Unwanted children

[Marund]

the father needs to stop looking for ways to forgive himself for blowing off his responsibilties. this is just all kinds of pathetic and sad.

thats not what a man is; in fact that sounds more like a loser with no responsibility or solid qualities at all

what i mean is: if you START SOMETHING g you fu.cking finish it.

abandoning/ blowing off your kids is a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ thing to do; i don't care who you are or what you "really want" in life. Once you have kids you made that decision to bring them into the world on your own. The kids didn't chose to do it! I can't be sympathetic because if you don't want kids YOU GET A VASECTOMY

It just sounds irresponsible.

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by LostMyMap

You think Lakshi was projecting? Watch this:

That statement is the most complete uttter bit of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ I've ever read on this forum. What a crock. He didn't get 'conscripted' into anything. You wanna dip your wick, you take your chances, pill or no. So she got pregnant. Too f***ing bad. Now grow the f**k up and deal with it.

I guess LostMyMap also lost his dictionary?

There wasn't any Projection in my correcting Lakshi's misappraisal of the situation, and more urgently, being conscripted is PRECISELY what happened to the OP. (He was involuntarily pressed into service!)

My original quote was:

Originally Posted by Me

The OP didn't quit - he got conscripted against his will. He has done a stand-up job the entire time, but finds himself resenting his circumstances, and knowing that the kids will ultimately sense his discontent, and will feel responsible for his embittered state. Therefore he came to me to see if I might help him find an appropriate and realistic frame from which to present the case to his ex-wife which would best remedy the dilemma.

As anyone should be able to see, his actions are entirely noble and responsible - he isn't trying to evade any responsibility whatsoever - but he does not want to HARM his children by showing them a disgruntled and resentful parent (himself!)

Originally Posted by LostMyMap

I'd be real interested in seeing how this has developed over the last year and a half. Did he man-up and own his life's responsibilities and deal with his own 'discontent' and 'embittered state' for the sake of his kids? Or split entirely? Or begrudgingly spend time with the kids and screw them up with his 'don't really want this' attitude?

As we clearly all agree, from the segment of your comment I've boldized, that his spending time with his kids against his will would screw them up.

I presume he "owned his life's responsibilities" by negotiating an arrangement where he continued to sponsor and support his kids, without the ordeal of needing to attend to them personally.

Originally Posted by LostMyMap

Some of us have busted out ass for years and years trying to even have one and never got there. I'd do anything to be in his position of having the joy and the responsibility of a couple of kids seven days a week for the next twenty years. I'd kick the OPs ass and anyone else's too to get it.

NOW who's projecting?

Have you considered adoption? If you WANT to raise children, there is a spectacular abundance of needful unwanted children who would be delighted, I'm sure!

Good luck

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Usually I think Johnny Soporno is pretty onto it but I'm pretty disappointed with his advice to a serial adulterer who resents the fact that his wife did not wish to have an invasive medical procedure to remove the children that she conceived while explicitly attempting to avoid such a situation.

I'm sorry that you misunderstood the advice I gave. I'm confident that you would agree with my counsel wholeheartedly if it had been more clearly relayed.

Originally Posted by Indiana

I'm not sure 'you're an alpha male, and therefore it's okay to further abandon your part-time responsibilities to your children' advice is reasonable.

Oh, COME ON! That was not anything like the advice I gave, nor the sentiment behind it - and I'm saddened that it was so grossly misconstrued, and digested so poorly!

I never suggested, nor was the OP ever looking for, any 'escape' from his responsibilities. The issue at hand was the welfare of the children. Full stop.

(His unfaithfulness to his partner has no bearing on the advice I gave, nor should it have had. I explicitly do not advocate deceit AT ALL, particularly with someone you're entirely intimate with, such as your life partner! I also openly condemn 'cheating' and 'infidelity' as utterly self-defeating and rude.)

A rational person, Elias accepted the reality of his situation:
His marriage had come to an end, his wife and he had generated two children, and they needed parenting and support.
He also recognized that he had NEVER wanted to have children - and that attempting to offer them sufficient attention was unrealistic.
He felt trapped, and unfairly burdened, and knew that his children would sense that - and suffer for it.

Originally Posted by Indiana

If he was so dead set against children, HE should have been the one to have the invasive medical procedure to ensure that he didn't find himself in this situation.

Of course, I agree with you. A vasectomy would have been a perfectly reasonable choice, and would have avoided all this - but like so many others, he presumed that hormonal contraception would be sufficient. Ooops.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Apparently he didn't want to go to the trouble... of telling his wife he did not want children for fear that he would lose his access to regular sex, or something.

Actually, he was very clear about it to his wife. She claimed to have respected his position, which was why she, a medical doctor, opted to use oral contraceptives when she became pregnant the first time. (Modern 'combination' birth control pills, if used properly, are estimated to be more than 99% effective.)

He didn't want to have children because he did not want to have children. That seems to me to be about as cut & dried as could be, and doesn't require any further exploration?

His not wanting to have kids is no besmirchment to his character, and neither was his presuming that his wife, actively taking contraceptives explicitly to avoid becoming pregnant, would opt to have a child if she were to become pregnant in spite of their best efforts.

Once the first child was born, and the mother switched to the Nuvaring (which is considered at least equally effective as oral combination pills) she became pregnant again. Despite her again being on anti-baby medication to prevent such a circumstance, she insisted on having this second child, against Elias's explicit protest.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Although he tries to come across in the letter like he's being responsible, the fact that he wrote to JS at all suggests to me that he was looking for someone to pat him on the head and tell him 'It's okay to shuck off your responsibilties! You're not cut out to be a dad; it would be worse for you to try to be a good one! Don't let the promises you made in the past tie you down today and stop you from being all the man you were meant to be!'

That's insulting and ludicrous at once.

I've been a relationship counselor for nearly two decades, as well as a sex therapist & educator. I have consistently given out the most rational and practical advice I could to everyone who has asked, and backed up my recommendations with solid reason and supporting documentation, (particularly obviously on this forum!) and while I realize this is a particularly heated topic for many people, I do not regret nor forswear a single line of text I have written here.

I challenge you to find anything which supports your assertion that I suggested to ANYONE they they abandon their responsibilities! I believe I have been advocating ABSOLUTELY the reverse, consistently.

Elias came to me because he wanted to know if there was something WRONG with him for his not feeling a 'paternal urge' to spend time with his young.

I helped him to recognize that not everyone feels any such parental drive, regardless of their gender [My own daughter had her tubal ligation at 23, (before she'd ever been pregnant!) because she KNEW she didn't want to be a mother] and that this was FINE.

Many people are not cut out to be parents - it is a rare circumstance where a person recognizes it and wants not to contribute to an unhappy childhood by playing a role for which they are unsuited. I applaud this.

I am firmly of the opinion that the best thing anyone can give a child is a happy home.

I am equally of the opinion that the LEAST thing anyone can give a child is NO EXPOSURE TO AN UNHAPPY HOME.

Anyone who 'stays together for the sake of the children' is inevitably doing far more harm than good. They are actually 'staying together for the sake of public appearances' and are doing themselves and their offspring an unspeakable disservice.

Elias's desire to do right by his kids makes him A-OK with me!

Originally Posted by Indiana

This isn't an 'alpha male' we're talking about here. It's a wimpy, selfish man-child, sulking because he doesn't want to live up to the responsibilities that he signed up for when getting married and having sex. No wonder people like LostMyMap are disgusted.

This is NOT about anyone 'wimpy' at all - it's about a very bold and mature man who, realizing he was in an untenable situation, went looking for advice from a professional who was happy to furnish it.

There is NO RATIONAL WHATSOEVER for Elias's damaging his children's self-esteem and self-schema through his discomfiture in having to attend to them against his will. Not to mention that it would be detrimental to his own enjoyment of life, and his ability to earn enough to ensure that his kids would be able to receive excellent parenting/education through nannies and schooling.

Herendeth the lesson

Johnny Soporno
Relationship Counselor

[votoshka]

I'm a mum and I love my kids more than anything... but I still agree with Johnny here

A man who didn't want to be a dad became a dad, and now he's doing the best he can in the situation.

Personally, I think his wife should have greater custody (I agree with him helping her pay a nanny for when she can't be with her kids) because it's obvious he doesn't appreciate his time with them, and would probably appreciate them more if he saw them less.

Yes, maybe he should have had a vasectomy... especially after child #1. At that point, he could have opted to leave his marriage paving the way for his ex to find someone who wanted to have more babies with her... but instead he had another...

Anyhow, he did at least seem CONFLICTED about his ambivalence for fatherhood.

Ultimately, it's a story of a couple who should never have been together in the first place. If you don't want kids, don't marry someone who does Sometimes "mistakes" happen

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

You should get that looked at...

I don't think so, that was a poor attempt at humor.

Overwhelmingly most people are born to fathers who are +/- 25 years older than their offspring, so your situation was exceptional, rather than normal.

I hate it when people present a statement as if they know what they are talking about. You mean IN AMERICA. Gah. Americans are so egocentric.

Having to deal with kids you clearly and explicitly wanted NOT to have is also a monumental drag - both for the parent AND the kids.

If you CLEARLY AND EXPLICITLY do not want kids, GET A VASECTOMY or DO NOT HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE.

It's really simple. Thankfully I know quite a few adult males who understand this concept. Guess what? They don't have kids!

Having energy or not is not the issue - the issue is whether one can avoid demonstrating perceivable reticence to the children they must attend, WHO NEED ATTENTION simply because they are kids.

No ****. As a single parent with the flu, I feel like that a lot. Hell I feel like that on a regular basis. Check it out, I put my big girl panties on and suck it up! To ***** and moan about what is would be pretty lame at this point.
[quote[
You were fully immersed in a loving and supportive relationship with your own father - so you've got your own opinion of what a responsible adult male does when tending for his kids - but try to recognize that not everyone chooses to generate babies, nor to undertake to raise children. This is a lifestyle choice. [/quote]]

Dur. I know that. I often advise people to not reproduce, and never feel guilty about making a choice to not have kids - it's the hardest job in the world with no benefits and no time off.

But check it out, if you don't want kids, don't shoot your jizz into a vagina. Period.

All other arguments are crying about spilt semen, IMO. If you busted the nut, deal with the fact that you're ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Look, senor sporano, you and your buddy that you advised can and will do whatever you want. But the fact of the matter is that this choice will natrually drawn criticism from others, and it will obviously reduce the pool of women who would be likely to date or have a relationship with him. 90% of the women I know, even if THEY don't want kids, don't want to be involved with men who have no role in their kids' lives because they don't want to be involved with chodes.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

A rational person, Elias accepted the reality of his situation: His marriage had come to an end, his wife and he had generated two children, and they needed parenting and support.
He also recognized that he had NEVER wanted to have children - and that attempting to offer them sufficient attention was unrealistic.
He felt trapped, and unfairly burdened, and knew that his children would sense that - and suffer for it.

His not wanting to have kids is no besmirchment to his character, and neither was his presuming that his wife, actively taking contraceptives explicitly to avoid becoming pregnant, would opt to have a child if she were to become pregnant in spite of their best efforts.

...

I am firmly of the opinion that the best thing anyone can give a child is a happy home.

I am equally of the opinion that the LEAST thing anyone can give a child is NO EXPOSURE TO AN UNHAPPY HOME.

...

There is NO RATIONAL WHATSOEVER for Elias's damaging his children's self-esteem and self-schema through his discomfiture in having to attend to them against his will. Not to mention that it would be detrimental to his own enjoyment of life, and his ability to earn enough to ensure that his kids would be able to receive excellent parenting/education through nannies and schooling.

Sorry, Johnny, I'm just not buying. Your advice was 'get a full-time nanny to take care of your kids so you don't have to.' This is an explicit dismissal of his responsibilities as a father.

I notice that the one part of my post that you didn't quote was the very salient point that Elias ended up with not one but two children, despite his supposed commitment to not having them.

I am unsure how clear he was with his wife that should she get pregnant on contraception, he would expect her to have an abortion, but if he was serious about not wanting to have children, he should have been. I don't think that there should be any presumption that because a woman is happy to take contraception to avoid pregnancy that she would also be happy to have an abortion in the event of contraceptive failure. Those are two very different things.

If he wasn't clear, it's his tough luck that nobody gets to tell a woman to have an abortion once she's pregnant, and regard that as a sufficient dismissal of parental responsibilities. Particularly not TWICE. I believe your response to that was 'Oooops!' A child is not an 'oooops'. Elias wasn't 'unfairly burdened'. His children came about as a direct result of his unwillingness to be responsible for his own choices.

In fact, I think Elias is pretty clear where his problem came from.

All of it because of my lack of resolve and long term thinking and predicting consequences.

I am firmly of the opinion that you CREATE a happy home. Every single day people have to do things they don't want to, and yes, childcare can be exhausting and frustrating but nobody suggests parents just palm their kids off to someone else because they don't feel like dealing with that. Offering children sufficient attention (particularly on a part-time schedule) is not 'unrealistic'.

His children are not stopping him from earning money - nowhere has he said that he has had to give up his job. He has to spend time with them outside of work hours and on weekends every second week.

You think his kids are going to grow up being grateful that he handed them off to a nanny because he didn't like spending time with them? That they're going to respect him for that, and not feel damaged? I doubt it. I think it would mean more to them if he 'sucks it up', just like he suggested, and sits down in front of a Disney film, or goes out and throws a ball around or builds a Lego castle with them, even if he doesn't 'feel' like it. That's what being a grown-up is about.

He knows what he needs to do to be a parent. He's obviously not stupid. He's not beating or abusing the kids or mistreating them in any way. He just doesn't want to put the time in, and he wants to be able to blame someone else for the situation that he got into fair and square.

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi

I hate it when people present a statement as if they know what they are talking about. You mean IN AMERICA. Gah. Americans are so egocentric.

No, I'm speaking globally. The OVERWHELMING majority of men have no further children after age 45. (Presupposing your father didn't retire at 53, he was conspicuously older than average.)

Oh, and I'm not American.

Originally Posted by Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi

Dur. I know that. I often advise people to not reproduce, and never feel guilty about making a choice to not have kids - it's the hardest job in the world with no benefits and no time off....

As a single parent with the flu, I feel like that a lot. Hell I feel like that on a regular basis. Check it out, I put my big girl panties on and suck it up! To ***** and moan about what is would be pretty lame at this point.

It's ironic - when I first read your initial post in this thread, I presumed you were male, and projecting onto the OP your own opinions and attitudes based upon having had a far-better-than-normal relationship with your father.

Now I realize you're female, and you're projecting your own hostility and resentment at being a single-parent onto the OP instead. You don't actually understand his situation at all.

If you live in a country where abortion is legal and available to women, then you do not have anything in common with the OP, who was literally afforded NO CHOICE but to be a father.

You retained the choice of whether to become a mother, even though you had already HAD the sex which generated your offspring. In other words, if you took appropriate precautions against generating a pregnancy (say, using 99% effective birth control) and you became pregnant in spite of that, YOU STILL HAD THE CHOICE.

The OP did not. He did everything appropriately, and the final decision of his becoming a parent remained exclusively in his partner's hands.

Please consider this before passing judgment on him, or others who have found themselves in his position.

Johnny Soporno
Lifestyle Guru

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

In other words, if you took appropriate precautions against generating a pregnancy (say, using 99% effective birth control) and you became pregnant in spite of that, YOU STILL HAD THE CHOICE.

The OP did not. He did everything appropriately, and the final decision of his becoming a parent remained exclusively in his partner's hands.

Elias did not use any birth control. His partner did. He didn't do a thing to ensure his continued non-fatherhood as far as I can see.

[Bazza]

Can I just say this? Bring on the invention of the male contraceptive pill!
Male birth control pill - AskMen.com Australia

[votoshka]

Yes, Elias should have used contraception himself ESPECIALLY after the first unwanted child.

BUT as far as I can see he's just feeling bad about being a father who doesn't really want to BE a father. He loves his kids, but doesn't want to be a hands on dad.

In most situations like that, Mom gets to be main caregiver, and Dad gets to see his kids on occasion... and everyone is happy! (Well maybe kids would like to see dad more... but most kids I think don't like swapping houses week in and week out...)

It seems to me that Elias is just acknowledging his feelings in an honest manner?? Yes, he's a dad now and he has responsibilities...he's not trying to palm them off I don't think... but he's at least being HONEST about the way he feels.

Lots of people get pregnant and have kids despite using contraception... some of them make lousy parents and don't give two hoots about it!

[aelle]

Originally Posted by Bazza

Can I just say this? Bring on the invention of the male contraceptive pill!
Male birth control pill - AskMen.com Australia

It's been in the works for decades, but it is biologically really complicated to offer a male hormonal BC. But it's not like you guys have no choice as it is: condoms, withdrawal, vasectomy, abstinence from vaginal sex are all options that are male-controlled. Before you start with the Yes-Buts, of course none of these methods are perfect, but guess what? The ones we endure aren't either. But most importantly, they allow you to take control of your life and dramatically reduce your risk of spawning unwanted offsprings.

[Bazza]

Originally Posted by aelle

It's been in the works for decades, but it is biologically really complicated to offer a male hormonal BC. But it's not like you guys have no choice as it is: condoms, withdrawal, vasectomy, abstinence from vaginal sex are all options that are male-controlled. Before you start with the Yes-Buts, of course none of these methods are perfect, but guess what? The ones we endure aren't either. But most importantly, they allow you to take control of your life and dramatically reduce your risk of spawning unwanted offsprings.

Im not complaining, however I cant get off with condoms (long story), my g/f has bad side effects on the pill, I want kids one day so vasectomy is a no go, and withdrawal and other forms of contraception aren't very safe or pleasant.

That the male pill would make things much easier is all I'm trying to say.

With all that, I have an underlying philosophy of not having sex with anyone that I would not be willing to accept the possible consequences with.

[votoshka]

Originally Posted by Bazza

With all that, I have an underlying philosophy of not having sex with anyone that I would not be willing to accept the possible consequences with.

And THIS in my opinion, is the BEST philosophy to have! If you can't accept the consequences of your decision to have sex, then DON'T have sex! No method of contraception is 100% reliable, and sometimes people get pregnant. If you're not ready for that possibility then don't do it!

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Bazza

Im not complaining, however I cant get off with condoms (long story), my g/f has bad side effects on the pill, I want kids one day so vasectomy is a no go, and withdrawal and other forms of contraception aren't very safe or pleasant.

That the male pill would make things much easier is all I'm trying to say.

With all that, I have an underlying philosophy of not having sex with anyone that I would not be willing to accept the possible consequences with.

Good on you Bazza, the OP (and a lot of other people) could learn a lot from you. Unfortunately some people seem to suffer from 'it won't happen to me syndrome' when it comes to the term '99 percent effective'.

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Sorry, Johnny, I'm just not buying.

With all due respect, when you actually understand the situation, I'm sure you'll 'buy in' to my advice.

I hope to help you see what you've been missing in this attempt!

Originally Posted by Indiana

Your advice was 'get a full-time nanny to take care of your kids so you don't have to.' This is an explicit dismissal of his responsibilities as a father.

Rather than respond to your paraphrasing of my advice, I will repost it here:

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

I expect that most-likely you could have a frank and sincere conversation with her about your needs and motivations, reminding her that you had explicitly opted not to be a father (and had been blind-sided both times, having relied on A) hormonal medications and B) her appreciation of your desire not to assume the responsibilities of a father at this time.

While I am sure you love and adore your kids, I completely sympathize with your not wanting the burden of caring for kids that young at this time in your life. You need to communicate to her than YOUR KIDS WILL SENSE that they are overwhelmingly NOT WANTED by you, and it will cause them psychological and socialization harms which neither you nor your ex would want for them.

Frankly, I expect you're probably pretty ADHD [Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder] yourself (based upon your obvious intelligence and your career path) and this isn't conducive to raising youngsters: KIDS NEED ATTENTION, regardless of whether they are actually interesting to you at each moment or not - and failing to give it to them will end up causing inestimable damage to their self-esteem and their emotional welbeing. (This doesn't, of itself, make you a douchebag! But failing to find a positive solution does! )

Personally, I recommend that you offer to cover or share the costs of a live-in nanny to tend to them (nominally at her home) and to see them on a less onerous schedule, which would give you time to crave their company and yearn for the time you'd spend with them, thereby ensuring that they feel treasured and appreciated. If your ex wants to tend to them on her own when she would otherwise have had responsibility for them, she should be assumed to have invested her half of the nanny's costs in so doing... but as an MD, I would imagine she'll ultimately leave the kids with the nanny a lot more than she would spend time with them directly.

Nowhere in there do I advocate or sanction dismissing his responsibilities to his kids - in fact, I am very clear about both how and why he needs to rectify the untenable situation, for his children's sake.

Originally Posted by Indiana

I notice that the one part of my post that you didn't quote was the very salient point that Elias ended up with not one but two children, despite his supposed commitment to not having them.

Just as you omitted my agreement that he should have has a vasectomy

We are not (any of us, including Elias) disagreeing that his failure to ensure he could not impregnate his partner is why he has two children. In his initial message to me, he acknowledges this explicitly:

Originally Posted by elias_naur

If you don't mind, I'd like your input regarding having and bringing up kids. I know you chose a proactive solution to that, but it's a bit late for that in my case

(In case it's not clear, he was alluding to my own vasectomy operation.)

[My response is too long, so I'm continuing this in the next post:]

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Indiana

I am unsure how clear he was with his wife that should she get pregnant on contraception, he would expect her to have an abortion, but if he was serious about not wanting to have children, he should have been. I don't think that there should be any presumption that because a woman is happy to take contraception to avoid pregnancy that she would also be happy to have an abortion in the event of contraceptive failure. Those are two very different things.

Granted.

Originally Posted by Indiana

If he wasn't clear, it's his tough luck that nobody gets to tell a woman to have an abortion once she's pregnant, and regard that as a sufficient dismissal of parental responsibilities.

Um, actually that's pretty standard, worldwide? I must know literally hundreds of women who announced they were pregnant to the expectant father, were asked by their lovers not to have his baby when they became pregnant, decided to anyway, and were summarily abandoned.

The majority of single mothers did not opt to be single mothers before they became pregnant - they became pregnant and the male progenitor of her impending offspring was either unwilling, unsuited, or unable to take on a partnership paternal role. (I'm not including 'shared custody' situations in defining "single motherhood".)

Originally Posted by Indiana

Particularly not TWICE. I believe your response to that was 'Ooops!' A child is not an 'oooops'.

First of all, you're misquoting me:

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

Of course, I agree with you. A vasectomy would have been a perfectly reasonable choice, and would have avoided all this - but like so many others, he presumed that hormonal contraception would be sufficient. Ooops.

I never said a child was an "oooops" (or even an "ooops" ) - What I did say was an "ooops" was his confidence that birth-control pills, taken as directed (as one would expect a medical professional to do!) should be 99.7% effective, as advertised.

Please bear in mind: Elias had his first child with his girlfriend, despite his directly communicating that he did not want her to bring the child to term, and not only stayed with her, he MARRIED HER.

This is not the action of a person trying to evade responsibilities.

His then-wife, no longer comfortable relying upon oral contraceptives, switched to the Nuvaring, which is again advertised as 99.7% effective.

Since she is a medical doctor, one must presume that she was reasonably confident that she would not become pregnant while using this method of birth control. There was therefore no justification for Elias to second-guess her wisdom, and have a vasectomy - particularly since he had already been explicitly clear to his wife that he didn't want her to have even a first child.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Elias wasn't 'unfairly burdened'. His children came about as a direct result of his unwillingness to be responsible for his own choices.

You're completely off-side here.

Elias has NEVER forsworn his responsibilities as their father, despite his initial reticence during their gestation. He has also never attempted to evade any of his responsibilities to them, or to their mother.

Was his mistake in believing that his then-girlfriend, a MEDICAL DOCTOR, was taking the Pill as directed?

Was he a fool for believing that the Pill would prevent pregnancy? OF COURSE NOT! And neither was his wife, who also believed it was sufficient.

MOST ADULTS BELIEVE THIS, and for most of them, it's generally true.

Originally Posted by Indiana

I am firmly of the opinion that you CREATE a happy home. Every single day people have to do things they don't want to, and yes, childcare can be exhausting and frustrating but nobody suggests parents just palm their kids off to someone else because they don't feel like dealing with that.

I disagree with you on every point.

Most people don't even remember what happiness feels like, much less how to engender and maintain a happy relationship, and virtually none know how to create a happy home. That said, many people can create a comfortable-enough home, in which they can complacently accept that theirs is a constant struggle in which they must do things they do not want to do, in order to maintain the creature comforts and security they feel they need.

I can't remember the last time I did ANYTHING I didn't want to do. Seriously.

As for raising children, I believe that anyone for whom the PROJECT of raising children is not overwhelmingly important to them should not be involved at all.

Infants and small children need attention, appreciation, acceptance, affection, and approval from their parents, in order to thrive. Affirmation and acknowledgement are also very significant as they mature into individuals, and begin forming their egos and their self-schema. (I go into much greater detail on each, in my book "The Seven As" which I'll be publishing in February, under my professional name)

"Nannies" exist explicitly to take on responsibility for ensuring that children are given those things they need when their parents are unable or unavailable to do so themselves.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Offering children sufficient attention (particularly on a part-time schedule) is not 'unrealistic'.

That is unfortunately simply not true for many people.

If one actually does not enjoy children, or is driven-to-distraction constantly, as most ADD/ADHD people are, then giving constant attention to kids is an insurmountable burden.

I suspect both are true for Elias - and I am very impressed by his dedication to do the right thing, and prevent his inattentiveness from damaging his kids self-esteem.

Originally Posted by Indiana

His children are not stopping him from earning money - nowhere has he said that he has had to give up his job. He has to spend time with them outside of work hours and on weekends every second week.

With whom do you presume the kids spend time while he's working, during the two weeks each month where he has sole custody? Or is that not important?

Originally Posted by Indiana

You think his kids are going to grow up being grateful that he handed them off to a nanny because he didn't like spending time with them?

I'm absolutely certain of it! When the kids are old enough to appreciate and understand their father, and they are able to communicate with him openly (as they become young adults, around 8-10 years old) they will never reflect negatively on their having been so well-attended as youngsters.

Originally Posted by Indiana

That they're going to respect him for that, and not feel damaged? I doubt it.

I recommend you contact some professional child-care providing outfits, or child psychologists, and see what they have to say. I can tell you that I know what I'm talking about, and that I've been dealing with these issues professionally for well-over a decade, but that won't carry nearly as much weight as if you simply do your own research.

Originally Posted by Indiana

I think it would mean more to them if he 'sucks it up', just like he suggested, and sits down in front of a Disney film, or goes out and throws a ball around or builds a Lego castle with them, even if he doesn't 'feel' like it.

Children are incredibly more attuned to the emotions of their parents than you seem to appreciate. If your kids don't sense positive enthusiasm, it is destructive to their sense-of-self. I with more people understood this, and instead of pretending they are "grown ups" to their kids (thereby demonstrating to their kids "how grown up behave", which is to do things they don't wish to, out of a sense of grudging duty) they were PEOPLE to their kids.

Originally Posted by Indiana

That's what being a grown-up is about.

BINGO! Being a 'Grown Up' is about pretending you aren't a person - you're now operating as a shadow of your parental role-models, who were parroting (poorly) their own distorted view of what adult life was like.

I am adamantly against "grown up" behavior, as it DENIES MATURITY, and prevents honest communication between adults and kids, thereby perpetuating a distinction which need not exist, and serves to ensure that kids skip the maturation processes of experiencing and contemplating their lives, in favour of assuming roles they have had displayed to them by people who were obviously unhappy in those roles!

UGH! Sorry, you touched a nerve

Originally Posted by Indiana

He knows what he needs to do to be a parent. He's obviously not stupid. He's not beating or abusing the kids or mistreating them in any way.

Yes, and that's why I'm completely on-side with his following the advice I have given, and working something out whereby his kids do not suffer for his lack of enthusiasm.

Originally Posted by Indiana

He just doesn't want to put the time in, and he wants to be able to blame someone else for the situation that he got into fair and square.

Again you're missing the KEY element here:

Elias's attempting to tend to his kids AGAINST HIS WILL will do much more harm than good. The ONLY appropriate action is to find them an appropriate attendee in his stead. Full stop.

Johnny Soporno
Manumissionary

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Bazza

Can I just say this? Bring on the invention of the male contraceptive pill!
Male birth control pill - AskMen.com Australia

Heh - I don't know any woman who would be comfortable and confident relying on a man to take his pill!

I'm frankly astonished by the frequency that men are able to be comfortable and confident relying on a women's taking her pill! Even taking into account that so many men would simply flee if a woman didn't want to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, I am amazed that so many people take such chances.

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy (Vasectomised years ago)

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Elias did not use any birth control. His partner did.

In that case, Elias did not have any children. His partner did. Q.E.D.

Seriously, Elias's partner believed she was protected from unintended pregnancy, and was a medical professional, thereby fully aware of the likelihood of accidental pregnancy. (Myself, I can't imagine that she became pregnant accidentally, even once, much less twice. Every medical doctor should be able to identify cervical mucus, and would KNOW that the evidence of such fluid would demonstrate a failure in her contraceptive's ability to prevent ovulation and therefore her fertility.)


Combination BC pills are hormonal medications which convince a woman's body that she is ALREADY pregnant, so that the mechanisms of preparing and releasing an egg are forestalled, thereby eliminating the risk of unwanted conception.

If a woman skips two pills during her cycle, (Or removes her Nuva-ring overnight) she effectively defeats the hormonal regulation she has been undergoing to prevent conception, and therefore becomes eligible for impregnation during her next ovulation.

Please give this page a read, it's very accessible and well-written, and covers the essentials.

I am not intending to suggest that Elias's ex-wife consciously duped him into impregnating her - although I suspect she might have done so unconsciously.

If Elias had even suggested using condoms with her, I would imagine she would have freaked right out. Most women who take BC pills do so because they don't enjoy condoms, but don't want to become pregnant. If a man whom they trust to be disease-free volunteers to use a condom, they will generally assure him that he needn't.

Furthermore, getting a doctor to perform a vasectomy on a healthy man who has never had kids is INCREDIBLY CHALLENGING. (Most US doctors won't do it for risk of post-facto litigation in the event the man decides he wants kids later. In Canada, it is next to impossible to get a prescription [necessary with state-run medicine] to have a vasectomy if you haven't had children already. Doctors will simply refuse.)

This isn't nearly so cut-and-dried as some of you seem to want to make it -
Elias is not and was not irresponsible.

He and his partner BOTH were using her birth-control pills as their shared form of contraception when she became pregnant the first time,, and then her Nuvaring as their shared method when she became pregnant the second time.

Johnny Soporno
Sexual Revolutionary

[Bazza]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

Heh - I don't know any woman who would be comfortable and confident relying on a man to take his pill!

I'm frankly astonished by the frequency that men are able to be comfortable and confident relying on a women's taking her pill! Even taking into account that so many men would simply flee if a woman didn't want to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, I am amazed that so many people take such chances.

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy (Vasectomised years ago)

So true!
I have to ask what that says about the woman who dont trust their men? I'm pretty sure that the girl im with now would, but she would be the first out of the ones I've been with!

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi

90% of the women I know, even if THEY don't want kids, don't want to be involved with men who have no role in their kids' lives because they don't want to be involved with chodes.

I'll go further and say that 90% of the women you know, including yourself, have no clue whether the men they date/go to bed with have any children, aside from the ones they give birth to, are introduced to, or are told about directly.

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

In that case, Elias did not have any children. His partner did. Q.E.D.

That does not make a lick of sense. His partner wanted to avoid getting pregnant. So she took birth control (best chance at achieving her intended outcome). Elias on the other hand wanted to avoid having children. So he... uh... Hmm.

I am not intending to suggest that Elias's ex-wife consciously duped him into impregnating her - although I suspect she might have done so unconsciously.

If Elias had even suggested using condoms with her, I would imagine she would have freaked right out. Most women who take BC pills do so because they don't enjoy condoms, but don't want to become pregnant. If a man whom they trust to be disease-free volunteers to use a condom, they will generally assure him that he needn't.

Pure speculation. Or perhaps Elias just wasn't being quite clear enough about how utterly opposed he (apparently) was to having children.

Furthermore, getting a doctor to perform a vasectomy on a healthy man who has never had kids is INCREDIBLY CHALLENGING. (Most US doctors won't do it for risk of post-facto litigation in the event the man decides he wants kids later. In Canada, it is next to impossible to get a prescription [necessary with state-run medicine] to have a vasectomy if you haven't had children already. Doctors will simply refuse.)

That's as may be, but it doesn't seem that it was a possibility he even investigated. Still, you managed to do it. One wonders about the hassle of procuring one vs the hassle of having unwanted children.

He and his partner BOTH were using her birth-control pills as their shared form of contraception when she became pregnant the first time,, and then her Nuvaring as their shared method when she became pregnant the second time.

Unexpectedly, but not impossibly, resulting in their shared children.

[aelle]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

Furthermore, getting a doctor to perform a vasectomy on a healthy man who has never had kids is INCREDIBLY CHALLENGING. (Most US doctors won't do it for risk of post-facto litigation in the event the man decides he wants kids later. In Canada, it is next to impossible to get a prescription [necessary with state-run medicine] to have a vasectomy if you haven't had children already. Doctors will simply refuse.)

I've heard that before, and I always wonder if the people who say that live in the same world as I do. I know over two dozen people, both men and women, who have gotten permanently sterilized while childfree and under the age of 30 (in the US, in Canada and in other Western countries). And it's not like I actively go looking for examples. It seems like people who are adamant about not having children and take full responsibility for it very early on get what they want.

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

If Elias had even suggested using condoms with her, I would imagine she would have freaked right out. Most women who take BC pills do so because they don't enjoy condoms, but don't want to become pregnant. If a man whom they trust to be disease-free volunteers to use a condom, they will generally assure him that he needn't.

I'm not sure that most women switch to hormonal BC for pleasure reasons, and in any case that's irrelevant to one man's particular situation.
I, for one, would respect any partner of mine who explained sensibly that regardless of whether I am on birth control or not, he wants to take responsibility too and will take action to ensure a pregnancy does not occur if unwanted (whether he decides to use condoms, withdrawal - which is statistically as effective as condoms when used by stable couples - or to bring me my pill every single morning with breakfast in bed). I may not be 100% happy with his decision, it may not lead to my first choice of sexual practices, it may be something I want to negociate and I can even think of cases where it would lead us to split up, but I would respect him for it. In any case, one cannot know if his wife would simply not want to use condoms unless he asks.

[aelle]

Originally Posted by Bazza

So true!
I have to ask what that says about the woman who dont trust their men? I'm pretty sure that the girl im with now would, but she would be the first out of the ones I've been with!

Actually, withdrawal is among the most widely used methods of birth control worldwide (as it requires zero access to doctors or equipment) and it requires the woman to fully trust the man.
But I agree with your undelying thought (I think) which is that ideally each partner would take full responsibility for their actions. And if their aim is to avoid pregnancy, both would take some sort of preventive action instead of simply hoping the other party knows what they're doing.

[Bazza]

Originally Posted by aelle

Actually, withdrawal is among the most widely used methods of birth control worldwide (as it requires zero access to doctors or equipment) and it requires the woman to fully trust the man.
But I agree with your undelying thought (I think) which is that ideally each partner would take full responsibility for their actions. And if their aim is to avoid pregnancy, both would take some sort of preventive action instead of simply hoping the other party knows what they're doing.

I once read that a commonly used term for couples who practice the withdrawal method is... parents!

[aelle]

Originally Posted by Bazza

I once read that a commonly used term for couples who practice the withdrawal method is... parents!

And that joke is mostly a myth:

Does Withdrawal Deserve Another Look?

Withdrawal is sometimes referred to as the contraceptive method that is “better than nothing.” But, based on the evidence, it might more aptly be referred to as a method that is almost as effective as the male condom–at least when it comes to pregnancy prevention. If the male partner withdraws before ejaculation every time a couple has vaginal intercourse, about 4% of couples will become pregnant over the course of a year. However, more realistic estimates of typical use indicate that about 18% of couples will become pregnant in a year using withdrawal. These rates are only slightly less effective than male condoms, which have perfect- and typical-use failure rates of 2% and 17% respectively.

[Bazza]

Wow! I didn't know that. Learn something new everyday aye!

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Indiana

That does not make a lick of sense.

Elias AND HIS PARTNER used contraceptive medication which SHE took orally, (because HIS taking it wouldn't have accomplished anything) and they both relied upon it to prevent them from having children.

Originally Posted by Indiana

His partner wanted to avoid getting pregnant. So she took birth control (best chance at achieving her intended outcome). Elias on the other hand wanted to avoid having children. So he... uh... Hmm.

Trusted her. Ta dah!

(It wasn't unreasonable for him to trust her, since after all, they loved eachother, and she is a doctor, and all. SO naturally, the TWO OF THEM opted for her to take medication which should have ensured that she wouldn't become pregnant.)

They were conjoined in their sex, and they were conjoined in the outcome of their sex, and they were conjoined in their decision to rely upon BC pills to prevent conception.

Ya fallow?

Originally Posted by Indiana

Pure speculation. Or perhaps Elias just wasn't being quite clear enough about how utterly opposed he (apparently) was to having children.

You haven't been privy to the same correspondence I have. Elias was very clear.

Originally Posted by Indiana

That's as may be, but it doesn't seem that it was a possibility he even investigated. Still, you managed to do it. One wonders about the hassle of procuring one vs the hassle of having unwanted children.

Since he trusted his partner's judgement, and she never suggested it (and SHE'S A DOCTOR, once again) he believed he was covered. In hindsight, he feels differently now. He had not ever considered the possibility that his gf would elect to have a child against his wishes - but loving her, and wanting to do-right by her, he stuck by her and ultimately married her. When the second kid was conceived, he was again distressed to discover that his now-wife was AGAIN prepared to ignore his wishes, and another child was born.

I feel terribly for him, that his wife was so disloyal. But that's just me - I consider integrity and loyalty to be paramount - and he was twice unfaithful to her.

Myself, getting a vasectomy wasn't that serious a challenge, since I have six kids under my belt. (Five sons and a daughter)

Johnny Soporno
"Father to many - Married to none." - Beastie Boys

[aelle]

Originally Posted by Indiana

That does not make a lick of sense. His partner wanted to avoid getting pregnant. So she took birth control (best chance at achieving her intended outcome). Elias on the other hand wanted to avoid having children. So he... uh... Hmm.

Part of Indiana's point was that they did not have the same goals, ultimately. Preventing pregnancy is not strictly equivalent to not having children, as Elias' case proves. And he took no action to compensate for this discrepancy in goals. It's all the more regrettable if, as you suggest he told you privately, they had discussed what would happen if she got pregnant.

[Medea33]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

Elias AND HIS PARTNER used contraceptive medication which SHE took orally, (because HIS taking it wouldn't have accomplished anything) and they both relied upon it to prevent them from having children.

You really can't have it both ways. Either his partner used BC and had a baby anyway, or they both used it and both of them had a baby. Don't make me go up-thread to quote that one, because I'm already cranky about this.

I'm not sure why you're so stuck on absolving the OP of his responsibility for ensuring that fatherhood only happened to others, but raising the signal to noise ratio isn't obscuring his rather stunning lack of forethought. And getting a vasectomy isn't exactly like requesting elective brain surgery. Even in Canada. So, being persistent would have been enough to ensure no children in his future. But, hey, it doesn't look like he tried.

I actually sympathize with the OP. Joint custody, if you're not particularly interested in small children or feeling compentent as a parent, is onerous. You have sole responsibility for little alien critters for seven days in a row. Whoof. That's why my ex-husband and I moved rather rapidly from joint custody (it wasn't my idea) to two four day periods per month. That way, his chances of being a good parent were optimized and he didn't get worn out.

However, I think one of the underlying problems here was resentment and I'm curious as to whether you recommended counselling.