Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really. I was expecting something about a turkey baster.
That said, my thoughts on this will probably be in the minority here, but I feel that unless both spouses definitely want to try to conceive, they shouldn't. It doesn't matter what the reasons are if one does not feel it is the right time. It's not a matter of making one spouse or the other happy, either. It's about bringing a kid into the world whom both parents actively wanted. Anything less isn't fair to the kid, especially when you consider the resentment that can build up in the spouse who would rather have waited, either toward the other spouse (possibly resulting in divorce) or to the kid (possibly affecting parenting).
Also, if the situation were reversed, I can't imagine many people telling a woman she should go ahead and have a baby just because her husband wanted one. Yes, the woman is the one whose body goes through the pregnancy and birth, but I don't think that really makes a difference. Egg is to sperm for the purposes of this discussion.
Would I make moving a condition for conceiving? No. I would focus on the fact that I am not happy with the current arrangement.
So, OP, is there nothing you an do to cut back on time with your in-laws, without moving?
And not for nothing, but you mention that you and your wife both have jobs that would be okay with the move. Thing is, 200 miles is far. Are you going to commute? Or put in for a transfer? Because if you are hedging your bet on finding another job but in the same field, I would be very careful about that. Jobs are hard to come by these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by D217
Selfish? No.
Naive? YES.
If a woman wants your sperm, she's gonna get it!!!!
A man has a right to do what's best for his family as he sees fit. No one really knows to what extent her family meddles. As for marrying the family also I don't believe that. He married the woman and made vows to her..
If he feels his family would have a better environment and opportunity in another location I say go for it. They can always move back if they so choose. Children or no children if they stay near the family and they're that bad the marriage is doomed. It's just a matter of time because he seems like the type who won't take their mess. I wouldn't.
OP, I need to know why you don't like your IL's (yes, I think you're posting about yourself), otherwise, I can't give you an honest opinion. Is your MIL like Marie Barone? If she is, then by all means, hold out for moving. Or if you just don't like your IL's because you don't like the color of their house, then that's selfish.
A man has a right to do what's best for his family as he sees fit. No one really knows to what extent her family meddles. As for marrying the family also I don't believe that. He married the woman and made vows to her..
If he feels his family would have a better environment and opportunity in another location I say go for it. They can always move back if they so choose. Children or no children if they stay near the family and they're that bad the marriage is doomed. It's just a matter of time because he seems like the type who won't take their mess. I wouldn't.
Who is extending the so-called "right" for the man to make the decisions? Without the OP here to clarify, we don't know anything about the kind of problems he's referring to. Heck, for all we know, he could be the difficult one but claiming they're unreasonable.
But in the absence of knowing what is so awful about the in-laws that he wants to move, it's not his decision alone. Right now there are two of them, both employed. It was different back in the day when only husbands worked so you went where his job took him. But that's not even the case here, he wants to move to get away from her family, not because of a job transfer.
I don't think the husband is entitled to pull rank and decide they're moving away. IMO, this decision needs to be made and agreed upon jointly, not by bribery, or "holding sperm hostage".
If a woman wants something then it's her "right to want that" but if a guy wants something he's "selfish".
Look, he obviously wants a better life in what he think will be a better city for him and a potential family to be raised. He's expressing what he wants and that he doesn't want to have kids in the current environment. What's wrong with wanting that?
If he won't have kids in the area they live in now, and the wife absolutely won't move and must stay in the same town near her family then they need to think about parting ways.
Neither person is wrong, they just have different wants. And the husband is just expressing how he feels about the situation before making a HUGE decision to start bringing kids into this world.
This is definitely something for discussion before marriage, not after. If it were discussed before marriage, I think it would be a reasonable request. I know how hard it is to accept a family being too involved. After marriage, I think you're stuck.
You two are seriously headed downhill, TheEarthBeneathMe. I say that based on this and other posts you've made. If you would seriously consider what you're stating in the OP, PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN. NO MATTER WHAT. Do NOT do it...bad bad bad idea.
You have such a huge resentment toward her family that it will eventually break the two of you up. Let go and be the bigger person. Is it worth all this?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.