MSE Parents Club Part 11

SusanC_2

weezl74 wrote: »

very interesting.

What's your ideal ratio/number of biologically yours:adoptively yours children?

If you don't mind me being nosey:o

Ideally an unrealistically large number.
Realistically: Me either 2:4, 3:3 or 4:2, OH I imagine slightly lower (probably 2:2, 3:1 or 4:1) but he has agreed to a minimum total of 4. Ideally I would want us to adopt a sibling group because they are harder to place and can end up being separated if nobody is willing to adopt them as a group. I also looked into adoption from China (because we disagree with their horrific birth control policies/methods) but we would be low down on the priority list (the older you are and the less children you have already the higher chance you have) and also we don't earn enough to meet the income requirements.

aless02

fitzio said it very well, glam! I am toying with a similar idea, but it all kinda depends on what dh's job is doing at the time.

jha

Not much to tell really - just took me a long time to get better. off all meds now and able to look after baby 24/7 on my own which is lovely. only got the normal worries now like the odd bad night and general normal knackeredness associated with motherhood:D

Evansangel

jha wrote: »

does this piccie work?
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/photo.php?pid=30849816&id=1574151918

Says content not found

csh_2

weezl74 wrote: »

i think each pregnancy is different and I hope susan and csh have a lovely one next time to compensate

Both of mine have been awful, my body doesn't like it. Third time will be as awful I'm sure

Glamazon wrote: »

opinion time please
Pros - It means we pay £60 a week less in childcare
J is only in creche for 3 days
I would get 3 full days with him rather than just 2 and 2.5hrs 5 nights a week
He gets a full day with Daddy - more bonding time

Cons
Lose £75 from OH not working (thats before tax)
I wouldn't see him much those 3 days or the day when he is with OH - only 1.5hrs a night.

We would need to give creche a months notice, do budget planner and speak to our respective workplaces but thought I'd get other people's views on it in case I'm missing something

thanks

If CC is £60 and he is losing £75, is he not then only technically losing £15?
If someone charged me £15 for a day off I'd take it, but I look at things weird!
I could not imagine working 5 days a week and would move heaven and earth to work less days. Again thats me and working FT works out for plenty of others but I also have a very demanding DD who is prob more work than 4 other children put together!

SugarSpun wrote: »

Glam, I don't want you to feel ganged up on but I'd share Fitz's concerns.

Well, the way I see it is he only takes the pi$s because he can get away with it cos Glam is there to do everything. If shes not there I don't imagine for a second he wouldn't do everything J needs. Whether he'd do any housework or whatever is a different matter!
Maybe a little bit of responsibility towards his son rather than being sidelined while someone else does everything would be the making of the lad?

I appreciate the last sentence comes across very harsh, I could write a paragraph making it sound better but giving the gist as I cba typing muchly

jha

Glamazon

csh - just worked out that after tax, ni, student, loan & pension he'd only earn £50 for that day anyway.

I just mentioned to him that he would need to actually care for Jack and not go on the internet all day (:o:o) and he said he knew that!
Just heard him mention it to MIL and she seemed to think J should go to creche 5 days! From a woman who never worked cos she wanted to look after her boys!
Hypocrite!!

Be back in a bit just gonna put J to bed, going for early bed tonight to see if that helps.

weezl74

jha wrote: »

does this piccie work?
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/photo.php?pid=30849816&id=1574151918

I don't have permission to view! Is that cos Fergie hasn't worked out how to send you a friend request?

SusanC wrote: »

Ideally an unrealistically large number.
Realistically: Me either 2:4, 3:3 or 4:2, OH I imagine slightly lower (probably 2:2, 3:1 or 4:1) but he has agreed to a minimum total of 4. Ideally I would want us to adopt a sibling group because they are harder to place and can end up being separated if nobody is willing to adopt them as a group. I also looked into adoption from China (because we disagree with their horrific birth control policies/methods) but we would be low down on the priority list (the older you are and the less children you have already the higher chance you have) and also we don't earn enough to meet the income requirements.

fascinating! Thanks so you both like the idea of at least one more biologically followed by the adoptive ones?

I love the idea of sibling groups.

I'm sure you already know this, but adoption placements which fail is often attributed to how traumatised the child has been by their early experience/how able they are to form new attachments. Having a sibling who they stay with throughout is one of the best buffers to that early trauma.

So my feeling putting those 2 together is that a placement of a sibling pair would be more likely to be successful. Also I think since your biological ones (Alice plus new baby/babies) would have a 'true sibling' bond, it feels nicer that your adoptive ones would too, rather than feel left out.

Guessing that if from China though the eldest sibling would be left with the birth parents?

Becles

Sami_Bee wrote: »

possibly the answer is ....cbeebies They have a phonics show that Chris randomly spouts facts from so could be the same for Charlotte?
Alpha Blocks
yey for sensible GPs! I 'm loving High 5! so sweet.

I'll ask my Mam if she watches that at her house. She doesn't really bother with the TV here.

Got my big assignment finished today and submitted. Feels like a weight has been lifted.

Need to revise tonight for the exam tomorrow afternoon.

Evansangel

jha wrote: »

Beautiful