Would you end your marriage (or relationship,) if your partner didn't want children?

duchy

LilElvis wrote: »

So are those who are parents through adoption, gamete donation or as a step parent second best? Why do you think that having a biological connection is that important in a parent/child relationship? There are plenty of rubbish biological parents out there - the number of children placed in State care is the proof.

Perhaps 74Jax's husband was happy not to have a biological child because he already considers himself to be a parent to his stepdaughter, that he does have a child.

You are the one assuming the poster meant that parent means biological parent- I certainly don't regard my partner's mother as second best because she adopted him rather than gave birth to him- She is more his parent than his birth mother will ever be even though he's in contact with her as an adult too. Marie Osmond has a mix of children she gave birth to and adopted children- when asked whether a particular child is "her own" or adopted in interviews her response is always the same -She smiles and says "I don't remember".
Personally I think giving birth is overrated and I don't think I'd have felt less connected to a child I adopted than one I gave birth to and none of my friends who have adopted or have children that are not genetically theirs seem to have any issues either.

This thread is about having a child (or not having a child) the mechanics of how that child is obtained is irrelevant. It's about whether a couple want to become a bigger family unit or not .

duchy

euronorris wrote: »

Society is definitely harsh on this matter.


I've been asked repeatedly, since I was in my early 20's, when I was going to settle down and have children!! The assumption was that I MUST want those things. No other option was possible for me as a woman apparently. The same question was not asked of my male friends.

That's exactly what I meant

We still have employers who are wary of employing women of childbearing age in key roles - yet no-one ever thinks that a man having a child is going to impact on their career (even though they could claim exttended parental leave if they chose).

If a man says he doesn't want kids he's considered ambitious and career focused -If a woman says it- she either can't find a partner, is infertile or eccentric in many people's eyes .......(or worse she'll "grow out of it")

euronorris

duchy wrote: »

That's exactly what I meant

We still have employers who are wary of employing women of childbearing age in key roles - yet no-one ever thinks that a man having a child is going to impact on their career (even though they could claim external parental leave if they chose).

If a man says he doesn't want kids he's considered ambitious and career focused -If a woman says it- she either can't find a partner, is infertile or eccentric in many people's eyes .......(or worse she'll "grow out of it")

Ah yes. I remember someone telling me not to worry about such potential questions during interviews as 'they can't ask you, it's illegal!'.


It may well be illegal, but it won't stop some asking, and it certainly won't stop even more of them not employing you due to your age and gender (more likely to get pregnant in their eyes). The latter is discrimination, yet would be soooo difficult to prove! So, unless you are outright asked the question during the interview, the law is pretty ineffective. And most interviewers are stupid enough to fall into the trap of asking (though some are).


The ironic thing is, whilst I'll be taking 6 months maternity, it is most likely that my DH will be the one to be the stay at home parent as I am the main earner. Yet, he'll have no problems finding a new job right now, even if he tells them that he's about to become a Dad during the interview. They'll just assume that he won't be the SAHP.

tea_lover

Exactly - they'll just assume worst case scenario is two weeks off and then it'll be you that stays at home, and covers illness, and goes to doctors appointments and sports days and all the rest of it. Which means before you even start, a woman of childbearing age has extra hurdles to cross - regardless of whether she has the slightest interest or ability in actually having children.

duchy

Goldiegirl wrote: »

Even today, if making small talk with older people (I mean in their 70's and older) and they find out I don't have children, I can see it makes them feel awkward. But anybody of my own generation and younger doesn't seem concerned at all.

Maybe, just maybe, society is learning that women don't need children to fulfill their lives

I think the generation who were children during WW2 saw a lot of women lose their husbands and their chance of children so the mindset was different -plus reliable contraception only became available universally in the early to mid seventies and they grew up in a time when pregnancy was far more likely to lead to a wedding than today and married women did have more social status than single women so their thinking about children is different to young people today. Social attitudes have changed enormously in their lifetime.

Person_one

tea_lover wrote: »

Exactly - they'll just assume worst case scenario is two weeks off and then it'll be you that stays at home, and covers illness, and goes to doctors appointments and sports days and all the rest of it. Which means before you even start, a woman of childbearing age has extra hurdles to cross - regardless of whether she has the slightest interest or ability in actually having children.

At least I don't have to worry about that, if the NHS stopped employing female nurses of child-bearing age the hospitals would be empty! :rotfl:

LilElvis

duchy wrote: »

You are the one assuming the poster meant that parent means biological parent- I certairnly don't regard my partner's mother as second best because she adopted him rather than gave birth to him- She is more his parent than his birth mother will ever be even though he's in contact with her as an adult too. Marie Osmond has a mix of children she gave birth to and adopted children- when asked whether a particular child is "her own" or adopted in interviews her response is always the same -She smiles and says "I don't remember".
Personally I think giving birth is overrated and I don't think I'd have felt less connected to a child I adopted than one I gave birth to and none of my friends who have adopted or have children that are not genetically theirs seem to have any issues either.

This thread is about having a child (or not having a child) the mechanics of how that child is obtained is irrelevant. It's about whether a couple want to become a bigger family unit or not .

My reading of prosavers post was that they were referring to biological children, particularly as the relationship between the husband and 74Jax's child was ignored - the child being referred to as hers alone. You obviously read that post differently.

I must also have misunderstood how threads develop on here, as I frequently see them veering completely away from the original question. This thread has seen discussion also of attitudes towards childlessness, which is not "on topic", so I have hardly derailed it with a single post.

duchy

LilElvis wrote: »

My reading of prosavers post was that they were referring to biological children, particularly as the relationship between the husband and 74Jax's child was ignored - the child being referred to as hers alone. You obviously read that post differently.

I must also have misunderstood how threads develop on here, as I frequently see them veering completely away from the original question. This thread has seen discussion also of attitudes towards childlessness, which is not "on topic", so I have hardly derailed it with a single post.

It was a prosaver post so not expected to make sense ......I was agreeing with you

fierystormcloud

Peter333 wrote: »

I think you are missing the point. Or not getting what I am saying.......

Why does a woman stay with a man who doesn't want children, (when she wants them,) because she 'would rather be with him and childless, than be without him?' Why does HE not compromise to stay with her, and have children?

You say that you should not force someone to have a child.......

But he is effectively forcing her to NOT have one by saying 'we cannot be together if you insist on having a child.'

That is worse IMO. Much worse.

Depriving a woman of becoming a mother?

No. Just no.

And remember, HER fertility has a short shelf life. She could stay with him - and sacrifice her chance to be a mother - because she wants to be with him sooooo much; and then he could dump her when they're both 45. Then HE could go on to have a baby a year until he dies... Her chances would be over.

More fool her, if a woman stays with a man who refuses to have children, when she wants them.

euronorris wrote: »

I agree that no that no one should have a child if they don't want to. It's a disaster for all concerned, but mostly the child themselves.


But, SDW was suggesting that if you love someone enough, and they strongly don't want a child and you do, then that love will be enough for you to change your mind and be happy with not having a child. By that logic, then the partner who doesn't want a child should equally be able to change their mind out of love and be happy to become a parent.


Which I don't think is possible in either case to be honest. I don't think the love you have for your partner will make you happy to have, or not have, children, if it is something you really strongly don't want, or do want.


I think whether or not an agreement can be reached, that both partners are happy with, strongly relies on how badly one does, or doesn't want to become a parent. Not on how much someone loves someone else.

This ^^^

I agree with what Peter and Euronorris are saying. People here are saying that if you love someone enough, and you want children and they don't; you will sacrifice your desire to have a child for them. But by that token, if the person who does NOT want a child loved their partner enough, then they would sacrifice 'their' wishes, and agree to have a child.

Some have said 'you can't make someone have a child,' but how is it any worse than depriving someone of one?

The child will have at least ONE parent who will love and want it, (which is more than some people get!) And the chances are high than the other parent will love the child; why wouldn't they? :huh:

It's unlikely I would stay with my husband if he flat out refused to have children.

FBaby wrote: »

I think it is also not just about caring/loving, but also about your role and place in life, ie. being a wife/husband vs being a parent. As far as I can recall, I imagined myself as a mum later in life rather than a wife (or serious committed relationship). Nowadays, I think that life has been massively fortunate that I get to enjoy the fulfillment that comes with both.

Well precisely! Some people have this bizarre idea that once you have children, your marriage is ruined. I know many people with kiddies whose marriage is fine, and some without kiddies whose marriage failed. Of course having children puts a bit of a strain on a relationship to start with, but you adjust, and the children become part of your life.

Finally, I agree that society gives women a hard time if they don't have children over the age of 30. Pollycat has been very fortunate if she was never hounded for having no children. As someone said earlier; MEN don't get this treatment.

catkins

Gavin83 wrote: »

I don't honestly believe a couple wouldn't discuss such an important matter before marriage.

You would think it would be something a couple would discuss before getting married but I think you would be surprised how many times it isn't.


I know quite a few couples who say they never discussed it beforehand. In most cases they wanted children and just assumed the other did and luckily that was true. I do know 4 couples though that discovered, after getting married, that one wanted children and the other didn't and they all ended up getting divorced.


Out of the 4 couples it was 3 of the woman that wanted children and 2 are now remarried with them although 1 never found anyone else and is now in her 50's so too late to have any.


The other couple it was the man who wanted them. He remarried and had children but that marriage ended in divorce quite quickly and he has had very little contact with his child (not through choice)

Pollycat wrote: »

That's one advantage of being older - people don't ask that question any more.
Although, TBH, I didn't find many people did ask me that anyway - back in the day.

I find they now ask if I have grandchildren.

Hermia wrote: »

I think it is getting better, but I have been called selfish by people and had people imply that my feelings were unnatural. My favourite was the person who said I was no different to Myra Hindley!

I actually think the worst are the people who just say, "of course you want kids" and completely ignore what you say. There is something rather disrespectful about claiming someone does not know their own mind.

I have been asked why I bothered getting married if I did not want children as that is the sole reason for getting married! I have also been told I am not normal and that I will be lonely if my husband dies before me. I have also had the "who will look after you when you are old" rubbish.