have more presents than the other kids. No one really cared, but it made me feel different. Also, I would go visit my father for two weeks every summer. The rest of my family would be doing other things without me. It just felt like I was different.