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.
Precisely! But unfortunately, taking responsibility for one's actions/reactions seems to be a foreign concept to some. Even worse is trying to force someone you're supposed to love to do something they abhor (pun intended).
This is real life. This is the OP's entire life, from this moment forward. Women do get pregnant and yes, one of these two should have gotten his/her tubes tied but are you saying an abortion means a woman isn't responsible? Just trying to clarify there. It's pretty harsh to say the fact that the wife being afraid to have her tubes tied and the husband apparently feeling the same way about himself means responsibility is "a foreign concept" to them. If you're anti-choice just say so. No need to put down their entire lives to irresponsibility based on the woman getting pregnant despite precautions, which is a situation as old as time to people of all ages, all "responsibility levels," all levels of commitment, and all demographics.
We don't know how much the husband tried to "force" the wife. Unless I missed a subsequent post, which is possible, the OP described two angry comments the husband made, apparently immediately after hearing some shocking news. Until I hear from the OP again I'm going to assume he is not holding her at gunpoint screaming at her to abort the child. He was probably SHOCKED and blurted out this "OMG deal with it"-type stuff. He may still want her to get the abortion but we don't know he's being a total P about it at this point.
He can't force her to, anyway. He can accept that she chooses to continue the pregnancy, and stay, or he can leave.
Correct.
He can not "force" her unless he drugs her and drags her to the abortion clinic. Actually, that hyperbole doesn't apply anyway as no abortion clinic would take an unconscious woman in and give her an abortion on someone else's, even her husband's, say-so.
The husband certainly knows this - everyone knows this - and his harsh immediate words sound to me like shock and utter panic to me against a wall of "Guess what? Your ENTIRE life is GOING to change for the next 20 years, the whole plan has changed and many of your dreams must be put on hold until you're a senior citizen...you can't do a thing about it, so just accept it and be loving about it." That's how it would feel and in the moment I'm sure he freaked out.
I don't know that he's necessarily The Debbil and an Eeeebil Baby Killa who is utterly devoid of any sense of responsibility. (I realize you didn't say this, TR, but it seems to be the general sentiment among a few here...this guy is soooooooo awful and just doesn't give a hoot about responsibility. That's a pretty big assumption to make based on two posts on a message board.)
Getting tubes tied is surgery. Getting a vasectomy is surgery. If an obstetrician is already under the hood performing a C-Section then tying tubes at the same time is a trivial extra and should be considered. As elective outpatient surgery. Not so much. I do not have a problem with the o.p. not having her tubes tied at 43. I do have an issue with her and many others in this thread thinking that having tubes tied and/or vasectomies are the only reliable methods of birth control. They aren't.
Getting tubes tied is surgery. Getting a vasectomy is surgery. If an obstetrician is already under the hood performing a C-Section then tying tubes at the same time is a trivial extra and should be considered. As elective outpatient surgery. Not so much. I do not have a problem with the o.p. not having her tubes tied at 43. I do have an issue with her and many others in this thread thinking that having tubes tied and/or vasectomies are the only reliable methods of birth control. They aren't.
I think the idea is that they are more reliable than condoms, and that's true.
AFAIK either a tubal ligation or a vasectomy will be more reliable than any temporary BC on the market except certain forms of the IUD (IIRC from what my OB told me when I got an IUD years ago). Part of that reliability isn't solely down to the actual mechanism but rather, is based on the fact that with sterilization, there is no prep involved, ergo no fumbling and possibly non-perfect use. But either way, condoms can fail for a variety of reasons. Therefore, if pregnancy absolutely can not happen in either of the partners' eyes, something more solid (efficacy-wise) really should be used.
And I get that, but really, that's closing the barn door after the horse got out, IMO. They have this situation now; various posters condemning them for not being responsible enough in the posters' eyes will not do a thing to help the situation. I don't see the benefit of discussing this factor ad nauseum except to make the OP feel like the most horridly irresponsible person on earth. I have a feeling there is a good amount of anti-choicers on here who feel a lot more comfortable pointing fingers and shaming than realizing real life really does happen.
This is real life. This is the OP's entire life, from this moment forward. Women do get pregnant and yes, one of these two should have gotten his/her tubes tied but are you saying an abortion means a woman isn't responsible? Just trying to clarify there. It's pretty harsh to say the fact that the wife being afraid to have her tubes tied and the husband apparently feeling the same way about himself means responsibility is "a foreign concept" to them. If you're anti-choice just say so. No need to put down their entire lives to irresponsibility based on the woman getting pregnant despite precautions, which is a situation as old as time to people of all ages, all "responsibility levels," all levels of commitment, and all demographics.
We don't know how much the husband tried to "force" the wife. Unless I missed a subsequent post, which is possible, the OP described two angry comments the husband made, apparently immediately after hearing some shocking news. Until I hear from the OP again I'm going to assume he is not holding her at gunpoint screaming at her to abort the child. He was probably SHOCKED and blurted out this "OMG deal with it"-type stuff. He may still want her to get the abortion but we don't know he's being a total P about it at this point.
This entire post is a real stretch and shows that you haven't read all my posts in this threat. Nowhere do I absolve either of them of any responsibility and nowhere do infer that a woman who aborts isn't responsible. Her choice, her responsibility. It's as simple as that. In that regard, please take off your feminist (I'm married to one, a midwife no less) hat and read thoroughly. And by the way, my personal views on abortion have not entered into this at all. I've neither persuaded nor dissuaded her/them at all.
FYI, the post you appeared to take exception to was directed at the husband, not the wife.
My theme has been the husband's demands and in one post I said it could simply be a knee-jerk reaction to the news of the pregnancy. But barring that his demand is unfeeling because it doesn't give credence to or consideration of her feelings about it. In the end they both have momentous decisions to make. 'Nuff said?
He can not "force" her unless he drugs her and drags her to the abortion clinic. Actually, that hyperbole doesn't apply anyway as no abortion clinic would take an unconscious woman in and give her an abortion on someone else's, even her husband's, say-so.
The husband certainly knows this - everyone knows this - and his harsh immediate words sound to me like shock and utter panic to me against a wall of "Guess what? Your ENTIRE life is GOING to change for the next 20 years, the whole plan has changed and many of your dreams must be put on hold until you're a senior citizen...you can't do a thing about it, so just accept it and be loving about it." That's how it would feel and in the moment I'm sure he freaked out.
I get the "Well, this was unexpected," reaction to a point. But if you've declined a vasectomy (it being "not manly" and all) and continue to have unprotected sex, how shocked can you really be?. If you are committed to having no more children, as one would assume that a person who has moved on to the jet skis and empty nests phase of his life and is now having a meltdown that that's not gonna unfold the way he thought, logic dictates that you take the necessary steps to ensure that you have no more children. If you don't do that, you can't really be surprised (let alone shocked and spewing "You better abort!" niceties to your spouse) when the natural outcome follows. This is not shocking. Sex = babies. Don't want 'em? Be better about taking precautions and less concerned about your perceived potent, manly status. He's a little long in the tooth to be freaking out like a 20-year old caught up in an oops.
I get the "Well, this was unexpected," reaction to a point. But if you've declined a vasectomy (it being "not manly" and all) and continue to have unprotected sex, how shocked can you really be?. If you are committed to having no more children, as one would assume that a person who has moved on to the jet skis and empty nests phase of his life and is now having a meltdown that that's not gonna unfold the way he thought, logic dictates that you take the necessary steps to ensure that you have no more children. If you don't do that, you can't really be surprised (let alone shocked and spewing "You better abort!" niceties to your spouse) when the natural outcome follows. This is not shocking. Sex = babies. Don't want 'em? Be better about taking precautions and less concerned about your perceived potent, manly status. He's a little long in the tooth to be freaking out like a 20-year old caught up in an oops.
The reaction according to the OP was *in the moment.* (And we do after all only have her side of this.) The surprise was surely great, logic aside. It could have even been a knee jerk guilt reaction. How can we know?
ALL we know is that it is what it is NOW. Retroactive you-should-haves won't help for *this* pregnancy.
And I have to say I'd love to hear the husband's side of this, right down to the quotes.
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.
