board77

Eltirwen wrote:

Personally, I'm scared stiff of having children. People look at me weird when I say that, because I'm married and apparently the only reason to get married is to have kids. But I'm truly terrified.

I'm even scared of other people's children. Babies seem to have a "cry around this person" radar for me, because they all do. I'm not good meeting any sort of new person, but kids are worst - I prefer adults any day. I helped in a class of third graders for the whole year, and it took me two months to warm up to them. Several of them did get quite attached for a while, but it took time.

I've got a bad history with my own parents, so that's probably part of it. My greatest fear is to be like them, and if I have kids, it would be easier to be like them. Yet, I hear that I would be missing so much, and it almost seems a duty to have children. I'm just not sure what to do. Right now I just want to spend time with my husband - that's why I married him, after all.

Is there something wrong with me?

Elti -

You are still just a young person yourself, not to be patronizing or anything, because that is not what I mean at all.

You have no DUTY to have children, it is always best to have them prepared and wanting them, but, things do sometimes happen, and it is surprising how much that can change some people. My first husband always claimed that he never wanted to be a father, he had had terrible issues with his own dad, his parents divorced when he was eight, and he had a very strained relationship at best with his father. But, when I found myself pregnant at age 25, after being married for nearly four years, he was okay with it, and then when our daughter was born, it was as if he could not have been a better daddy. She melted his heart. Our son three years later was the same, he literally WANTED a second child at this point, I was the one having some reservations.

Elti, if it helps, that's about how I felt. Now, Lufu was as planned as any child conceived without medical help can be. Yet when I saw that second pink line on the preg test, I screamed. Then I wept. Not for joy, either.

I do think that our relationship with our parents is a great influence on how we view having children of our own, and even more so on how we interact with our children once we have them.

Alatar wrote:

I know without doubt that I would be willing to kill or die to protect my kids.

Beautiful post, Alatar, and so terrifyingly true!

Yeah I know jewelsong...
I dont negate the fact some people have great pregnancies... but the very idea of it happening to me just scares the living daylights out of me. I would perceive it as an unnerving thing that would require coming to terms with Im weird. Ive heard it all, from my mother, friends or others, that this is "abnormal" because every woman should want to have babies. I stand by the fact that this does not make me "abnormal".
My mom didnt have good birthing experiences and several women in my family in fact did not, so maybe Ive somehow internalized a fear from all that... but even if everything goes great.. its just... something I dont really want happening to my body... perhaps that sounds really weird...but thats the way it is
If a baby "happened to me" I dont know what I would do, but likely I would eventually welcome it, but with lots of reservation and conscious effort to change things in my brain

When I clash with my mother I sometimes promise myself to make a note of never making the same mistakes if ever I am a parent. If I become a parent I would like to put my absolute best foot forward, financially, emotionally, mentally and physically... and I feel nowhere near a point in my life where I can or want to do that. Not sure I ever will.
I know lives work out even if conditions for a baby arent 100% ideal... but Id feel great guilt over bringing a kid into the world if I didnt feel confident about making a great parent. I think this is akin to what Guru was saying. I can relate.

EDIT: I have heard this before and others have said here that the view on children can change with love. Being with someone you love. I dont doubt that love can make us grow and change, Ive experienced that myself, but I also know some married couples who are very much in love but one, or both, still dont want children. I feel a bit outraged when society makes it seem like having kids is just the natural, normal, dutiful or inevitable thing to do for every woman. /little edit rant over.
I dont think that not going ga-ga over the children idea and not having that as one of my primary goals makes me any less of a woman than those who have wanted to be mothers since they were young girls.

Well, one is ever really prepared to have children, even when they think they are. Now I was one of those teenagers that didn't like babies and I never understood why girls went all gaga over new babies. I even told my step-mother when I was 17 that I didn't want to have any babies; that it seemed like too big of a responsibility. She laughed and said I would change my mind when I found someone I loved.

She was right of course. I married my husband about a year after that conversation and shortly afterward I started having yearnings to be a mother. My husband didn't really want one, but we weren't using birth control and the inevitable happened. Before I got pregnant I was scared of precnancy too, like Enchantress. I had (and still do to a lesser extent) a fear of losing control (especially of my own body) and pregnancy is of course the epitome of losing control. Well, I just sort of went with the flow as it were and found out that change in my body is nothing to fear. Labor and delivery hurt worse than I thought it would, but after three children I just roll with the punches (so to speak) when it comes to the pain. It's not like it lasts forever .

When my first daughter was put on my chest and she looked at me with eyes as blue as sapphires, I fell instantly in love. I can not stress enough that your own children are different. To this day I'm still not all that enamored with other people babies, but my own children are like precious jewels from God's own hand. And yet I don't feel like a good enough mother for these precious treasures. You see they deserve a perfect mother and alas I'm only human. I read everything I could (and still do) about child developement, nutrition, discipline, learning, inspiring creativity, teaching about God, ect...ect... and yet I still sometimes get mad at them for normal silly things. Sometimes I let them play by themselves all day because I am just so overwhelmed by everything and then I remember that my daughter wants to write a story called "The Princess Who Invited the Tornado to Dinner" and I feel like I am not the mother that she deserves. I think about my four year old son who has many developemental problems and can't even talk yet and know that I can't meet all of his needs on my own. It breaks my heart, but then I remember how he loves his stuffed dolphins so much and tries so hard to say dolphin and I know I wouldn't trade him for the world.

So, no you aren't prepared for children no matter how much you read, learn, save, or buy, but you know what it's OK. Just love your children, smile at them, tell them that they are teaching YOU something new (because they will), hug and kiss them a lot. You will know that you are a good enough parent when your son or daughter gives you a hug and says, "It's OK, mama." when you are crying from the stress. So I probably scared a lot of you from having children, but that is not my intent. Like someone said earlier in this thread it is a great adventure and it is traveled together with the loveliest people you will ever meet, your children.

~Sidonzo

Sidonzo wrote:

then I remember that my daughter wants to write a story called "The Princess Who Invited the Tornado to Dinner"

I so want to read that story! That is just great!

My oldest, who is now 21, went through a phase when he wrote and illustrated books (I had to "publish" them because he couldn't write yet.) Memorable titles include "The Boy Who Found Some Dinosaurs" and "The Mom That Was Dead." And Luke (my youngest, who has high-functioning autism) wrote a great one called "The Kitchen That Talked Back." I still have them.

And, Enchantress...everyone feels differently. You are not any "less" of a woman because of your feelings about pregnancy and children. I think what people are trying to say (in a reassuring way) is that MANY people feel dubious and conflicted about having children...but for MOST people, that feeling changes (in a positive way) as soon as the kid arrives.

I did not always "dream of" having children, but a time came when I felt like it was "right" to have one.

I did not dream of having children either... I was just sure to have them. And I hated being pregnant!!! Feeling fat, ugly...

We almost lost our elder - he got infected while still in hospital, five days old - with a meningities, a general blood infection, a kidney infection... they gave him less than 50% chance to survive... and even less without sequels. He did however - but I cried unnumerous tears, I was afraid like I had never been before... it was a hard way of becoming mother, being separated from your baby immediately, seeing him with all those strings fixed on him, knowing he had to go through so much pain. He is fine now - but we all have been branded forever.


What Alatar said about the love that you feel for your children is so true.

Enchie, I don't think that people who don't want children are lesser people... I am very sorry for them that their life will be empty of such an overwhelming experience.

OK, I'm about to go all metaphysical on you guys!

There's an energy bond between you and every person that you love. You can visualize this as a glowing rope going from your chest to theirs, and distance doesn't matter. You are always connected, unless you deliberately cut that bond.

You've heard of when something tugs at your heartstrings? It's not just a turn of phrase, there are 'heartstrings' and they connect you to others and facilitate your emotional interactions.

The bond from mother to child is especially strong, and I suspect it had some evolutionary advantage as we evolved. You know, made it easier to keep track of a child's wellbeing.

In my case, being an Army officer, I did not allow those bonds to develop quickly enough. I was used to suppressing emotion, and being rather cold and heartless. I suspect that is why all my children had colic. They were being starved of the emotional energy they needed of me. As I relaxed after getting out of the Army, the bonds grew to their necessary strength, and the kids had my undivided attention up until teenager hood.

When my oldest daughter started rebelling, I had trouble letting loose my tight mother/daughter bond with her. A couple of years ago, as I started learning about those energy/emotional bonds I realized that part of what teenagers rebel against is the tightness of the bond. They need to become their own person, and can't with the constant heavy emotional interaction of that bond. I deliberately reduced the intensity and watchfulness of the bond between us, and we've been on good terms ever since.

Last year, when my son had a very bad ruptured appendix and spent 9 days in the hospital, I poured every ounce of healing strength into him that I could. He made it through, but the bond between us was quite a bit stronger than it should be for his age. I started to realize this half a year after his surgery, when he started having totally uncharacteristic flashes of temper, so I thinned out that bond, too, and he hasn't even HAD a rebellious phase.

I'm slowly reducing the intensity on my 14 y.o. daughter, and she's doing better now. She's going to be the most problem of all my children, being of a completely different personality type than the rest of us. A natural-born 'cheerleader' type!

I had the chance last summer to hold my newborn nephew who was crying and crying and his mother couldn't console him. I'd been thinking a lot about emotional energy, and asked to hold him. I knew his mother was kind of messed up emotionally, so I wanted to try something. She said she thought he was getting hungry, but sure, give it a try.

As I held that baby, I deliberately projected a feeling of "I love you, it's OK" emotion at him. I can't see auras, but believe in them, so I visualized my aura extending around him and giving him the protection and comfort he needed.

He fell right asleep. The grown ups were amazed. I didn't try to explain, because it would have freaked them out.

It's exactly what I should have done with my babies when they were new and colicy, but I didn't know how. Babies feel emotional energy, and need good forms of it. If one is all twisted up inside emotionally, it starves the child, and they cry in protest.

Now the freakiest evidence of emotional bonds I've ever seen involves my and my husband. We are SO bonded it produces some psychic phenomenon. We generally know who it is when the other calls, and once, right after I suffered an emotional shock at work, he literally called me and asked "What's wrong?"

After I read an article proving that couples feel each other's pain (Oh yes, there's MRI proof! ), I started noticing that I was picking up his aches and pains as well. One day, after feeling his shoulder ache all day long I was feeling grumpy and PMSing and just plain irritable. I thought to myself, "I'm sick of this! I don't want this! My aches and pains are enough, thank you!" So, I took out some imaginary scissors and CUT that bond between us- so I wouldn't get this constant backflow of his pain. Later that evening, he noticed a small wound in the middle of his chest. A tiny hole the size of a pin prick, he picked at the scab and then it wouldn't stop bleeding. We'd been picking blackberries earlier that day, so I thought he'd just pricked himself leaning over the bushes to get more berries. We put a styptic powder on it, and the blood welled and bubbled up through the powder. I got a bandaid for him and had him keep pressure on it and thought no more about it until the next day. He took the bandaid off, and the blood started dribbling again like it was a fresh wound. This was exceedingly weird, from such a tiny hole, about the size of a skin pore. We did the styptic powder again, and a bandaid, and about that time I remembered about the cutting of the bond I'd done the day before. The books say this bond is located in the middle of your chest, right where he was bleeding from!

Oh. Doh!
I visualized the bond reforming, and he wasn't bothered by it again.

I guess my point is: those bonds are REAL, and have real, physical effects on the persons in question.

Disclaimer: I am young and reserve the right to change my mind about any of the following at any time. HOWEVER, that does not mean that I *will* change my mind, nor do I need to be reminded that I *might* change my mind because I already know that's possible

That said, I do not want children. I have never wanted children. I remember announcing this to my mother when I was six years old, and remaining very constant in this to the present day, save for one period during which I became deeply religious and felt that I "had" to have children for religious reasons, even though I still did not want them.

Am I "selfish"? Selfish only in that I am willing to put my own needs and desires ahead of a being that does not yet exist, and which I do not wish to ever exist (namely, a potential, unborn, unconceived child). When I have a partner, I want to be able to spend time with that person, for us to have enough time to spend with each other, for OUR relationship to be able to develop. I have heard it said that children are an extension of that love. That has not been my experience - not in my family, not in the families of many others I know. More importantly, that wouldn't be what I would want to be my experience in the future.

I have put an immense amount of time and effort into my education, and do not wish to have to choose between achieving career-wise at the highest level possible and raising children. This would not be as big a problem were I male; however, the reality of the situation for women in private legal practice in the preeminent biglaw firms seems to be choosing between making partner and succeeding in practice, or accepting a lesser track (or dropping out of the jobforce) and having children. Six figures into student loans, thousands of hours into law school, and hundreds of dreams into life - this is too much to sacrifice for a biological child that I have never wanted. And sacrifice it would be - in my mind and heart.

I have never felt attracted to young children as most women seem to be. I was always the only girl who never wanted to play house, never wanted to go "goo-goo-ga-ga" as my friends did over the child, asked to be excused from holding new babies, felt miserable at baby showers, and hated babysitting. That said, I like being both female and feminine - I just don't consider having biological children a part of that identity at all.

Having said all of this, I present two contradictions:

(1) I like working with children above the age of six or seven. I am in Big Brothers Big Sisters, and have an eight year old Little Sister, Vicky, with whom I love to spend time. I would love to be more involved with tutoring or mentoring elementary/middle school age children, and intend to look for ways to do this in the future.
(2) I would be willing to consider adoption of a non-infant child, preferably from some relatively "unwanted" demographic (i.e. where the child might otherwise never find a family). I would love and care for that child or children. However, I would not adopt to fill some emotional need or desire for a child in my own life, because I have never felt such a thing. I would do it because it would be in the best interest of that child, and because I would have the emotional and financial wherewithal to give my best effort.

One more thought on the selfishness point: I think that it depends on what one's priorities are. That is, I think that there are many ways to choose to be childfree and yet not be selfish. What if one takes the time and resources that would have gone into parenting, and instead dedicates them to community service, pro bono work, mentoring, political involvement, or myriad other efforts to better their community/state/country? At some level, acting on the desire to have a child OR the desire not to have a child is, if not selfish, very inward-looking. What's important is the actions that come after that - whether raising children to the best of one's ability, or concentrating on other worthwhile, good efforts outside of that.

- TP

EDIT The concept that one's life will be less meaningful or emptier without children is, to me, a presumptuous one. That is - surely such a thing is a very individual determination, right? There are some people whose lives would be very meaningless without children, and there are others whose lives would be very full. This is an individual determination that each person must make. Childed people cannot speak of the path their lives would have taken without children, for they cannot know, and childfree or childless people similarly cannot speak of the path their lives would have taken with children. It is even more clear that no one can judge what someone ELSE'S life would have been like with or without children. All that each of us can do is to make the judgment that we feel is best suited to our families and/or ourselves...and respect the choices and judgments of others, not suggest that their lives are "lesser" or that they are deprived in any way because they have chosen a different path.

TP, I think all people are saying is this: there are some very specific experiences that people without children can never have (sorry, I really dislike "childfree," although I also see why people dislike "childless"), and those of us who have children and have had those experiences find them meaningful and enriching.

Having kids isn't the only source of meaning in life. Of course not. One can build a rich, meaningful life with or without children. But people who choose not to have them are giving up more than sleepless nights and tuition bills.

It feels the same to me as choosing lifelong celibacy would feel. Yes, life without sex can be spiritually rich and full of worthwhile experiences. Many fine people do choose it, and don't miss what they never had--it is exactly the right choice for them. But even though sex can bring physical risk and emotional pain, most of the rest of us can't imagine living without it.

Tolkien Purist wrote

Quote:

I would be willing to consider adoption of a non-infant child, preferably from some relatively "unwanted" demographic (i.e. where the child might otherwise never find a family). I would love and care for that child or children. However, I would not adopt to fill some emotional need or desire for a child in my own life, because I have never felt such a thing. I would do it because it would be in the best interest of that child, and because I would have the emotional and financial wherewithal to give my best effort.

I have seen several people mention (those who have no desire to give birth or would feel 'more comfortable' with and 'adopted child- age X) the desire of perhaps parenting an older child. This task could /can be a harder row to hoe.*

My example comes from a dear couple whom adopted two Chinese boys (I think their first son was 5, the second probably around the same age- but they have about 2.5 years difference). They were unable to have thier own children. They wanted children- they needed to introduce their sons into a totally new culture AND language (still at 5 a child can be quite adept at learning a new language, or one can look at adopting a same culture child). They had to deal with things that the children had lived/been through up to that point in their lives. And most recently, my friend mentioned that she has had to deal with outbursts of anger directed and transfered to her, being the 'mother' and because of the psychological hurts from the abandonment of the birth mother. Perhaps some children are brought up in a loving foster home until adoption is possible, but I can't help but thinking that the loss incurred from giving up the child is something that the child will have to work through... even into adult years. Something to be aware of when adopting older children- they might be at a better age of 'reason', but they may come with a history as well.
Don't know... perhaps some of the adopted moms might care to comment?? I lost both parents (through divorce and then death) at an early age- and I still have some issues to work through at mid-life.

*(by no means is this post meant as a discouragement to those who would consider adoption, but rather as something I am in the process of learning about, as I had never heard about the 'anger toward the adoptive mother' before)

And for those of you who have said you would rather not have children..., my commentary on having kids is to answer the question, not to put value on whether or not you do have kids of your own. I understand the 'pressures' and the unfair societal thinking that can be frustrating... because I've seen how hard this is on my SIL and her husband (living in Switz- where being a career-person with no kids is far less the norm). Even working when you have young children is 'less' the norm, but is becoming more-so due to the need or want for double income.

crystal_seed wrote:

Tolkien Purist wrote

Quote:

I would be willing to consider adoption of a non-infant child, preferably from some relatively "unwanted" demographic (i.e. where the child might otherwise never find a family). I would love and care for that child or children. However, I would not adopt to fill some emotional need or desire for a child in my own life, because I have never felt such a thing. I would do it because it would be in the best interest of that child, and because I would have the emotional and financial wherewithal to give my best effort.

I have seen several people mention (those who have no desire to give birth or would feel 'more comfortable' with and 'adopted child- age X) the desire of perhaps parenting an older child. This task could /can be a harder row to hoe.*

My example comes from a dear couple whom adopted two Chinese boys (I think their first son was 5, the second probably around the same age- but they have about 2.5 years difference). They were unable to have thier own children. They wanted children- they needed to introduce their sons into a totally new culture AND language (still at 5 a child can be quite adept at learning a new language, or one can look at adopting a same culture child). They had to deal with things that the children had lived/been through up to that point in their lives. And most recently, my friend mentioned that she has had to deal with outbursts of anger directed and transfered to her, being the 'mother' and because of the psychological hurts from the abandonment of the birth mother. Perhaps some children are brought up in a loving foster home until adoption is possible, but I can't help but thinking that the loss incurred from giving up the child is something that the child will have to work through... even into adult years. Something to be aware of when adopting older children- they might be at a better age of 'reason', but they may come with a history as well.
Don't know... perhaps some of the adopted moms might care to comment?? I lost both parents (through divorce and then death) at an early age- and I still have some issues to work through at mid-life.

crystalseed:

You make a good point. First, non-infants are going to have a past that the adoptive parent(s) will have to deal with. I was just thinking through this with my Little. Even as her Big Sister, I have already had to spend quite a bit of time starting to help her work through her issues re: her alcoholic father who physically and verbally abused her mother, and one of her older brothers (twenty years older than she) who has stolen from their mother and physically attacked both of them in the past. I can only imagine the greater challenges entailed in parenting such a child.

Furthermore, I was aware (due to having a couple of friends who are overseas adoptees) of anger sometimes directed at the adopting parents.

The reason that I feel that if I do parent, adoption might be preferable, is that for me, it changes the nature of the "selfishness" consideration. When I ask myself whether I am selfish not to want biological children, I inevitably conclude that I am not, because there is no one existing to weigh my personal desires and interests against. There is no child there. However, the potential adoptees are already in existence, and can have needs and desires to weigh against my own. This is not to suggest that I feel I must or definitely will adopt by any means - for example, if I become very involved post-school in religious, community, or political causes and would not have the wherewithal to be an active parent, I wouldn't adopt. However, if I'm just being social and having fun in my spare time, I would think more seriously about it.

Also, I want to be clear that I'm not suggesting that people who choose not to adopt or have children are selfish at all. My thoughts apply only to me; each person's circumstances, considerations, and priorities are different.

- TP

TP (nice to meet you by the way), I completely relate to your post. Thats exactly how I feel as well.
Nice to see that Im not so completely rare in my feelings on this issue.

On the note of adopting - At some point, if I ever grew into the partenting role and ideas, I could see myself adopting a baby. I could probably put up with the babyhood, like jewelsong said her friend who wasnt ga-ga over babies did with her kids, but the pregnancy issue really bothers me. And from the world encompassing view, I think its a horrible shame there are so many unwanted children. My mother's friend adopted two Chinese baby girls last year. She went over to China to get them. She is very happy with them and is the greatest mom. I would love to do something like that. It shocks me that girls are unwanted there and often given up if not killed at birth...
If I had a child, I would really want it to be a daughter... and adoption would also let me have some control over that.

I too find saying that "we totally miss out" presumptuous. Please dont feel sorry for people who dont want kids...Everyone is different. Feeling sorry for someone who doesnt like oranges because they are your absolute favourite food is unfounded. Taste buds, like deeper and more complex needs and desires, vary.

Although I am a mother, and a grandmother, I cannot see how it is "selfish" not to have children.

Selfish how? It's beyond me.

My view is the exact opposite, actually: far too often the choice to have a child is "selfish", with the parent or parents utterly unprepared in any way for the real child that they go ahead and bear.

From the inane stupidity of the girl who has a baby "so I can have something to love that will love me back" (get a puppy, I say) to the people who have children because they have to "pass on the family name" or because "it's expected", etc., it's selfish nonsense.

I would have more of a problem with people who would adopt because pregnancy doesn't appeal to them. There are so many childless couples trying to adopt because they can't have kids and have tried every physical option that it seems ludicrously unfair that one of those parents might lose out on their chance at parenthood because someone feels pregnancy is a little too "icky".

I speak from experience here. My brother and his wife have tried every option available to them bar surrogacy and they are now in their late thirties and looking at a long road ahead of them before they can adopt. Adoption should not be a convenience. There are too many people for whom it is the only option.

In Ireland, for foreign adoption, you have only two choices. Either you go through the Irish adoption boards official channels or you take the unofficial route. You can certainly adopt children through the unofficial route but you run the risk of supporting criminal gangs who run "Babies for Sale" rings that either kidnap the children or "Farm" them.

There are certainly thousands of unwanted children who desperately need adoption, but if you go through unapproved channels you could be aggravating the problem.

If you really feel the need to give love and provide for a child but don't want to be pregnant, consider fostering. That is a truly noble calling and one that is very poorly supported. It takes a special kind of person to give that much love and support and know that it may never be returned or that it may be taken from you.

Just a few thoughts.

Alatar

Wow, lots of responses so quickly

Primula_Baggins wrote:

TP, I think all people are saying is this: there are some very specific experiences that people without children can never have (sorry, I really dislike "childfree," although I also see why people dislike "childless"), and those of us who have children and have had those experiences find them meaningful and enriching.

Having kids isn't the only source of meaning in life. Of course not. One can build a rich, meaningful life with or without children. But people who choose not to have them are giving up more than sleepless nights and tuition bills.

Hi Prim! First, I understand why people could dislike either of the terms childless or childfree, but I choose to use both to incorporate both the people who consider themselves bereft of something they want very badly, and those who consider themselves free of something they truly do not want. At least on the Internet, there seem to be people who have a strong preference as to which word should apply to them, so I try to use both out of respect to both groups I don't consider myself a member of either, because as I said at the top of my first post, I reserve the right to change my mind, and many of the "childfree" are adamant that to use that label, you should be sure that you do not want children, now or ever. Again, I'm just trying to respect as many groups as I can here, and doubtless will end up offending someone

I understand what you are saying on the meaningfulness and experience of having children that the childless/childfree/childlacking/childbereft/nonchilded/whatever do not have. However, as best as I can understand it, it truly is a different set of experiences. My non-childed friends who are in their forties and fifties feel that they have had many diverse, life-enriching experiences that would have been impossible for them with children, and they cannot imagine trading their lives in for a different, childed trajectory. Thus, I'm left feeling that this is a case of "to each, his/her own".

Quote:

It feels the same to me as choosing lifelong celibacy would feel. Yes, life without sex can be spiritually rich and full of worthwhile experiences. Many fine people do choose it, and don't miss what they never had--it is exactly the right choice for them. But even though sex can bring physical risk and emotional pain, most of the rest of us can't imagine living without it.

Truthfully, I feel that your analogy would be more apt if you used asexual people. Celibates who are sexually oriented towards someone are "giving up" something that some part of them wants, as I understand it. This would be like someone with a desire for children foregoing it to pursue what they saw as a higher purpose. In contrast, childfree people might view children more as asexuals view sex - as something that they simply are not interested in having/doing, even though most of the rest of the world is. Both are just minority choices IMO.

enchantress - thanks for sharing your thoughts as well, and nice to meet you There are so many children overseas who are unwanted, particularly young girls, and to take one of them and give them hope, future, and a life would truly be a wonderful choice to make, if you are able. I, too, would prefer to have a daughter, if I ultimately choose to adopt a child at all.

Vison wrote:

My view is the exact opposite, actually: far too often the choice to have a child is "selfish", with the parent or parents utterly unprepared in any way for the real child that they go ahead and bear.

ITA, Vison. However, as I said, I see both choices - to have children or not - as being very self-focused at some level. There is nothing wrong with this per se, but if one's choice results in the creation of another human being, one must be adequately equipped to deal with that person's needs - and many new parents do not seem to be.

Alatar wrote:

I would have more of a problem with people who would adopt because pregnancy doesn't appeal to them. There are so many childless couples trying to adopt because they can't have kids and have tried every physical option that it seems ludicrously unfair that one of those parents might lose out on their chance at parenthood because someone feels pregnancy is a little too "icky".

With all due respect, Alatar, this argument seems rather unfair for a man to make, because of the immense physical and emotional hardships that pregnancy entails - for some, extending many months past pregnancy (e.g. post partum depression). To state that any woman who wants a child must go through this if they are at all physically able (particularly in a world in which no man must or can do the same) is troublesome. This is more so because even among the pool of women who CAN become physically pregnant, all are not created equal. Some would-be mothers will undergo far worse side-effects, risks, etc than others due to pre-existing conditions. FURTHERMORE, some women who are capable of conceiving (or their partners) may be high-risk for various severe diseases, conditions, and syndromes - and could pass those risks on to their children. They may not want to give birth to a biological child for this reason - if they still want to parent, I do not know why they should not adopt.

Quote:

Adoption should not be a convenience. There are too many people for whom it is the only option.

You suggest fostering to people who do not wish to be pregnant. Why is this solution not proposed on equal footing to those who cannot conceive? Again, this presupposes that the latter have some right, or some greater right, to have a child of their own, no matter what, and I must disagree (although I, too, know people who are trying everything under the sun to have a child).

Furthermore, at least in America, your concerns would be irrelevant since there is no shortage whatsoever of children to be adopted - unless one must have a Caucasian child, since racism here still predominates. There are any number of minority children that languish in foster care. Also, there are African and Asian (and Latin-American?) children in other countries more than willing to be adopted by Americans, and I would assume, any first-world country citizens. Adoption is an expensive process, but unless a white child is a must (and IMO, anyone who thinks this is too racist to merit any sort of child at all*), I have not heard of anyone being unable to find a child.

- TP

Alatar, I understand what you are saying, but there are A LOT of orphaned and unwanted children around the world. I am convinced there is PLENTY to go around... though the bureaucracy of adoption programs is very crappy sometimes. Its not so incredibly hard here in Canada from what I heard. They check people out really thoroughly and a certain financial basis is required, but I have not yet ran into a couple who wanted to adopt for any reason and could not find a child. Sometimes it takes a bit of time to formalize the papers, but in the end they find a baby/child. I bet it depends on the country though.
I think the problem truly lies in non-efficient adoption systems. Things should be done to make it easier and more readily accessible, for everyones benefit.

Fostering is noble... but not really the substitute to conventional life-long parenting. I couldnt do something like that, because I get attached to people very strongly once I make a commitment...I would not be able to handle temporary parent relationships...and thus would not make a good foster parent. I think it would have the potential to mess with me emotionally a lot. Kudos to those who can do it.

And TP has already adressed the "males speaking on pregnancy issues" point I wanted to make, way better than I ever could.
Ive had this conversation with my own love... It is certainly not men's or anyone's "fault" that they cannot be pregnant, even if they wanted to, but its simply the way it is. Thus, I have issues with men making strong statements pertaining to pregnancies... keeping a pregnancy, becoming pregnant, etc. It seems to me that many men (especially those who have not had children yet) have a very rosy-coloured view of the whole process... and it isnt always like that. Even if you go through the experience with your partner or have been around pregnant women and babies, I dont really think it quite compares to 9 months of profound changes in your OWN body and the experience of childbirth. Men making "should" statements on pregnancies and viewing women who dont want to do that as weird, "undutiful," abonrmal, selfish or something bothers me. Of course, I cannot speak from personal experience on pregnancy itself, having never been pregnant... but at least I am personally familliar with aspects of possessing a female body, and I have the potential to one day be pregnant. I think that predisposes me a bit more logically to deciding and stating certain arguments on baby issues....

Andri, Leoba ... I was with you totally .. I just could NOT understand how I would have the patience with a small child. I could not GET small children at all. I always knew I wanted kids, but not how I would cope with being a mum.

Well .. the only thing i can say after having two of them (admittedly not as soon as 20 months apart ) is that ... well ... it is the only job I have ever had where I put 100% in and got 200% return
In fact I have loved it so much, I have decided I want to do it full time ...
Each person is different, there are those who have them and cant wait to go back to work, those who have them and feel their lives are over. Well .. your old life IS over .. unless you can afford a full time nanny or have your mum around the corner ... then you can leave the child and do what you want to do If that works for you then fine, but you can never get away from the fact that small, tiny being is YOUR responsibilty
I thank God every day that I have had my two .. and wish for more .. although I doubt I will have any And that is another thread entirely !!!!

tolkienpurist wrote:

The concept that one's life will be less meaningful or emptier without children is, to me, a presumptuous one. That is - surely such a thing is a very individual determination, right? There are some people whose lives would be very meaningless without children, and there are others whose lives would be very full. This is an individual determination that each person must make. Childed people cannot speak of the path their lives would have taken without children, for they cannot know, and childfree or childless people similarly cannot speak of the path their lives would have taken with children. It is even more clear that no one can judge what someone ELSE'S life would have been like with or without children. All that each of us can do is to make the judgment that we feel is best suited to our families and/or ourselves...and respect the choices and judgments of others, not suggest that their lives are "lesser" or that they are deprived in any way because they have chosen a different path.

TP, I just wanted to thank you for saying this...I've been lurking in this thread (not posting because I get way too emotional and I'm afraid I'd end up being rude) and I've seen several comments of the 'I feel sorry for those who won't have kids' nature that have greatly irked me. So thanks for saying it better and more politely and reasonably than I would have been able to.

Alatar, while I see how frustrating it must be to see your family go through that process and come up empty, I find your choice of words to be more than a little troublesome...

Alatar wrote:

it seems ludicrously unfair that one of those parents might lose out on their chance at parenthood because someone feels pregnancy is a little too "icky".

In purposely using the word 'icky' you seem to be implying that women who don't want to go through pregnancy are being foolish, selfish, and childish. There's a lot more to not wanting to go through pregnancy than whatever 'icky' aspects there may be. I know you have several kids...surely you've seen your wife go through things during pregnancy that can perhaps make you see why some women wouldn't want to go through it? It's a fully rational choice for some of us, since, as others have pointed out, there can be great risks, both physical and psychological, that go along with pregnancy.

Elian wrote:

Alatar wrote:

it seems ludicrously unfair that one of those parents might lose out on their chance at parenthood because someone feels pregnancy is a little too "icky".

In purposely using the word 'icky' you seem to be implying that women who don't want to go through pregnancy are being foolish, selfish, and childish. There's a lot more to not wanting to go through pregnancy than whatever 'icky' aspects there may be. .

I second this. I was very fortunate in my pregnancies - felt good the entire time..."glowed" one might say. However, I have known women who were not so fortunate, who ended up bed-ridden for 4 or 5 months, experienced severe nausea and mood swings or gained an enormous and dangerous amount of weight. None of these conditions are life-threatening, but some pregancies do end up being very dangerous for mother and child. Pregnancy may be a "natural state" but it is by no means a walk in the park!

Most women, even those who think they don't want kids, end up loving the kids when they arrive...some even enjoy the pregnancy. However, if a women is adamant about not having children, there may be a reason for it. Not everyone is "meant" to be a mother; not everyone "should" have kids. When I think of the amount of child abuse, the kids who are neglected and worse...and horror stories like Andrea Yates (the woman who systematically drowned all 5 of her kids in the bathtub. She showed obvious symtoms of severe post-partum psychosis and her husband's response was to make sure she got pregnant again!) I totally respect any woman's carefully thought-out decision to stay "un-preggered."

(Enchantress, you are young and even though your partner is older, age is not as much of as issue for him. In 10 or 15 years, you may feel differently and still be perfectly able to conceive and carry a baby! People are living longer and having children later these days, anyway.)

While it is true that there are many children who need homes, the adoption of a child of a different "race" than the parents creates as many problems as it solves.

It is NOT easy to raise an adopted child. Children who have been, for whatever cause, left without a family, are nearly guaranteed to go through hell in their lives.

I did not adopt any children, but without stopping to think very hard I can think of four families I know who adopted First Nations children in the late 60's. Without exception, these adoptions were disasters for EVERYONE concerned. But that's because there are many issues involved, that have little to do with the topic at hand.

Just for an example: I know a woman who adopted a little black girl from Haiti when the child was 18 months old. This child is beautiful and bright, she is now 9. Some fool, some incredible interfering moron of a beastly fool, said to this child, "white people are more evolved than black people" and that little girl has been waiting now for months to "evolve" into a white person like her mum and dad.

It's difficult for me to express the feelings aroused by this child and what she is going through. It isn't up to me to set her straight, I'm not part of her family. Still, I've done what I can. If I ever get my hands on the person who told her the bullshit about "white people being more evolved than black people", you'll be seeing vison on the evening news as she's dragged off to jail for murder.

Cross "racial" or even "cross cultural" adoptions require an enormous wisdom that many people don't possess.