I know a couple who were also being asked about when they were starting a family and in private were suffering greatly with repeated miscarraiges etc . . .I would never ask a couple this question and people who do should be reminded of their incredible lack of tact.
To have a baby or not to have a baby ?
- Thread starter ZEGAR
- Start date
- Status
Looking after children can be very tough at times but is also hugely rewarding. Age is a factor as, amongst other things, it gets harder to conceive and the curve for Downs and other issues start to rise steeply after 35. Talk of 'stable relationships' is all well and good but if you're going to have children, in Ireland anyway, you should strongly consider getting married first. Also if you're going to have a few kids you should forget about job/career, commuting, crèches etc and be prepared to sacrifice one income and look after your own children yourself, at least until you get the youngest out to school. Sol28: It's spurious to suggest that 'society hasn't grown up enough' because it places the Adam and Eve model ahead of the Adam and Steve model. ZEGAR: it's sound like you should be taking Folic acid, just in case.
Chalk it down. I am well in the same boat. I love my life, waking up every day thinking how great life is. Since I left home I haven't lived in one place nor worked in one place longer than a few years. I don't need a life changing experience - I know what I value in life and I honour it, and I honour people. I fear a child would be the worst thing that could happen to me, but I have to consider it for the sake of my OH.ClubMan said:
But fair play on the post peeps- great to hear such honest, well thought out opinion.
michaelm said:
Just my point made - Thank you!
I would in every circumstance prefer to see a child born and raised by two loving parents who are in a stable relationship, Than any one take on the burden alone. I see more kids being born to those who dont want them or had an "accident" or two or ten. I know of one irish case - M-M couple and F-F couple had a kid - Raised by the female couple - But that kid had 4 loving and fully supportive 'parents' who had to go to a lot of hassle to have that kid - I think that kid is lucky - because it was wanted, planned for and provided for.
michaelm said:
I agree that marriage is important and I myself couldn't consider children without being married - this is not a religious thing I just feel that it's human nature to get lazy/bored in a relationship and marriage makes you work through these issues rather then just letting you walk away. Re giving up work etc I completely disagree, we couldn't afford to live on one income, we couldn't pay mortgage, pay for cars etc without two incomes - as is the way in a lot of homes in Ireland these days. Even if we could afford to live on OH's income (which is the highest), why should women feel that they have to give up their jobs and independance while man heads off to work every day. I don't think it should be one or the other - I think you can work and have kids, the only real priorty should be providing a stable, healthy and happy home for any little ones you bring into the world.
Sol28 said:Just my point made - Thank you!
I know of one irish case - M-M couple and F-F couple had a kid - Raised by the female couple - But that kid had 4 loving and fully supportive 'parents' who had to go to a lot of hassle to have that kid - I think that kid is lucky - because it was wanted, planned for and provided for.
I agree completely with Sol28.
Loving parents is all that are need..There are enough people out there with children that should probably not even be allowed to keep animals.
I do however see one cruelty in same sex parent situations ,and that is how they are treated by society.Many people would disagree with placing a child in this situation.
Of course this is societies problem but a change is society is not going to happen over night..
I do think we are moving in that direction slowly but surely.
ney001 said:
Ideally the above would apply and all women would be "women who can have it all" .... if they wanted. I'd say the tables have turned a bit on that one in that a woman who wants to stay home is at risk of being labelled lazy/unambitious/a failure. My OH, Mrs. Betsy, is on maternity leave with #1. I am at pains to point out that I'm not ordering her back to work and that I wouldnt think she's a sponger/failure if she didnt. Luckily we'd get by/be fine on my wage so thats enough for me. Less wealth would be more than compensated for by a less rushed home.
I dont think I'd like life if we were both on the big commute to the pressurised job to pay the jumbo mortgage, drop off and collect kids. I know thats a reality for many and I aint judging them but I think if one partner wants to be the carer and its financially feasible (a cut in "standard of living" is an acceptable choice I think) then they should be supported, and consideration should be given to stepping back from the rat race if its going to stress/chronically tire both out and not be ideal for their kids.
TBH much of the above is more of a transportation issue with Irelands crazy commutes, but I suppose we cant ignore its knock on effects.
If you crunch the numbers you might be surprised what is achievable; although Tax Individualisation does make it a bit more difficult.ney001 said:
It's not a case of 'have to' but that you can 'choose to' on the basis that the best environment for pre-school children is their own home with one of their parents. I feel sorry for the little ones whom are woken early to be driven to some crèche every morning and might spend up to 10 hours there before being collected in the evening.ney001 said:
Actually - and I'm not being facetious here - at various times I wondered, for various reasons, if having a child might be the worst thing that could happen to the child! However, even if it's early days, it hasn't worked out anything like that so far. Looking at things more objectively I reckon that this was distorted thinking on my part.shnaek said:
speirbhean
Registered User
- Messages
- 154
"...why should women feel that they have to give up their jobs and independance while man heads off to work every day..."
What about men giving up their jobs/ going part time? In a lot of cases these days, women are more highly qualified/ earning more money than their partners - but they are still seen as the ones 'most likely' to stay home if the need arises. What do you think - does society still shy away from the idea of the 'stay at home' husband? Personally speaking I'd like to see a society where each parent would have the option of taking up to a year off work, so that the child gets around two years of full time care at home but neither parent feels he/she has made the whole sacrifice.
What about men giving up their jobs/ going part time? In a lot of cases these days, women are more highly qualified/ earning more money than their partners - but they are still seen as the ones 'most likely' to stay home if the need arises. What do you think - does society still shy away from the idea of the 'stay at home' husband? Personally speaking I'd like to see a society where each parent would have the option of taking up to a year off work, so that the child gets around two years of full time care at home but neither parent feels he/she has made the whole sacrifice.
I haven't come across this figure. I guess it may be an average figure which masks the spike in fertility which occurs for the 2-3 days around ovulation. [broken link removed] mentions that 'It is estimated that women in their 30s, particularly those over the age of 35, have less than a 10% chance per month of becoming pregnant'. If this statement is intended to equate an IVF cycle with intercourse, it is way off the mark.ClubMan said:
You get to do maybe 2 or 3 IVF cycles per annum. It costs you about €4k for every IVF cycle. The IVF cycle takes 'manual override' to the ladies' hormonal system and floods her system in order to stimulate ovulation and produce multiple eggs (10-20 eggs are common, compared to 1 for a typical natural cycle). Both man and woman throw their dignity out the window, with him popping off into a jar on a regular basis in the nice room with the magazines and her being pricked & poked by medics & possibly herself or her partner (daily hormonal injections can be given at home, to reduce the number of visits to the clinic). Living on tenterhooks for the initial 2 week wait for the pregnancy isn't much fun and wondering about the increased probabilities of multiple birth (with all the associated increased risk to mother & children) for the next 2 months before the first scan is kind-of scary. Any IVF parent who had surplus embryos frozen for future IVF cycles is now left wondering how the bewigged folks over at the Supreme Court are going to interfere.
IVF is not a fun experience. Of course, in the context of the end result, it is absolutely worth it, but it is not 'similar to intercourse'.
michaelm said:
On the plus side of age, I have friends whove had babies in their 30s and said that they are glad they didnt do it younger. That they werent ready then for such a life change, that their relationship with their partner is stronger/more stable now than it was in their 20s and that they (the mother in this case but Im sure it applies to men to) were happpier to make the sacrifices now and wanted it (to have babies and the life changes that come with it) more.
None of these friends and cousins have regrets that they will be 60 plus or approaching 60 when the sprong is 21.
Betsy Og said:
I agree completely that if a woman/man decides to stay home to look after children they should absolutely feel free to do this - it's a great thing to do and if I'm honest I'd love to feel that maternal need to stay at home (and have the money to do it). Personally though I wouldn't want to stay at home, I'm not trying to be some kind of go-getter supermum - I would just feel the need to be out working - I've always worked hard and have reached where I want to be career wise and I think I might resent having to give that up. I understand what you say about stay at home mothers being labelled lazy etc but from my experience it's the stay at home mothers who label the working gals! - I used to hear it all the time when I picked my younger sister up from school - mother's in the playground would be blaming the fact that one particular child was rude/hyper on the fact that both parents work etc etc - I found them very tedious and perhaps a little resentful!.
I came across it recently in this book. A quick Google search suggests that it is indeed a commonly accepted average figure. Of course averages can be misleading. My point was to clarify in the context of the overall discussion that there is absolutely no certainty about conceiving through intercourse even when there are no overriding fertility problems.RainyDay said:
For what it's worth I neither made nor inferred either of these points.
ZEGAR said:
Again - Thats my point - One major reason I wouldnt decide on having kids, even if the time and situation was right, is that the kids may be discriminated against based on their parents situation.
But realistically - this is no different than kids born to other minorities, though there is more protection in place for kids from the other minorities. Its the church fundamentalists that cause the worst problems - All in the name of their faith. (Note: I have no problem with religion per se - but do with those people who take it to extremes)
liteweight
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,678
When we had our first child I gave up work simply because I didn't feel anyone could look after her as well as I/we could. It was a personal choice and one I've never regretted. I still meet young women who would like to do this but can't, for economic reasons, which is a shame. Far from being lazy, I found staying at home was much harder than going to work. Apart from the obvious joy of the children, work at home is repetitive and often thankless! It's also a 24 hour job.
As stated in a previous post, I used to take temp work and later worked from home for my husband and others. I used to find this a great break. At dinner parties etc. I frequently met working women who imagined I was judging them for leaving the children. Not so!! I firmly believe that whatever makes the woman/mother happiest is the best course to take. A woman who feels forced to stay at home with kids IMO will not make the best mother. It's really horses for courses.
As stated in a previous post, I used to take temp work and later worked from home for my husband and others. I used to find this a great break. At dinner parties etc. I frequently met working women who imagined I was judging them for leaving the children. Not so!! I firmly believe that whatever makes the woman/mother happiest is the best course to take. A woman who feels forced to stay at home with kids IMO will not make the best mother. It's really horses for courses.
Mrs Daveco due to have #1 next month and is undecided as to whether to go back to work or not. From a financial point of view there is no need - not loaded, but a few lifestyle changes / sacrifices would see us through. As mentioned earlier in the post, its the commute that would do us in.. OH works in IFSC and we live in Greystones, so about 75 mins each way door to door. Probability is that she will get something part time locally, not for financial reasons or to prove herself career wise - simply to get out of the house every now and again and not feel exluded from the rest of society..
As to the question of when / where / best time to have a baby, the answer is that there is no answer. If you look at it, there is no right time - there will always be some obtacle on the horizon you feel you have to clear before the time is right. One could have done everything, travelled, career, right partner, right house, right age, but there will always be something around the corner to put kids on the back burner. Bottom line is that if you both want them then have them. As mentioned earlier, everything else just falls into place.
As to the question of when / where / best time to have a baby, the answer is that there is no answer. If you look at it, there is no right time - there will always be some obtacle on the horizon you feel you have to clear before the time is right. One could have done everything, travelled, career, right partner, right house, right age, but there will always be something around the corner to put kids on the back burner. Bottom line is that if you both want them then have them. As mentioned earlier, everything else just falls into place.
autumnleaf
Registered User
- Messages
- 38
daveco23 said:
But what if those obstacles are impossible to clear and everything doesn't just "fall into place"? If your ovaries/sperm/love life are just not co-operating in your grand plan? What do you do instead?
Concentrate on your career? Travel? Learn to be a good uncle/auntie/best friend's babysitter? Take up painting/bungie jumping/nuclear physics?
- Status