I will not have a child if I am not financially secure and healthy, it is part of my 3 - 5 year plan. I am planning on artificial insemination and if the donor is okay with identity release, great.
Okay, I am self centered and delusional by using a sperm donor? I’m not buying a kid BTW. I’m planning, saving, and working towards cooking one in my oven. Part of my plan is including positive male role models aka pseudo dads.
Is there a reason why you aren’t going to put any effort into finding a mate? There are a million good reasons why a two-parent household is the norm, and why in some culture, many generations in one house are the norm.
We’re the same age, and I can’t figure out why you’re not hoping for and wanting to find a partner. Partners are great, and if there are deep-seated issues with why you assume you’re not good enough/too busy/man hating or whatever, you will pass that on to your child.
ETA - If this is something you truly want, I would encourage you to adopt. There are a lot of kids all over the world that need a good parent, and the time and money costs will be just as high for IVF as to arrange and adoption.
Yes, god forbid any child grow up to believe that being single is okay.
Of course being single is okay - do you ever present an argument, or just throw up your hands and roll your eyes, and spit out one liners?
What I am saying is that, having grown up with an abusive father myself, serious issues arise. They are made when we’re little, and we can’t understand why daddy doesn’t love us. And then, when we get older, we are taught that being sad is childish, so we cover that lost, lonely feeling with anger or despair or burying it under a lot of pseudo-psychological bullshit.
Having a baby without uncovering and dealing with those issues leads to you directly or indirectly influencing your child in an unhealthy way. If she has a girl, she may tacitly pass on a distrust of men. If she has a boy, she may pass on a certain feeling of distance or shame.
In addition, finding and being a partner is hard, hard work. It take tons of skills, unbelievable patience and practice. Since partnering up is pretty much ingrained in our DNA, you do your child a certain disservice by not modeling such behavior growing up. Not in some namby-pamby way, but by showing your child things like Mom and Dad having a dumb argument about the remote control, then showing Mom and Dad talking about it the next day, and admitting they were just worried about something at work, and saying sorry and “I love you”, you show your child how to be and have a partner.
While pseudo-dads and close family, those behaviors cannot be modeled. Sure, a kid can hang around all day, stay there for a week to “observe”, whatever, but the true lessons are much more mundane and take years to learn.
Agreed with Sateryn76 and (gasp!) Diogenes. The nuclear and/or multigenerational family model exists for a reason, and you should be humble about your ability to substitute or improve on it. Extreme circumstances can force people to adopt suboptimal arrangements, and with much effort such single parents can compensate. But the two-parent model is pretty good, and shouldn’t be broken without cause. And if the only reason is I want to have a baby, that isn’t going to cut it.
I’d also warn you to be skeptical about advice in general: you have to ask “if the didn’t work the way this person is claiming, would he tell me something different or stubbornly persist in his beliefs?” No single mom is going to come out and say that it was a mistake: not only would that hurt her child’s feelings, it would be an admission of a very high-impact mistake in her life - an admission folks don’t like to make. (Just think of how few people would say they picked the wrong profession or chose the wrong community to belong to.) Nuclear-family proponents have a limited amount of status quo bias as well. But “I could have done it an easier way” isn’t nearly as strong a reason for self-deception as “I went through a lot of needless suffering and harmed my child.”
Jesus. Fucking. Christ. Pseudo-psychological bullshit indeed.
Married people give their kids plenty of issues. If your biggest concern about parenting is that you might give your kid ‘issues’, then definitely don’t have kids, because I assure you, they WILL have issues. Issues are something all people have.
As is a capacity for self-deception. For instance, people think that they’re doing their kids a favor by staying together and being miserable, when really they’re just scared and inert. They superstitiously believe that doing things ‘right’ gives their kids a magical veil of protection from the perfectly normal problems of being human. They believe that people who do things differently than them are not only wrong, but delusional.
[quote=“Sateryn76, post:84, topic:552490”]
I have been in therapy for a decade and have reached a healthy place dealing with my childhood abuse. I am not a man hater and I don’t ignore the value of fathers. I have seen amazing fathers in my extended family. This isn’t really discussed with abuse survivor but we grow up with a HUGE blindspot when it comes to choosing partners. Let me put it simply. My grandmother was abused, my mother was abused, and I was abused. We tend to be attracted to men who are like our abusers. I don’t distrust men, I distrust myself. Maybe breaking the cycle of violence in my family could start with me?
I think it’s great that you’ve done so much work. Parental abuse is about the worst thing there is, because kids only really want love.
But my thought is that you are not “breaking” the cycle, you are “avoiding” men because you are afraid, and lack the confidence in your choices and trust in yourself.
This could have real repercussions as a parent, IMO.
Chip on your shoulder much? :rolleyes:
[quote=“Sateryn76, post:88, topic:552490”]
Wow, you know about my dating life now? My relationship history? I was an active participant in the douche topic and imho your relationship sounds vaguely abusive.
No, actually. You can tell, since I’m not the one diagnosing people over the internet and telling them how to live.
No one in his thread is telling anyone how to live. You’re being defensive out of proportion to what’s being said, and you’re inferring things that haven’t been implied. No one is passing moral judgements on single moms. I think you’re really taking things the wrong way. I think two good parents in a household is better than one, but one is better than a good one and a bad one.
Ruling out any possibility of a second parent a priori is what I object to. And I don’t even mean that the second parent should necessarily be part of the household. I’m not coming at it from a standpoint that “a woman should have a man.” I don’t think that at all. I just think that a kid should, at the very least, be allowed to know who his father is, and be allowed whatever access and interaction the father is willing to reciprocate.
Really? You’re bringing that up again?
If you thought my relationship was “vaguely abusive” because my husband likes no-smell vaginas, then I think you have some issues to work out.
Indeed. This is exactly the case with all the single mothers by choice I personally know.
You have no idea how strong the urge to have a baby can be in some women. It can be all-consuming.
Speaking of arguing something that no one has said. :rolleyes:
Yes you are. *Everyone *in this thread is giving information and advice that they know may sway the OP’s decision. Denouncing facts that support position A and giving facts that support position B is just as much “telling people how to live their life” as simply giving facts that support position A is. You are not morally superior.
Nobody here has given any facts. Everyone has shared experiences, and given opinions. My opinion is “Hey, if you want to do this, and you’re able to do this, then go ahead.” Many people’s opinion seems to be “If you do this you’re a terrible person who’s willfully endangering your child.” See if you can spot the difference as far as “telling people how to live”.
AmericanMaid, could you explain to me why the need for a baby? I asked earlier and got a response (thanks, suranyi!), but I’d also like one from you. I’m not judging - I have two kids and, now that I have them, feel like I’d be missing an important part of myself if they weren’t there. But, I have trouble understanding kids as part of a five-year plan.
My problem is this: having a five-year plan assumes finite goals. Financial stability – check. Weight loss, good habits achieved for future weight management – check. Have kid – check? I suppose you could consider the act of having the kid a check in the box, but (and I know you know this, but I think it bears repeating) once you have the kid, you also have a lifetime responsibility.
And, while you’ve certainly accounted for the financial side of having a kid and the importance of your health, it seems like in preparation of having a kid, especially having a kid on your own, if you must have a checklist or five-year plan, establishing a firm and practically unbreakable social network is just as important to your health and that of the child’s as your finances and weight loss.
So I’m not saying, “Don’t do it! Think of the child!” But I am a little confused about the idea of a five-year plan with no plans to build in the support you’d need to raise a kid. Normally that’s achieved by a husband or wife, but in this case, it doesn’t look like that’s a concern for you. So how would you go about that, and if you don’t plan to have that network in place, why not?
Who cares if they really want to be a parent? I really want a Corvette. Who gives a shit. That’s the selfishness I’m talking about. It’s all about “what I want,” instead of what is actually the best situation for a potential kid. My objection is also not to depriving the father, but to depriving the kid.