Co-parentng - single gay male

templeville · 15-12-2014 2:27pm #1

Hello,

I'm a 40 year old, self employed, gay and single man. I have always wanted a child but felt that it was not to be. I now know that this is something that I want deeply and feel that the time has come to properly explore my options. I had a great free childhood growing up on a mayo farm in a large stable family unit. I want my child to feel the same bond of family, both parents equally involved. I want my child to feel that they belong to a core and extended family.

I want to start exploring my options and co-parenting seems to be the best option for me. Any advice/ideas on how to go about finding women who are also considering this option?

Sin é!

baztard · 16-12-2014 1:08am

I'm in a similar situation, but a few years younger than you. I can't offer you any advice sorry, just best wishes in your journey.
I have looked into surrogacy, but the c.€150,000 price tag has put that idea to bed.
Hopefully co-parenting can be a realistic option.

templeville · 16-12-2014 1:48pm

Thanks,
Price tag aside I would prefer a co-parenting option as i would like both parents to be equally involved. There are a few co-parenting websites out there but there seems to be very little activity on these.
i will carry on my search!

nozipcode · 16-12-2014 4:43pm

I am glad to hear these sites are quiet. Sounds like a terrible idea to me. Any couple who are not in a stable relationship for x number of years shouldn't even consider having a pet together nevermind a child.

eviltwin · 16-12-2014 4:56pm

I think you're going to struggle to find a woman willing to have a child and co parent with a complete stranger OP. It's a massive undertaking to have a child with someone you know well let alone with some random person. Huge risk for you too of course. Definitely a bad idea imo.

Peregrinus · 17-12-2014 2:04am

The only actual case I know of involved two people who had known one another for many years before they decided to have a child together. They have made it work, but they are both remarkable people and they have been really challenged by it. To be honest, I would not be optimistic that this would work out well if embarked upon by two well-intentioned strangers.

mrsdewinter · 17-12-2014 2:10am

I'm a 40yo woman and I'm curious about how co-parenting works too, so I've elected to follow this thread. It's a bit disheartening to see the responses so far.

Aard · 17-12-2014 2:18am

mrsdewinter wrote: »

It's a bit disheartening to see the responses so far.

Can you see how others might perceive "coparenting" to be a little selfish or shortsighted?

17-12-2014 11:08am

Aard wrote: »

Can you see how others might perceive "coparenting" to be a little selfish or shortsighted?

Not in and of itself I can not.

Co-parenting in and of itself is neither selfish nor shortsighted.

The _reasons_ any individual couple or group might pursue it might themselves be selfish or short sighted however. So one can do little but evaluate the reasons and agendas of the individuals involved in any given scenario.

jobbridge4life · 17-12-2014 11:12am

Aard wrote: »

Can you see how others might perceive "coparenting" to be a little selfish or shortsighted?

No more than adoption by single persons or women choosing to become parents by themselves surely?

aaakev · 17-12-2014 11:20am

nozipcode wrote: »

I am glad to hear these sites are quiet. Sounds like a terrible idea to me. Any couple who are not in a stable relationship for x number of years shouldn't even consider having a pet together nevermind a child.

Whats good for you is not necessarily good for everyone else. Families come in all shapes and sizes and there could well be a woman, gay or straight, reading this who has been thinking the same as the op.

eviltwin · 17-12-2014 12:43pm

My concern wouldn't be about co parenting itself, it's about the risks involved in having a child with someone you don't know. OP remember that as an unmarried father you have very few rights, you want to be sure your child's mother is someone you can trust. There is so much to consider not just in the short term but right through the child's life, you'll need to find someone on the same page in terms of values, parenting style, attitude to health, education etc. I don't want to rain on your parade but you have to protect yourself.

floggg · 17-12-2014 1:33pm

I always thought you should approach the issue of whether or not to have a child not by asking what you want, but what you can offer to the child.

After all, the child must come first in everything.

So I think just wanting a child isn't enough reason to bring one into the world. I think you need to be in a position where you can offer them a good and loving home.

Do you think co-parenting with a stranger can offer that? Do you think you can ensure you can find agreed approaches to the various parenting issues which will arise? Are you both happy to become major and permanent parts of each other's lives?

17-12-2014 1:38pm

floggg wrote: »

Do you think you can ensure you can find agreed approaches to the various parenting issues which will arise? Are you both happy to become major and permanent parts of each other's lives?

There are some married couples I wish had asked themselves these things before they procreated too.

And some who did answer them - with a yes - and turned out to be wrong. Very very wrong.

floggg · 17-12-2014 3:27pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There are some married couples I wish had asked themselves these things before they procreated too. And some who did answer them - with a yes - and turned out to be wrong. Very very wrong.

Obviously there are no guarantees things will work out for anybody, but at least with a married couple (even a long term unmarried couple) there is a semblance of a stable base.

One thing I always think funny is when people who call those who say they don't want kids selfish for not wanting to give up their lifestyle for children.

But I think often the decision to have a child can be the selfish one - you choose to bring a life into the world because you think it would enhance your life.

Not that there's anything wrong with that - it's human nature.

But I think if people realised the ultimately selfish nature of the decision, they might treat the question with the weight it deserves.

I don't mean any of that as a dig at the OP. I would say though that you should be sure that you are having proper regard to the welfare of the child before making any decision. It's not about what a child would offer you, but what you would offer the child.

17-12-2014 3:33pm

That is why I do not put much stock in one type of relationship declaring another type "selfish" for wanting to have children. They all likely have the exact same reasons for wanting children - and no one group is any more (or less) selfish than the other.

Even in my own relationship - which is slightly different from the norm but not overly so - we got the accusation of being selfish when we chose to start having children. Seems many think their motivations are pure and everyone elses must be selfish somehow.

Anon79 · 18-12-2014 2:59pm

Hi I'm a 35 year old woman from Dublin. I've recently been considering co-parenting as an option for my first child. I can't think of a better environment for a child than to be brought into the world by two people who will want and love it with none of the selfish drama relationships bring. Please don't be discouraged by the negative comments on this thread. They sound a lot like petty jealousy to me. Being gay does not negate your right to a loving family!

Aard · 18-12-2014 3:12pm

^ You think coparenting will be drama-free?!

Anon79 · 18-12-2014 3:13pm

Try actually reading my post. Where did I say that?

Aard · 18-12-2014 3:15pm

"with none of the selfish drama relationships bring"

I did "actually" read your post btw.

Anon79 · 18-12-2014 3:18pm

So you'd see that I was talking about a specific type of drama. Relationship trouble. Cheating, abuse, lying, fighting over jealousy and insecurity. Don't put words In my mouth please

AlanS181824 · 18-12-2014 3:21pm

Coparenting is extremely interesting but whatever you do best of luck with it OP

Aard · 18-12-2014 3:23pm

Whoa, whoa, calm down. We're not in debate club.

I apologise profusely if I inferred incorrectly. Do you see how I might have made such a mistake though?

Anon79 · 18-12-2014 3:28pm

Sorry I took that as quite a condescending remark and immediately felt defensive. I thought I was clearly talking about romantic troubles that couples can experience but probably should have been clearer. I'm far from naive and have thought of the pitfalls co-parenting can bring. But I do believe given enough consideration the right match could do an excellent job of raising happy, loved, well adjusted children.

Chemical Byrne · 18-12-2014 3:30pm

I don't see how co-parenting as suggested by the OP could ever work. I mean I would presume that being gay he and the mother would not be planning to live together and would not be romantically involved obviously. He would instead "possibly" move in with his partner at some point. In that scenario I don't see parenting being equally shared in the slightest. The mother will most likely be the primary caregiver with the OP assuming a secondary role.
If the mother later gets a partner or married, how will that work if the husband feels he cannot/should not develop a relationship with the child?

And mostly, I just think it would all be very confusing for the child.

Chemical Byrne · 18-12-2014 3:38pm

Anon79 wrote: »

Hi I'm a 35 year old woman from Dublin. I've recently been considering co-parenting as an option for my first child. I can't think of a better environment for a child than to be brought into the world by two people who will want and love it with none of the selfish drama relationships bring. Please don't be discouraged by the negative comments on this thread. They sound a lot like petty jealousy to me. Being gay does not negate your right to a loving family!

Well that is all well and good on paper but I think reality is that the woman pretty much carries all of the risk and will be literally left holding the baby if the guy subsequently decides that this isn't for him. I understand that that can happen in any relationship anyway but I feel parents bringing a child into the world with no intention of ever having a relationship with the other parent is an odd idea.

I can understand the logic for same sex couples, but for heterosexual folks I don't get it. Why not just have a child with someone you love in the conventional manner. Is it a fear of or lack of desire for commitment or relationships?
It certainly wouldn't be something I'd encourage a friend to do.

Anon79 · 18-12-2014 3:55pm

Thats a fair point and if it happens so be it. The result remains I'll have my baby and it will have me. Single parents make it work every day. There are no guarantees. You've already established an opinion on Co-parenting based on your own beliefs and experience. You are fully entitled to that. I'm not here to change your mind or ask for advice. I simply want to offer support to anyone who wants to start a family in whatever manner they choose to suit their place in life.

Polo_Mint · 18-12-2014 4:05pm

Question.

When you speak about Co- Parenting , Are you talking MM,MF or FF?

Annasopra · 18-12-2014 9:20pm

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I don't see how co-parenting as suggested by the OP could ever work. I mean I would presume that being gay he and the mother would not be planning to live together and would not be romantically involved obviously. He would instead "possibly" move in with his partner at some point. In that scenario I don't see parenting being equally shared in the slightest. The mother will most likely be the primary caregiver with the OP assuming a secondary role.
If the mother later gets a partner or married, how will that work if the husband feels he cannot/should not develop a relationship with the child?

And mostly, I just think it would all be very confusing for the child.

Why are you automatically assuming anything about a primary caregiver?

Chemical Byrne · 19-12-2014 9:14am

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Why are you automatically assuming anything about a primary caregiver?

Because, as I said, the gay man will probably want to live with his same sex partner rather than with the mother. The mother is probably going to want the baby to stay living with her most of the time, especially when it is small for breastfeeding etc. As the baby is spending most of its time with the mother that would make her the primary caregiver in my view.

In reality, it would not be any different to situation of the bulk of separated couples, ie the woman keeps the kids and the father visits or has a secondary caregiver role. That's just my opinion though.

In the case of a gay father, what role would the fathers same sex partner have in this? Would he be relatively detached, like the new wife of a divorced man? A "second daddy"? Is it intended that the child would effectively have 3 parents? What role is envisaged for the partner?

19-12-2014 12:43pm

Polo_Mint wrote: »

Question.

When you speak about Co- Parenting , Are you talking MM,MF or FF?

Would that be relevant? For example for me it is essentially MFF. In that I will be having children with both of them and in each case the "other" one will be co-parenting with us. We have 2 of our 4 planned children so far and this has been working swimingly thus far.

But the answer is right there in the OP all the same. He said he was a gay man quite clearly and he said he was looking for a woman to do this.

So my guess is the answer to your question is he is speaking mainly of "MF"

floggg wrote: »

But I think often the decision to have a child can be the selfish one - you choose to bring a life into the world because you think it would enhance your life.

Definitely an element of that in any relationship type for sure. Which is essentially what I was saying in my last reply to you above.

But it is not limited to that. Yes I wanted children to add to my life. But I also wanted them because of everything I knew I could bring to THEIRS too.

But I am certainly with you on the "give the decision the weight it deserves" criteria. All too many people do not. And all too many of those are in the "traditional" heterosexual union community. What one can likely expect is that co-parenting people - gay couples who adopt - and so forth are people who quite often have put a relatively larger amount of time, thought AND effort into the whole affair _by definition_.

floggg · 19-12-2014 1:59pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Definitely an element of that in any relationship type for sure. Which is essentially what I was saying in my last reply to you above.

But it is not limited to that. Yes I wanted children to add to my life. But I also wanted them because of everything I knew I could bring to THEIRS too.

I may not be taking up up right here, and I'm not criticising your decision to become a parent in anyway (most people want to at some pojny), but I don't think you can describe it as a partially selfless decision since you felt you could offer a lot to this non-existent person.

If you didn't have them, they wouldnt exist so they wouldn't miss out on anything.

Now if it was an adoption, then I would certainly agree with you that the decision was as much about as what you could do for another as what they could do for you.

In fact if I ever did have a child (don't plan on it), it would definitely be adoption. Since I can't have kids with my husband to be, I think it would selfish to spend so much money and effort on having a child through surrogacy or what not when they are so many kids needing homes in the world today. I realise though actually adopting can be difficult.

Sorry, that isn't any criticism - just an abstract discussion on an intangible concept.

19-12-2014 2:36pm

floggg wrote: »

I don't think you can describe it as a partially selfless decision since you felt you could offer a lot to this non-existent person.

If you didn't have them, they wouldnt exist so they wouldn't miss out on anything.

Their prior existence is not really relevant to the point I was making. The desire to GIVE to another life is still a (relatively) selfless one - regardless of the person who is to be the target of it yet exists or not. The relevant point is that desire to give - whether I give to an existing person or create a new person for that purpose, is not relevant to my point.

Though I can equally point out that one of the things I have to "give" is the gift of life. I received it myself. I am quite grateful it was given to me.

But there is a route here to extreme pedantry I fear. Because (as I think someone else in the thread also said if my memory is not messing with me or it might have been another thread this week, Ive read so many.) essentially _every_ act is selfish. It is all born of self desire. I _wanted_ to give to another. That is still me fulfilling MY want even if I was giving to another. So what is left that is NOT selfish really?

But that pedantic road leads us to a point where the word "selfish" itself becomes meaningless because it means _too much_. I steal from my favorite poster on boards.ie when I say "A word that says everything - says nothing".

Selfish in the first google definition offered is " lacking consideration for other people; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure." and clearly my motivations DID consider other people (their prior existence being as I said not as relevant as you might think or want) and was not "chiefly" concerned with my own personal - anything.

floggg · 19-12-2014 6:44pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Their prior existence is not really relevant to the point I was making. The desire to GIVE to another life is still a (relatively) selfless one - regardless of the person who is to be the target of it yet exists or not. The relevant point is that desire to give - whether I give to an existing person or create a new person for that purpose, is not relevant to my point.

Though I can equally point out that one of the things I have to "give" is the gift of life. I received it myself. I am quite grateful it was given to me.

But there is a route here to extreme pedantry I fear. Because (as I think someone else in the thread also said if my memory is not messing with me or it might have been another thread this week, Ive read so many.) essentially _every_ act is selfish. It is all born of self desire. I _wanted_ to give to another. That is still me fulfilling MY want even if I was giving to another. So what is left that is NOT selfish really?

But that pedantic road leads us to a point where the word "selfish" itself becomes meaningless because it means _too much_. I steal from my favorite poster on boards.ie when I say "A word that says everything - says nothing".

Selfish in the first google definition offered is " lacking consideration for other people; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure." and clearly my motivations DID consider other people (their prior existence being as I said not as relevant as you might think or want) and was not "chiefly" concerned with my own personal - anything.

It's kind of a stupidly abstract point to argue so I won't. I just thought being motivated by what you can give a non-existent person who wont want or need anything unless you bring them into existence was a bit circular.

But the decision to have a child is hardly rational or logical - you sacrifice a large portion of your adult life and income so that you have the apparent privilege of being responsible for somebody who will be an unproductive, ungrateful and finally kinda stupid burden for the first 20-25 years of their lives, with no likely return on investment, and somehow the whole thing is meant to be the greatest thing that could ever happen to you.

19-12-2014 11:20pm

It is not that circular when you realise one of the things you have to give - the gift of life - is not something you can give an existing person. They have it already. Though with the amount of blood I have given in my time - I like to think I have in that way "given" it to existing people too

As for sacrificing part of your adult life - I never saw it that way. I see it as part of my adult life. Not a compromise - but part of the journey I am on. I can not say I felt I have sacrificed anything - nor see it as that kind of "investment" that I expect a return on. It is not so much that I am disagreeing with you - as much as I mean I simply do not recognise the words you use. Sacrificing your life to ME - is sitting around watching soap operas three nights a week

Some people spend hours painting. One mans sacrifice of their time - is another ones choice on how to spend it.

I wonder if the mods would like to move our posts to the other thread on "Why do you want to have children" though - as I fear we may have derailed here a bit

Sorry all!

Annasopra · 20-12-2014 8:09am

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Because, as I said, the gay man will probably want to live with his same sex partner rather than with the mother. The mother is probably going to want the baby to stay living with her most of the time, especially when it is small for breastfeeding etc. As the baby is spending most of its time with the mother that would make her the primary caregiver in my view.

But thats all complete guesswork and assumptions. You dont know anything really about what might happen. Its very odd that you assum your assumptions as facts/reality.

Annasopra · 20-12-2014 8:18am

Deleted User wrote: »

I wonder if the mods would like to move our posts to the other thread on "Why do you want to have children" though - as I fear we may have derailed here a bit Sorry all!

Its not really possible. The moderators of lgbt dont moderate ah and the moderators of ah dont mont moderate lgbt as well as that I think the discussion is fine as is.

Chemical Byrne · 22-12-2014 9:39am

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

But thats all complete guesswork and assumptions. You dont know anything really about what might happen. Its very odd that you assum your assumptions as facts/reality.

Yes of course it is. I never stated that any of it was a fact or a certainty. I don't where you got that from . It just seems to be the most logical outcome in my opinion.

Rachiee · 22-12-2014 10:21am

Sorry OP no advice here. I can see where you are coming from wanting a Co situation on paper it seems lovely a child with two loving families. I just worry the reality is diffident and a single parent situation may be more stable.
Im a single gay woman and gave thought about Co parenting with a single gay male friend of mine. This us a man who I love and trust and would have no problem sharing a life with for the next 20 years but ultimately I think the risks outweigh the benefits.
Having to negotiate birthdays holidays visitations and all parenting healthcare education decisions its just too much with a best friend never mind a stranger.
The idea of single parenting is not ideal and really quite scary but with support from friends and family it is do able.
Obviously as a single man though you are quite short on options and adoption is a bit of a night mare and costs around 20k in legal fees never mind time off work. But just to say to consider all your options and be really careful as an unmarried father if she has a change of heart you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Chemical Byrne · 22-12-2014 10:53am

Rachiee wrote: »

S.....but just to say to consider all your options and be really careful as an unmarried father if she has a change of heart you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

That really is the crux of the issue. Co-parenting would be all well and good but if the gay father isn't married to the mother then she holds ALL the cards. The father is not a legal guardian and the mother run off with the child if she gets tired of "co-parenting".

Annasopra · 22-12-2014 6:20pm

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Yes of course it is. I never stated that any of it was a fact or a certainty. I don't where you got that from . It just seems to be the most logical outcome in my opinion.

I dont see why though. I mean to me its very odd to jump to conclusions about outcomes.

Chemical Byrne · 22-12-2014 7:03pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I dont see why though. I mean to me its very odd to jump to conclusions about outcomes.

Well I figured that what I was saying was just the norm, ie baby staying with its mother etc, so wouldn't the same apply to a co-parenting situation?
In fairness, the mother is the primary care giver more often than not. I would say most people would agree on that surely. I'm not saying whether its right, wrong or otherwise, just that that is the more common arrangement.

Annasopra · 22-12-2014 7:16pm

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Well I figured that what I was saying was just the norm, ie baby staying with its mother etc, so wouldn't the same apply to a co-parenting situation?
In fairness, the mother is the primary care giver more often than not. I would say most people would agree on that surely. I'm not saying whether its right, wrong or otherwise, just that that is the more common arrangement.

Of course the Mother being primary caregiver is common but the reality is this has changed and is changing. I just think its really odd to make any assumptions like that at all.

Chemical Byrne · 22-12-2014 7:40pm

Well if you agree that it is the most common arrangement, then how is it odd that I would make that assumption?.

Anyway, look, this is just going in circles. [ / pointless circular argument]

LLMMML · 23-12-2014 3:53pm

I have to agree that having kids is a selfish act. It clearly is. The idea that you can bring great things to a life that won't exist unless you make it happen is pretty funny. But not all selfish acts are negative selfish acts. Id just like to see parents be a bit more honest about their motivations.

Annasopra · 23-12-2014 6:42pm

LLMMML wrote: »

I have to agree that having kids is a selfish act. It clearly is. The idea that you can bring great things to a life that won't exist unless you make it happen is pretty funny. But not all selfish acts are negative selfish acts. Id just like to see parents be a bit more honest about their motivations.

To me you are you giving so much that the idea it is selfish is completely wrong. As a parent you give time, energy, commitment, money, emotions, support. I dont know how giving all of that could be considered selfish. I really don't.

suicide_circus · 24-12-2014 7:35pm

Co....parenting? We're talking about a child here, not a timeshare apartment in Tenerife. I'm aware that families come in all shapes and sizes but deliberately having a child with a person you dont know and have no other connection with because you think you want to give a child a replica of your idyllic family upbringing in rural Mayo 40 years ago? This beggars belief.

25-12-2014 11:50pm

Probably not a fair analogy by any means. Time Shares are something you share with people you do not even know - and you only care for them 2 weeks a year while youre with them.

Not quite what is being described in the OP. Actually Co Parenting relationships can be - relatively speaking - a hell of a lot more child orientated than children brought up with married couples. As for many (not generalising just saying many) the primary focus is the relationship - and then come children. But with co-parenting the primary focus is the child.

Do not sweep that paint brush in either direction - but do not underestimate that difference either.

Annasopra · 28-12-2014 1:59pm

There is a troll called Thaidad persistently trolling this thread. He has reregistered about 17 accounts at this stage. I had closed this thread but actually I'm now reopening it as we shouldn't feel threatened or bullied here in discussing things. If you notice any odd or suspicious behaviour in this thread or in LGBT generally from new accounts please report the posts and don't engage.

LLMMML · 05-01-2015 2:16pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

To me you are you giving so much that the idea it is selfish is completely wrong. As a parent you give time, energy, commitment, money, emotions, support. I dont know how giving all of that could be considered selfish. I really don't.

You're confusing the reasons people have kids with the time they put into that child. What about those who have a child because they think it will fix their failing relationship?

And time investment doesn't mean you were unselfish or a good parent. I know plenty of people whose parents invested a lot of time and energy into having the perfect child and who made the child's life a misery when it didn't live up to expectations.

I think the Iona Insitute have a point, though they misuse it horribly. Two parents living in one home in a stable relationship does seem to be best.

I've no problem with families that end up not in this state, and I think their children turn out fine, but purposely bringing a child into a situation with as many possible pitfalls as co-parenting is a selfish act.

xLisaBx · 05-01-2015 2:19pm

Have you a close female friend that would have the baby for you? I know it sounds absurd, but she'd be like a surrogate who doesn't cost a lot

Co-parentng - single gay male

Comments