Choosing to have a baby - solo

NoLongerLurking_2

annie123 wrote: »

Good God woman, you're 29 not 49! stop sitting at a computer planing your life and get out an do something interesting instead. You've got years yet and whilst you have those years go and enjoy yourself, learn something new, do something different.

LOL wonderful!!! Point taken and well made. :rotfl:

duchy

ikkle87 wrote: »

It was a what if situation, I'm 24 and had feritility issues, it does happen. Just because your under a certain age doesn't mean your super fertile, which is why I asked if she had enquired into how her PCT treats people who are going 'solo'.

It's not really relevent though as the OP is no more or less likely to have fertility issues than any other 30-whatever woman. I can understand your preoccupation with infertility however MOST women aren't as unfortunate as you were. Not sure why you think anyone needs to be "super fertile" to get pregnant in their thirties though !

No-one said it doesn't happen and if we all didn't plan or do anything because of unpredictable might happens-No-one would ever do anything !

Might is a funny word -for some it's an excuse for inaction for others a reason to go for it !!

zcrat41

OP - I'm 31 and met myoh (online) a month after my 29th birthday. We married last year and I'm now 5 weeks pregnant. I'd really go out there to try and meet people. Loads of my friends are getting married this year having met age 29/30.

I would also echo ikkle - ttc is quite a tough time; you would definitely need an understanding mother or friend in place of an oh.

aliasojo

My tuppenceworth is this..

Best case scenario for the child - 2 parent family

Next best scenario - one parent

Acceptable but not brilliant scenario - children's home

Now from my personal pov, (and this is meant as a general point, obviously there will be cases that are exceptions), a single person intentionally bringing a child into the world as a single parent, isn't the best case scenario for the child BUT it's a better option for a child to be in a single parent home rather than in care, so adoption or fostering would be a good option to consider imo.

Of course kids can thrive with only one parent but there's always just that *something* missing for them. (I've been both a single family unit and a family unit so feel able to say that). Again only imo.

All this will likely be academic anyway as OP will post next year saying 'guess what, I'm met this fantastic bloke...yadda yadda....'

Lunar_Eclipse

milliebear00001 wrote: »

My own view is that people only ever choose to have children for selfish reasons. I have never met anyone who decided to have kids because they wanted to 'benefit the world' in some way, or because they wanted to 'offer a good home' to a child. Only people who adopt (and are thus very special people) do that. Everyone else who chooses to become a parent, does so for selfish reasons, to satisy a need within themselves, to become a parent. The OP is exactly that same.

For me, it makes no difference whether the OP is single or in a relationship, whether there i a 'father' or not. Plenty of single parents, since time immemorial have brought up well-adjusted, wonderful children. Plenty of couples have failed miserably at this challenge.

I see no reason why the OP should not be able to bring up a child perfectly well on her own, ideally with the support of her family and friends. I see no reason at all why that child should 'suffer' or 'miss out'. Do it. You won't ever regret it in the way you will if you don't, and then have a lifetime of 'what-ifs'.

Finally! One loving, dedicated parent is a great start.

It is impossible to appreciate how 'hard' parenting is though, beforehand. I'd recommend spending as much time around newborns & children as possible to educate yourself as much as possible as to what it involves in reality (few weeks in friends' homes with kids of varying ages would be fab!) before embarking on a parenting journey. Just so you know what it entails. I say this as someone who always wanted children, without having a clue as to what that might look and feel like, but now I have them, the experience is nothing like I could possibly have imagined.

Lunar_Eclipse

annie123 wrote: »

Good God woman, you're 29 not 49! stop sitting at a computer planing your life and get out an do something interesting instead. You've got years yet

To be fair, unless the OP has had her fertility assessed, nobody knows that.

My cut off point was 30, for general biological reasons. Additionally, now I'm a parent, I'm thrilled we had it for 'exhaustion' reasons!:D

Breast_Cancer_Survivor

I met my oh at 35, had our 1st son at 38 & will be 39 when I have our 2nd so you have plenty of time op.

ska_lover

DON'T DO IT.

I don't know why anyone would willingly put themselves in this situation OP.

I was a single parent from when my son was born, until he was 15 years old.

It is possible to bring a child up singlehandedly, but not advisable. If you had a boy, it is difficult for a woman to teach a boy how to be a man.

Plus, 99% of men will run a mile at a ready made family, so will hugely cut your chances of meeting Mr Right.

ska_lover

Oh and by the way 29 is YOUNG

Person_one

sassyblue wrote: »

What an awful thought. Love doesn't come into wanting to be a parent then? Just selfishness!

Even worse is that adopting makes you a 'very special person' - how patronising. :rotfl:

Of course its selfish!

People say "I want a baby", not "I feel as though I should give one of my eggs a chance of a more fulfilling life"!

Even adoption is very often a selfish decision, its still "I want a child".