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.
Children *always* come first. It should *always* be the case.
His children would come first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25
I really have to explain this?
When you decide to take such an active and involved role with a child such as that of a mentor or parent figure, you don't just leave. There shouldn't be a question or a choice to keep your obligation.
But he did leave, and made a choice to come back, did he not? It doesn't matter what we think he should do; the option was still there, whether or what one thinks is best for the kid.
That's the thing about choice. It isn't biased, or limited only to "right" answers. It exists regardless of the consequences of the action, albeit positive, negative, or neutral.
He made himself this girl's father figure for three of her four years of life. He would be a heel to just up and leave her completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexWest
But he did leave, and made a choice to come back, did he not? It doesn't matter what we think he should do; the option was still there, whether or what one thinks is best for the kid.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexWest
Choice isn't limited to "right" decisions. You have choices for any decision, that may lead to positive/negative consequences, or having a neutral effect.
If he wants to keep his obligation to this girl, his only right choice is to continue to be in her life.
Great in theory, but that's not always the case. For better or worse, new relationships can interfere with or even trump past relationships. If the man gets married to someone else, his new family, for better or worse, will likely take most of his time, and become the priority because he is legally obligated to these kids, and wife. He will likely consider their needs first, or it will jeopardize his own family. A great father needs to be a father to his own first, regardless of how he treats other children.
Most (older) women want a long term relationship, a good potential father, and (their own) children (with "no strings attached"). H886's argument can still apply.
No, new relationships do not trump children. Anyone who allows that doesn't care about the children in question. I've seen parents do this and they are selfish for putting their own wants in front of their children's needs. This guy is right to put the child first. He's a good man. He'll make a great dad.
No, new relationships do not trump children. Anyone who allows that doesn't care about the children in question. I've seen parents do this and they are selfish for putting their own wants in front of their children's needs. This guy is right to put the child first. He's a good man. He'll make a great dad.
I think you misunderstood what I said. Whether this guy wants to stay involved or not, he can still choose to get married to someone else and have kids of his own. His own kids are going to come first at some point.
He made himself this girl's father figure for three of her four years of life. He would be a heel to just up and leave her completely.
But it has and can be done. You may not agree to it, but he could still have gone on, new relationship, missing the child, and lived with that.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.
We're talking about choice here
If he wants to keep his obligation to this girl, his only right choice is to continue to be in her life.
Key words are "if he wants". He did not have to make the what you think is the "right" choice. It could be a "wrong" choice if another man gets involved, or life takes him elsewhere.
I think you misunderstood what I said. Whether this guy wants to stay involved or not, he can still choose to get married to someone else and have kids of his own. His own kids are going to come first at some point.
Yes he can and, I would assume, that whoever he marries will be ok with his relationship with this little girl. And I assume, like parents do when they have more than one child, he'll manage to meet all the children's needs. Believe it or not, adults can manage more than one child without slighting one of them.
To his biological children, his relationship with this little girl will be normal because it will always have been.
I am a step child. My mom and step father had four children. I'm big sister to all of them. The fact I predate my mom's relationship with my step father is meaningless. The fact my father had two children with my step mother didn't change my relationship with my father. Parents manage. I'm sure this guy will.
I cannot imagine dating a 20 year old when I was 28. or even a 24 year old. You're just in different stages of development with different agendas (usually).
Key words are "if he wants". He did not have to make the what you think is the "right" choice. It could be a "wrong" choice if another man gets involved, or life takes him elsewhere.
He already made the choice. There is no going back after you make that sort of decision.
I cannot imagine dating a 20 year old when I was 28. or even a 24 year old. You're just in different stages of development with different agendas (usually).
I dated my husband when he was 22 and I was 28. There is no pat answer for these types of things.
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.
