Anonymous wrote:If I was your husband I would have a vasectomy this week

+1. Before OP has an "accidental" pregnancy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also - what specific reasons has he given for not wanting another?

Well our youngest is 4.5. She can dress herself now, feed herself, she's obviously potty trained, she STTN. We like to travel and that's much easier now. We can go out to eat and it's easy. We can sleep in a bit on the weekends because they entertain each other in the mornings, so that's nice. I concede that all of that is true and it IS nice. I understand where he's coming from with that.

However, like I tell him, it's really only two years that things are hard. Two years in the grand scheme of a long life is nothing. We'll be back here again before he knows it. It's a very short term sacrifice for long term gain.

What gain is that? You're bringing in another burden. That's more $, another college education, and lost time. It means fewer child-free years on the back end.

I think you're trying to postpone returning to work.

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).

Of course you don't look at it from a financial perspective. You don't make any of the money!

^ I will obviously be returning to work at some point but it will be on my terms. I can take my time. My desire to have a baby has nothing to do with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also - what specific reasons has he given for not wanting another?

Well our youngest is 4.5. She can dress herself now, feed herself, she's obviously potty trained, she STTN. We like to travel and that's much easier now. We can go out to eat and it's easy. We can sleep in a bit on the weekends because they entertain each other in the mornings, so that's nice. I concede that all of that is true and it IS nice. I understand where he's coming from with that.

However, like I tell him, it's really only two years that things are hard. Two years in the grand scheme of a long life is nothing. We'll be back here again before he knows it. It's a very short term sacrifice for long term gain.

What gain is that? You're bringing in another burden. That's more $, another college education, and lost time. It means fewer child-free years on the back end.

I think you're trying to postpone returning to work.

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).

I understand how you feel. DH and I agreed on 3. After #3 was born, I wanted another. DH said no and got the snip. In the end, it was the right choice for us.

Did you by any chance have an agreement that you'd return to work when your youngest was in K?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also - what specific reasons has he given for not wanting another?

Well our youngest is 4.5. She can dress herself now, feed herself, she's obviously potty trained, she STTN. We like to travel and that's much easier now. We can go out to eat and it's easy. We can sleep in a bit on the weekends because they entertain each other in the mornings, so that's nice. I concede that all of that is true and it IS nice. I understand where he's coming from with that.

However, like I tell him, it's really only two years that things are hard. Two years in the grand scheme of a long life is nothing. We'll be back here again before he knows it. It's a very short term sacrifice for long term gain.

What gain is that? You're bringing in another burden. That's more $, another college education, and lost time. It means fewer child-free years on the back end.

I think you're trying to postpone returning to work.

Anonymous wrote:I also think it's unfair that he unilaterally gets to decide this major thing in our lives. I really really love being a mom to young kids. I'm not ready for this stage to be over. If we had another baby, it would be starting the clock over, like a PP mentioned. That's what I like about it. He doesn't even try to understand it from my perspective.

Because he already has three young kids. And this wasn't something he had ever wanted or planned. So yes, it's fair.

Anonymous wrote:I also think it's unfair that he unilaterally gets to decide this major thing in our lives. I really really love being a mom to young kids. I'm not ready for this stage to be over. If we had another baby, it would be starting the clock over, like a PP mentioned. That's what I like about it. He doesn't even try to understand it from my perspective.

Because your perspective is not sustainable! It's not about having a 4th for you--it's about perpetuating the baby/young kid stage.

Anonymous wrote:Also - what specific reasons has he given for not wanting another?

Well our youngest is 4.5. She can dress herself now, feed herself, she's obviously potty trained, she STTN. We like to travel and that's much easier now. We can go out to eat and it's easy. We can sleep in a bit on the weekends because they entertain each other in the mornings, so that's nice. I concede that all of that is true and it IS nice. I understand where he's coming from with that.

However, like I tell him, it's really only two years that things are hard. Two years in the grand scheme of a long life is nothing. We'll be back here again before he knows it. It's a very short term sacrifice for long term gain.

Anonymous wrote:I also think it's unfair that he unilaterally gets to decide this major thing in our lives. I really really love being a mom to young kids. I'm not ready for this stage to be over. If we had another baby, it would be starting the clock over, like a PP mentioned. That's what I like about it. He doesn't even try to understand it from my perspective.

If this is OP, you really need therapy.

Anonymous wrote:I also think it's unfair that he unilaterally gets to decide this major thing in our lives. I really really love being a mom to young kids. I'm not ready for this stage to be over. If we had another baby, it would be starting the clock over, like a PP mentioned. That's what I like about it. He doesn't even try to understand it from my perspective.

Your perspective really isn't valid, though. So, there's that.

Anonymous wrote:No, I don't think it's ridiculous. People are usually very sympathetic to posters on here who can't have a second due to circumstances and want one. I don't see this as that different, really.

Maybe he will change his mind.

You're a terrible person for reasons you cannot begin to understand.

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

+1.

Neither of you is being ridiculous. There are plenty of good reasons for both decisions, but in the end, the trump card is that you never get to make another person have a child they don't want. It's not fair to your partner and it's not fair to the resulting child. You may be committed to another child and consider a big family a gift to all of your children, but the lack of commitment pr resentment from the other parent is not healthy for anyone.

While you can afford it, you are already looking at 8-11 years of parenthood depending on how old your older children are). You husband sees an end to parenting dependents, the light at the end of the tunnel. Your youngest is 5 and likely will only be fully dependent for another 12-13 years. However, adding another child will extend that at least 6 years. That's asking a lot from someone who has explicitly stated that they don't want to take on that responsibility and burden. You are looking at it from a financial standpoint, that you can afford the money, but part of that is that he is the one who earns the money. As a SAHP, your job will get easier and have less time commitments as your children grow up. You'll get more help from them as they move from childhood to young adulthood. His job will continue with the commitment both work, stress and time until the kids get out of college. Additionally, if he was looking forward to being able to have some freedom to pursue other non-parental pastimes, then you've also delayed that.

I'm sorry that you two aren't in agreement, but I agree with the sentiment that in these situations, "No" always trumps "Yes".

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.

Agree with both of the above posters. For some reason, you seem to think that your vote should count more because you SAH. News flash: it doesn't. I understand you WANT this, but like others have said, you're already very blessed and your whole attitude about it seems very, very selfish. You're not being considerate of your husband's opinion and feelings whatsoever.