Considering having a baby by myself

LoMismo

bee06 wrote: »

It’s very difficult to describe the urge or want to have a child to someone who doesn’t experience it but it’s completely overwhelming. It’s not a logical thing where you can just say “oh well, it’s not going to happen. I’ll move on”. There’s a reason why couples spend 10s of thousands of Euro on fertility treatment and go through horrific emotional turmoil to try and have a baby.

Well thank god im a man then, all I can see right now are benefits in not having kids!

Paddy Cow

LoMismo wrote: »

Well thank god im a man then, all I can see right now are benefits in not having kids!

It's not only women who get broody. There are plenty of gay couples who use surrogates to have children. Straight men do it as well. Cristiano Renaldo had three kids by surrogate before having a fourth with his girlfriend. The desire to have children is what perpetuates the species and it can be an all consuming urge for either sex.

jigglypuffstuff

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

I don't understand if people are saying that you would be selfish to have a baby alone, why adopting a baby alone would be a better option. You'd still be single parent? Is it less of a problem for an adopted child to be raised by a single parent?.

It is a case of putting a newborn child in s suboptimal position willingly through no fault of their own for an individual's self interested reasons .....Vs trying to help out one who is already in that position through no fault of their own

It's very clear what the difference is

Big Bag of Chips

In that case why would anybody go to the trouble of conceiving, carrying and giving birth to any baby when they can just adopt instead? Adoption isn't an option for everyone. And that thinking makes it seem that it's fine for a child from one circumstance to be raised by a single parent, but unthinkable that a child from another circumstance should be raised by a single parent.

OP, every single person (or at least the huge majority of people) who have children have them for 'self-interested reasons'. We had children because we wanted them. I hope that they will grow to be good honest people who do good throughout their lives. But I didn't have them for the betterment of the world, I had them because I wanted them, and because I could! I wanted children. I wanted a family around me. I wanted someone to look to me for guidance and support. I wanted to be the proud mammy on important days.

Some people don't want children. Many do. Everyone makes the choice for themselves, and really it is of no consequence to anyone else.

flo09

Hi,
I really admire your decision to go it alone. I think its very brave. It really is impossible to imagine all eventualities and the many things that could happen or go wrong. There is one thing though that you can control and that is your plan to put the baby in a creche from early on for 8-10 hrs a day, 5 days a week. I think that needs more consideration. Could you take a career break for a number of years to at least enjoy the baby after all the hassle you will put yourself through to have one.

Just something else to consider. I know most people do.

I took a career break for 5 yrs and it was the best decision i made. Upon returning to employment, part time, i fell pregnant soon after and am now expecting my 5th. My cousin minds my children and im only gone for 4.5 hrs daily. I feel guilty but children are expensive and I work to provide for them. Never realised how expensive hobbies are.

jigglypuffstuff

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

In that case why would anybody go to the trouble of conceiving, carrying and giving birth to any baby when they can just adopt instead? Adoption isn't an option for everyone. And that thinking makes it seem that it's fine for a child from one circumstance to be raised by a single parent, but unthinkable that a child from another circumstance should be raised by a single parent.

Generally when a man and a woman love each other and want to start a family together that's why they go to the bother.....

No it does not....you're missing the distinction between deliberately bringing a child into this world at a disadvantage for ones own self interest rather than helping one out who's already at a disadvantage

In other words....why go about creating a wrong doing when you might be able to rectify one.

Ursus Horribilis

pone2012. In 2014, there were 14 times more Irish people looking for children to adopt than there were children. If our OP is to have a child, her most realistic option is to have one of her own.

qwerty13

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

In that case why would anybody go to the trouble of conceiving, carrying and giving birth to any baby when they can just adopt instead? Adoption isn't an option for everyone. And that thinking makes it seem that it's fine for a child from one circumstance to be raised by a single parent, but unthinkable that a child from another circumstance should be raised by a single parent.

OP, every single person (or at least the huge majority of people) who have children have them for 'self-interested reasons'. We had children because we wanted them. I hope that they will grow to be good honest people who do good throughout their lives. But I didn't have them for the betterment of the world, I had them because I wanted them, and because I could! I wanted children. I wanted a family around me. I wanted someone to look to me for guidance and support. I wanted to be the proud mammy on important days.

Some people don't want children. Many do. Everyone makes the choice for themselves, and really it is of no consequence to anyone else.

I get this post, I really do. But - to me - it just it seems a bit selfish to bring a kid into this world starting from a position that both the kid and the kid’s sole carer will be at a disadvantage. And many will say there is not disadvantage- but there’s definitely a lot of extra practicalities to be planned for.

That’s not meant to be offensive in any way, and I understand that circumstances can mean that a kid has only one parent to care for them, who may be struggling to juggle work, other commitments, elderly parents, financial difficulties. But to deliberately follow a path where life may be harder because a sole parent has chosen to go it alone - to me, that is a bit selfish.

Of course it might work out ok. But the chances of it not working out ok are a bit scary if there’s a sole parent situation from the start. For that reason, I do think it’s a somewhat selfish decision. I fully get that lots of people don’t agree with that point of view, and I’m merely presenting my point of view.

Someone commented earlier on this thread about the OP having no regrets re deciding to ahead with this choice. To me it isn’t about that - it’s about can you genuinely really see a future for the kid where the *kid* will have no regrets. That’s the nugget of it for me. Do you have all the bases covered, knowing that it will be harder for both you & the kid from day 1. If you’ve really truly examined all that, and planned for it (financially & emotionally), then go for it.

Do do it so that *you* have no regrets though. To me, that would be truly selfish.

qwerty13

I’ve tried to edit the last sentence of my post - should read “Don’t do it so that *you* have no regrets though. To me, that would be truly selfish.”

I don’t mean to be nasty or harsh OP. If you genuinely have considered every angle re finances and emotional support, then go for it. Just don’t do it in case you might regret it. Do it because you have considered upside down and inside out that the kid won’t regret it.

I genuinely wish you all the best in this.

LoMismo

Paddy Cow wrote: »

It's not only women who get broody. There are plenty of gay couples who use surrogates to have children. Straight men do it as well. Cristiano Renaldo had three kids by surrogate before having a fourth with his girlfriend. The desire to have children is what perpetuates the species and it can be an all consuming urge for either sex.

Straight men do not do it, it’s not possible for us ffs. Ronaldo is an ego maniac probably looking for heirs to his throne, and has 100s of millions to spend on his spawn, I doubt he has much to do with their upbringing either, bad example! I know of one girl who nearly lost her marbles trying to get pregnant in her late 30s alone, and it never happened in the end, Danish sperm etc. On the other hand I know lots of guys my age who never met anyone and we’ve never once discussed disappointment in not having kids. I think it’s definitely different for women!

pwurple

Irish adoption does not really exist anymore, unless it is stepparents or grandparents adoption. Generally the unwanted pregnancies are aborted. To being the adoption process here (unrelated), I think you also need to be under 35. OP is late 30’s. And the birth mother has to choose you above the other applicants.

So, If adoption was what OP wanted, she would probably need to go the foreign adoption route, which is also difficult since The Hague convention.


Listen, OP, this is your sticking point, you said it yourself.

But the thing I can't get my head around is that I'd be consciously deciding not to have their dad in their life

It is sticking with you because it is a perfectly valid concern/instinct. We are not hemaphrodites, children have two parents.
It’s not just to have a helper, a support when things go wrong with either of you... it is also the joy of sharing a child with their other parent while they are growing up. The little achievements, the worry when they are sick, all of you looking out for one another, being a family. They say money can’t buy some things, and if this is what you wanted really, a family rather than just the baby, then if you realise it can’t be bought, you can start to think of alternatives .

Don’t forget, favorite aunty is a fairly awesome thing to be, better fun than having to be the authorative parent. I love taking my nieces and nephews out for a bit of Craic. The Uber- stylised cult of motherhood is monstrously pushed by media these days, and I think it undermines reality for a lot of people.

Big Bag of Chips

There are plenty of people who start their children off with a disadvantage. 'Poor' people. Unemployed people. Disabled people who know there is a chance their disability will be passed on to their child. People with mental health problems. I know of a new born baby born to a heroine addict mother who spent 5 months in the neonatal unit withdrawing from a range of drugs before being put into foster care with her older siblings. That mother is 23 and has probably another 20 years of giving birth to addicted babies. THAT is selfish!

I think on the scale of selfishness yes, of course you can classed as selfish for wanting a baby, but so can a lot of people. And I think on the scale of selfishness yours is certainly not top of the list.

qwerty13

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

There are plenty of people who start their children off with a disadvantage. 'Poor' people. Unemployed people. Disabled people who know there is a chance their disability will be passed on to their child. People with mental health problems. I know of a new born baby born to a heroine addict mother who spent 5 months in the neonatal unit withdrawing from a range of drugs before being put into foster care with her older siblings. That mother is 23 and has probably another 20 years of giving birth to addicted babies. THAT is selfish!

I think on the scale of selfishness yes, of course you can classed as selfish for wanting a baby, but so can a lot of people. And I think on the scale of selfishness yours is certainly not top of the list.

The OP is of course not ‘top of the list’. But that doesn’t take away from the fact that she is *knowingly* starting from a relatively difficult position for her, and her child, of less emotional support than might otherwise happen (ie no full time partner), potentially less financial support than might otherwise happen (eg what if she gets made redundant), and a sole parent to cope with life’s trials & tribulations.

I’m not saying that it won’t work out. But it is undeniably starting from a harder position, and that’s why I urge the OP to consider every angle of what would happen re financial and emotional support for this child if she - through no fault of her own - was not able to provide such support. To me, to *knowlingly* embark on this path without having covered off such angles would truly be selfish. That’s why I said that any regrets the OP might have about not having a child should be far far less than figuring out whether the child (who did not ask for this situation) might have regrets.

That’s why considering every financial & emotional angle is so important before going down this route.

Big Bag of Chips

I don't see any evidence of her not considering everything. In fact in your position OP it takes an awful lot more planning and considering than someone else just getting pregnant because they have someone to get pregnant with, without considering anything beyond having a baby.

I wish you well, OP, however it turns out for you. As has been said, nothing in life is guaranteed.

qwerty13

I don’t see any evidence of her not considering everything either.

However, her posts seemed to be more about what she wants, as opposed to what she absolutely has determined that she can provide for a child - and, most importantly, what her back up plans are. Thinking that she has a supportive family isn’t good enough, as others on this thread have pointed out. People may be happy to support - but (entirely understandably) on a limited basis.

Im not criticising the OP’s desires - I’m just questioning as to whether she is planning this so that *she* will have no regrets, as opposed to her having a solid plan for her child (with very firm backups) in the event of practical childcare difficulties, changes in financial circumstances, changes in family circumstances, and simply needing a break from it all - so that the *child* doesn’t have regrets. Surely the child is the most important one in this scenario

manonboard

December2012 wrote: »

Actually OP I think if you're going to be a single parent, doing it wilfully is the much better option. ......

This is a really great point. Most of the difficulties coming from single parent families come from the breakdown of the family dynamic resulting in terrible emotional supporting/ongoing conflicts/constant change/mistrust and anger.
There is no plan or supports because it would of been seen as betrayal to consider not being together.

Your willful choice to do it, negates all these bad things. You can plan. Provide. Set up supports. There is no breakdown currently occurring. You sound like you'll have social supports etc. The child will only ever relate to things as they know them, there is nothing 'missing' as thats just a concept that never existed in the life of the child.

If you want to do this. Do it. One good parent, beats 2 bad parents or difficulty with parents every time. The child needs stability, safety, and provision. If you can provide these, then it will be a warm and loving home.

Thoughts of being selfish are not useful. It IS a self serving action. So? It's not different when two people are self serving. The kid doesnt care whether the mother gains pleasure from giving the kid a great life Infact is a bonus!

Paddy Cow

manonboard wrote: »

This is a really great point. Most of the difficulties coming from single parent families come from the breakdown of the family dynamic resulting in terrible emotional supporting/ongoing conflicts/constant change/mistrust and anger.
There is no plan or supports because it would of been seen as betrayal to consider not being together.

Your willful choice to do it, negates all these bad things. You can plan. Provide. Set up supports. There is no breakdown currently occurring. You sound like you'll have social supports etc. The child will only ever relate to things as they know them, there is nothing 'missing' as thats just a concept that never existed in the life of the child.

If you want to do this. Do it. One good parent, beats 2 bad parents or difficulty with parents every time. The child needs stability, safety, and provision. If you can provide these, then it will be a warm and loving home.

Thoughts of being selfish are not useful. It IS a self serving action. So? It's not different when two people are self serving. The kid doesnt care whether the mother gains pleasure from giving the kid a great life Infact is a bonus!

That's not true and is one of the things the op will have to consider. A small child completely accepts their surroundings and is happy if they are well loved and cared for. As the child gets older, they start to mingle with their peers and compare situations. This is completely normal. There will come a day when the child asks the op about his/her father. How the op handles that, plus the child's personality, will dictate how the child copes with the situation.

I was talking to a woman recently who's mother had died when she was a baby. She said she's had the comments that you don't miss what you've never had and she finds them hurtful. She has been told who her mother was but she never knew her mother and always felt growing up that she was missing something.

I'm not bashing the op or trying to put her off. The point I am making is that you can have all of the physical stuff in place ie finances, work, child-care etc but you cannot predict how the child will react to the situation emotionally when they are old enough to question it. That is the most important thing the op has to consider. We are all adults here and can understand the op's desire to have a child but a small child doesn't have that level of maturity.

If the op does decide to go ahead with it, then ultimately the only person she will have to explain herself to, is the child.

December2012

I think that's different. And I speak as somebody who had siblings die before I was born.

Your friend did suffer a loss, her mother died and get father left grieving.

Having a child by choice while single does not involve grief or loss. It is just different.

Caranica

I'm about the same age as the OP and didn't want a child in my marriage and certainly don't now that I'm out. But, I know mothers, single and otherwise who are amazing, and who had a biological need to have a child. I know other mothers too but everyone who so desperately wanted a child, whether alone or with a partner, gives that child everything it needs.

There are so many ways to get a male influence in a child's life. Being a father is only one way, and not a guaranteed good way. My friend was sexually abused by her father, I know for a fact her life would have been so much better had he never been in her life. An exception maybe, but it just shows that a two parent family is not always best.

My moral in life is "to thine own self be true". Op if you want to have a child, need to have a child, and are prepared for the sacrifices you will have to make for that child from birth until one of you dies, then don't let strangers on an Internet forum put you off. That child would be lucky to have someone put so much thought into their conception, so few children have that.

Paddy Cow

December2012 wrote: »

I think that's different. And I speak as somebody who had siblings die before I was born.

Your friend did suffer a loss, her mother died and get father left grieving.

Having a child by choice while single does not involve grief or loss. It is just different.

It doesn't involve grief or loss to the parent but that doesn't mean the child won't feel the loss, which is the point I'm making. Whether or not the child feels that having one parent without knowing the other, is a loss or not, is only something that the child can decide for itself. The op can plan for every eventuality but she cannot know how her child will cope with the situation. That's the most important thing she should take into consideration.

We can all post anecdotes from our own lives about people who have coped/had problems with their family situations but if the op decides to create a little family for herself, it's only her who will have to explain the situation to her child. If she goes for it, I hope it works out.

I know plenty of people who come from the traditional two parent family who had sh!t upbringings. That's not the debate here. The op asked for opinions on her having a child on her own. I have no problem with this. I am pointing out potential problems that she may have to face. Her child may be okay with it, or they may not. That's something she has to consider.

Katgurl

OP this is a bit of a rushed reply but I say either go for it or make your peace with not having children. I was in your situation a few years ago and considering the very same thing. I did lots of research and ultimately decided against it for different reasons - I had cancer in my thirties and would worry about it returning.

Listen life has no guarantees.

I did unexpectedly meet a man and we have a baby on the way. I'm 40 now. But I think the reason I was open to meeting him was that I was no longer consumed with worry and indecision. I had decided to get on with living my life.

Big Bag of Chips

Mod Note:

As the OP hasn't replied to the thread in a week, we'll lock it for now. OP if you would like it to be reopened then contact any of the PI Moderators.