Lurkette, I'm going to have to second this.... wouldn't that be nice?

I'm going through the exact same thing that you are, except that my husband is 100% not on board with having any children or adopting... so it is a bigger choice for my own personal circumstances if I feel this is something that's really important to me.

I'm going to have to say that I didn't want children for some years, or rather, I was unsure, but in the past two-three years, It's becoming clear to me it's something I am truly interested in as a life choice ... it's emotion based and an urge I have, and my husband does not understand my urge since he does not have any similar urges.

I was a nanny for some time and I think that's where my thinking changed.... tucking a child in for a nap, helping them learn to read, giving them a hug when they fall down, doing your best to cheer them up when they are grumpy and had a bad day at kindergarden.... it's work and it's not always easy, but i found the experience very rewarding....

I would like to thank you and everyone who has shared their thoughts so candidly....


sweetpea

I have read through this entire thread with as much care as I can. If I missed something or repeat something that someone else has said just add it to the statistics.

Preface the words "In my opinion" in front of every sentence please:

Having children is one of those things that if you have to ask other people about then you probably shouldn't. If you have to make a chart of "pros and cons" then you probably shouldn't be having children. If you have to consult a Magic 8 ball then you probably shouldn't have kids.

Why?

Your mindset has not changed if you are still having these kinds of doubts. You still don't really want children. You're just dealing with the biological urge that you spoke about. That's all.

All of the people you meet who say that having a child is the sweetest experience in the world are actually correct. However, that's certainly not a reason to have kids. Kids are not toys or dolls that you tuck in at night and sigh and whisper to your SO that life is beautiful. Sure, that can happen sometimes; but counter that with all of the not so beautiful things about kids (puke, poop, tantrums, midnight ER visits, etc.).

A child will not make you suddenly feel complete if you don't already have that. At most it will distract you from certain feelings for a while; but eventually you become "yourself" again.

Two things stuck out at me most that I'd like to address here:

As far as kids being "dream-killers" (can't remember who said that), in MY EXPERIENCE the exact opposite is true. I got involved in music with renewed energy after my daughter was born. I didn't have much drive before. I just listed from band to band and project to project like nothing really mattered. Now I have some real concrete goals that I am on the road to achieving.

On the subject of daycare; the studies are not conclusive. Certain daycares are nothing more than holding centers for children of parents who are also otherwise neglected. We chose a daycare that met some very specific needs that we wanted for our child. I wanted her to learn a second language as early as possible. I don't speak a second language; at least not well enough to teach it. We were lucky enough to have a foreign language speaking daycare in the city. In addition to learning the second language, neither my wife nor I felt that we could teach our daughter anything beyond simple ABC's and numbers effectively (that's our own shortcoming, I agree). But, I am a firm believer in the Maria Montessori principle … kids seem to learn best from other kids.

Having children was something I never really thought about. It's not something that you can ever be "ready" for. Some people do and some people don't want to have kids. Sometimes you don't have a choice and that goes both ways.

Good luck with any decision you make.

Doug

I have to agree with vanblah. Maybe I'll change that opinion later, but for now it resonates with me. I think that if you really wanted to have children, you wouldn't need to ask the TFP. But that's just me, and I'm not in your shoes, lurkette.

I also like what vanblah said about daycares. :) Yay for Maria Montessori! I was a Montessori kid for a few years and I LOVED it. I still believe it affected my learning style for the rest of my life (a good thing). Daycare, or anything about having kids, is all about what you want to do... in the end, it comes down to what you want, and what kind of life you want to make for your family (with a little bit of randomness thrown in, of course). It comes down to whether or not you can financially and emotionally (and relationally) afford the risk of having children, I guess. It's a gamble... one that I'm certainly unqualified to make, right now. But I wish you the best in this decision, and I am learning a lot from everyone's posts.

Update -

Still mulling.

Genetics are no longer an issue - we have discussed things and decided that if we did decide to have a kid, we would be okay with having a kid with HED. My genes are actually pretty kick-ass, and I'm done resenting them. The challenges of caring for a kid who can't regulate his temperature would be significant, but not insurmountable.

Still on the fence.

Thanks for all the comments!

I sit in the category of having had kids (second one only a few weeks ago), but was quite ambivalent about us having them at all. My wife was very keen, and I was OK if it happened by also fine if it didn't.

I agree with all who have said RB needs to be on board fully - otherwise this could be a relationship killer.

There are lots of tests offered to parents to check "in utero" whether a child has a high probability of down syndrome and other abnormalities, but having fallen pregnant both my wife and I were not interested in these - we had decided to play the cards that were dealt and wouldn't have considered aborting based on the possibility of birth defects.

I also want to defend Analog - at the very least he was willing to say what he believed. I think there are pros and cons to be looked at - just some of the items in the list are less tangible than others. Still, it comes down to you guys feeling comfortable with your decision.

RE the TV/DVD - I'm with Ustwo on this - occassional doses of Bob The Builder and the Wiggles (my 2yo favourites) is a sanity saver. My wife and I are in charge of the remote, though, otherwise it would be on all day ;)

A couple of years ago, I had no idea. I wasn't willing to rule it out, but it seemed pretty unlikely, and I had no real urges to do the kid thing. These days, I see it as a pretty good possibility, but not now, and I'd probably be okay if not ever. However... I am starting to feel like that's a part of life I want to experience. Later.

Just listen to yourself, and be honest with yourself. Do some more daydreaming, see what parts you tend to focus on... what parts are the most interesting to you? If you just want to mentor a kid, you can do the Big Brothers Big Sisters program (which I highly recommend). If you want to nurture one, well, then maybe kids are a good idea.

I know you're talking to RB (you're no dummy) about this... and I have to say, talking to Q lately has been rather illuminating. And helpful in keeping our opinions on kids aligned. How would we want to raise them? Discipline? How would we handle childcare with us working? When would we want to do this? Q was a lot more nervous about the idea a couple years ago. With time, age, and more discussions, we've come to a general agreement about what we'd be okay with, and when.

And I'm glad you've taken genes out of the equation - everyone has something that sucks (like my family's huge possibility for colon cancer). Gotta roll with those punches. :*

I just read this and was thinking of this thread....

Now I can't verifiy the numbers of course, but EVERY childless couple I know who is getting beyond the normal childbearing years is a liberal couple. I enjoyed the part I highlighted in red as I've heard it before, its grossly untrue being most populations where one can find liberals (US/Europe) are falling, and I think its not due to being selfless as in 'I won't have a child for the good of the planet' but due to selfishness 'I won't have a child due to it will cut into my lifestyle'. The planet is a justification, a nobel cause but lets get real here. Now before someone gets bee's in their bonnets, having children is selfish too, you have them because you want to have them. It just reflects the diffrent priorities of the conservative vrs liberal mind set.

My son, age 21, is a pleasure to be around now. Although he still hits me up for money (he's in college, DUH!), I enjoy his company on an adult level now. Face it, there are far too few people in your life that really give a damn about you. I'm glad he's one of the ones who do.

It's also a certainty that I'll be doing all of the dumbass stuff you mentioned above, and ENJOYING it, when I have grandchildren.

Update:

I'm still utterly on the fence about this. I have been having more (very emotional) dreams about reproducing, and it still has its appeal.

However, I saw a kid at the library yesterday, about 8-9 years old. He was black, and he clearly had the same disorder my brother did (HED). There's just a look about HED kids, you can just tell. He was standing in a corner by himself, just kind of watching other kids, and he looked so frail and tiny. It just broke my heart, partly because of my brother, but partly because it just sucks to be a kid and be different and not fit in. And I just can't imagine if that was my kid - how the fuck would I be able to live knowing that he was miserable all the time? I just don't think I could manage that level of constant sorrow and pain for someone I love so much. There's something to be said for helping someone overcome that, but I don't know that I want to go through that, or put someone else through that.

Sigh. Soon I'll be old and it'll be a moot point.

Lurkette,

In my experience happiness is primarily about three things....Being loved, having someone to love, and realized potential as everyone's potential is different.

If you're so inclined search this sub-forum for a little insight into my family's trials and tribulations. Our little one still doesn't eat, and has several other congenital physical and mental aliments, but she's doing just fine in the happiness department because she is realizing her potential, loves her family and the extended members of her support team, and gosh darn it, is just loved to death by all of us.

I think your fears about happiness and the concerns for "issues" are common the world over. You're not alone and trust me, things get put into a sort of perspective in the grand scheme that only a parent can comprehend. Essentially it just doesn't matter.

I've learned over the last few years that the nature vs. nurture debate is effectively settled! Nurture is by far the most important determining factor.

Go for it! Or not, only you can decide....either way you should practice alot.

I think you've got the nurture in you, regardless of what nature brings into this world.

-bear

^^^ YES. That's it.
That's the right answer.
Do, or do not... but whatever you decide, love your people. :*

Well...while I understand your hesitancy...I can only say that any child, that calls you and ratbastid; Mommy and Daddy, is one lucky child indeed. I mean that sincerely.

I have dreams about having children too. In all my dreams, I neglect the kid to the point of death. And then I'm upset because I'm in trouble, and will probably lose my job.

I don't put much stock in dreams, but I think I will remain childfree, heh.

Good luck with your decision, you guys.

I'd just like to ask where kids are (still) raised in orphanages in the states. I was adopted at age 5 and lived with my biological mother and in foster homes before then. Adoption can be a bit of a pandora's box for the parents - but I don't think it's quite what you infer here. I suspect it saved my life - either literally or metaphorically.

Random tid-bit of information from my sociology class on family. A lot of countries have negative population growth. The only reason why the U.S. doesn't is because of immigration.

The work lurkette was referring to was about orphanages in Romania. Really sad stuff.

Ah hah. Okay, then that makes a little more sense. I guess that leaves me curious about the blanket assumptions about all adoptions then. :paranoid:

Domestic adoption is too scary because of the legal ramifications...I don't want some judge deciding 3 years down the road that it's better off for a kid to be with its biological parents. It's great that you can have the child basically from birth, and in some cases can even be involved with the mother before birth, but it's still too shaky for my tastes.

International adoption is frightening because you don't really know the conditions in which the child is raised before you adopt them. If it's a good orphanage with consistent, low-ratio caregiving, or if the child was raised in a family setting for most of its life before you adopt, fine. But I've known too many people who've adopted internationally only to be surprised down the road by problems that have cropped up that, had they known about the precursors, could have been treated or intervened with. But since the precursors (early sensory/language deprivation, attachment issues, parental substance abuse, etc.) happened before the adoption and weren't documented, there was no real way for them to do anything about it until it was too late.

Either way, I hope your decision leaves you deliriously happy, whether it's child-free or child-enhanced. :)

Given that we have 5 friends about to give birth between now and September (5! did they put something in the water in NC? Was there a blackout I missed? Did I accidentally spike the Christmas punch with Clomid?) I'm about to get a bunch of second-hand experience watching how my friends' lives change as a result of having kids. I hope that'll provide some clarity.

I babysat stellaluna's nephew with her a few weeks ago, and paying attention to someone else constantly is a real PITA. Particularly when the consequences of not paying attention are that the kid could die. (I'd probably be one of those lax parents by default...I'd figure "how much trouble could the kid get into while I fix myself a sandwich?" and then find them choking on a sock or something.) Is it horribly naive to think that you can just let them hang out and get into mischief (how much is it really going to hurt them if they chew on the dog's toys?) and not have them die or have social services take them away? Do you HAVE to watch them like hawks 24/7? Is it just that parents are so worried about the unthinkable consequences of unlikely mishaps that they hover constantly?

Is it possible to be a sorta slacker parent ("sure, kid, crawl around the house for a bit while I fold the clothes...I've picked everything up that you could eat, the cabinets are all locked, knock yerself out!") and still have a very good chance that the kid will survive to adulthood, or at least to school age, is what I'm asking. Or are you sentenced to stare at this fascinating bundle of "let me stick my finger in that and see what happens" until they're old enough to know better?

Lurkette, my wife and I have a conversation very similar to your concerns about once a week. Basically it starts out with something along the lines of "remember when we could just put Max down somewhere and he'd be there when we got back?"

Infants are much different than toddlers who are much different than "kids" (for lack of a better term). For the first 8 months or so, we could put Max on a blanket in front of the window and go make ourselves a sandwich or whatever. When he was 6 weeks old, my wife would put him in a bouncy chair facing away from the TV so she could watch the NCAA basketball tournament.

First he learned to crawl, then pull himself up and now he's running (we do very little walking in our house). My point is that the changes are gradual. Honestly, we were never worried about mobility so much as sleep, but even that's gotten much better than before. You also learn to cope however you need to. If my wife (since she's the one who stays home with him) needs to make herself a sandwich (or go to the bathroom), she'll usually just waits until he occupied with something for 5 minutes or just gives him something to play with so that she stays in his line of site.

All kids are going to do stupid, dangerous things. When I was 3, my passion was riding my Big Wheel down the driveway, which was about 150m long and a steep hill and into an intersection. Coincidentally, one of my friends posted a blog entry about something he used to do as well today:

http://jackalope_ranch.blogspot.com/

I guess my underlying point here in sharing these stories is that if this is the kind of stuff you're worried about, I think you're overthinking it. While it's obviously one of the biggest decisions you'll ever make and will change your life, the small stuff isn't really important. What's important is whether or not you have the love to spare to raise a child.

Having seen my sister raising our two nephews.... I'd say yeah, as long as the really dangerous shite is out of the way and you've blocked off the stairs, well, how bad can it be? They're going to fall and swallow something stupid and etc etc etc. That's what we have immune systems and strong stomach acid for. Remember.... you are ALWAYS more paranoid with someone else's child. Once you figure out the quirks of your own, you're a lot less stressed, trust me.

"waaa fucking waaa"

thanks jazz for a stroll down my childhood memory lane

First, overthinking is what I do best :)

Second, I don't know that I am overthinking it...I see a lot of people go into parenthood with "love to spare," and they think that love will pretty much carry the day. And it does, in the end, at the bottom line...but in between, they're miserable, cranky people because they spend their entire days focused on keeping this little person fed and dry and healthy and alive, and it's fucking draining! For me, it's not about the love...it's about how I want to spend that love. Do I want to spend it on my husband and friends, or on my community, or do I have what it takes to spend it ungrudgingly on an utterly dependent little munchkin who seems to be hell bent on self-destruction?

Truth be told - I had to come back to add the "love to spare comment" because I couldn't think of anything at all at the time. As it stands, I could only come up with a cliche. Yes, I suck, but at least I admit to it.

I think that just about everyone on this board, including you, will admit to being "an utterly dependent little munchkin who seems to be hell bent on self-destruction" for a good portion of their life. That was actually sort of my point. A few years ago, I reconnected with one of my friends from elementary and middle school, and we spent an afternoon recapping the various ways that we tried to kill ourselves and each other. The consensus was that it was amazing that we both survived to adulthood until my wife rightfully pointed out that neither of us is particularly special in that regard. We could start an entirely separate thread on the stupid stuff you did as a kid but somehow survived (anyone else ever try jumping off the roof into a tree?), but honestly that's not the point here. The point is that all kids are stupid all the time. They may know enough not to drink the stuff under the sink, but they don't know not to tow their little brother who's in a wagon down a hill with their bike at top speed. (I think Chris is still picking gravel out of his arms after that one.)

I know that I still spend love on my wife, my friends and my community now that I'm a dad, but I will admit to re-prioritizing things. My immediately family now definitely comes first, where my wife might have slipped by the wayside if there was something that I wanted to do with friends. Now, that rarely happens, if ever. But that's my experience. Yours will necessarily vary.