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.
Would it be unreasonable or wrong/selfish if the husband of a young married couple agreed to only have kids if the husband + wife moved away from the inlaws?
Lets say they're (whoever they are..) currently live in the same city as the wifes family, the wifes sister has a two year old, and the option for babysitting etc and help would be available if needed if they stayed.
However, the family drives the husband absolutely nuts, and a city with better schools, more activities for a young family, less crime, and that was once identified as "The best place to live in the United States" is less than 200 miles away.
Also, husbands family is 1,400 miles away, and moving would actually be further away from them (while only 200 miles from wifes family). The husband wouldn't mind paying for childcare in place of wifes family, and would be excited at the idea of one longer visit during the holidays, rather than short regular get togethers.
Both husband and wife have good jobs that could support the move..
So is this anonymous guy being selfish, unreasonable, etc..?
yes, it would be selfish. As sound as the reasoning may seem to you, ultimatums never make for a productive, mutually happy relationship. This is the kind of thing that could drive a deep wedge between husband and wife. An open honest discussion is in order.
Good luck!
So long as he's prepared to listen to his wife's points, take a balanced view of the situation and then decide with her what's best for everyone involved, then no, it's not selfish.
His viewpoint has to be flexible, it's not about him, it's about what's best for the family.
If he digs his heels in, is stubborn and refuses to listen then yes, selfish.
However, if he doesn't already have a child or one on the way, I think this issue should be settled before trying.
To go ahead and start a family while negotiations are ongoing is silly.
Would it be unreasonable or wrong/selfish if the husband of a young married couple agreed to only have kids if the husband + wife moved away from the inlaws?
I don't care what the rationale is, that's a demand which is way out of bounds and shouldn't even enter into a discussion about relocating.
Is he going to shoot one group of hostages every hour until she meets his demands?
Unless it's an accident, couples usually jointly decide when to have children, based on many factors. Location and family issues certainly qualify. But, be very careful how you present your position, as you could undermine your argument with the wrong approach.
You might want to change the subject line wherein you reference YOUR sperm being held hostage.
Liberty
Why is the discussion about holding sperm hostage, versus talking to your wife about boundaries for her family, if indeed they are a problem? So what is it about them that drives you nuts to the point that you want to move 200 miles away? Are we talking about an Everybody Loves Raymond situation, or...?
How feasible is it to move 200 miles away? What does it mean that you both have jobs that could support the move?
You might want to change the subject line wherein you reference YOUR sperm being held hostage.
Liberty
Why is the discussion about holding sperm hostage, versus talking to your wife about boundaries for her family, if indeed they are a problem? So what is it about them that drives you nuts to the point that you want to move 200 miles away? Are we talking about an Everybody Loves Raymond situation, or...?
How feasible is it to move 200 miles away? What does it mean that you both have jobs that could support the move?
The problem is that it's infinitely worse than simply thinking about moving away from apparently aggravating family members. The premise is that the husband will only agree to have children IF the couples moves away.
It would depend on the reason that the family drives him nuts. My mom refused to have kids in the same town as my dad's family. His family thought it was funny to sit around getting high and get the toddlers drunk so they would stagger around. Most of my cousins are now alcoholics and drug addicts, so I was glad that mom took a stand and moved across the country before she had us.
If there is a real reason that impacts how the children are raised then it could be acceptable. However if the husband in this scenario just doesn't like the family, then I agree it is selfish.
Dear Anonymous - you knew your wife had a family before you married her and that they would be part of your lives. If you didn't like them in the beginning, why did you think it would change? Why do people do this?
For those of you here who are single -- take note of this post and remember it when you start getting involved with someone.
I would say you both need to think long and hard about having children -- you two seem to have a lot more issues that need to be resolved before bringing children into the mix.
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.
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.
