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.
I'm writing now in a moment of desperation in hopes that someone can relate or give any helpful advice. I've been with my husband for 15 years. We're both 38 yrs old. When we got married, neither of us wanted children. 3 years ago, I got pregnant while on the pill. At first, it was shock but then we grew excited - he was also very excited. When I miscarried at 14 wks, we were both devastated.
Since then, I have now changed and want nothing more than to be a mother. He refuses. It's been 3 years of me trying to convince him how much it means to me, crying, depression, now anger. He won't budge.
It's to the point where I can barely control my emotions and it's causing us to consider separation because we aren't on the same page and we are both miserable.
We still love each other and want to make it work, but he's not willing to have a child. And I've tried for 3 years to come to terms with that and be happy without it. As the biological clock ticks away, I have increasing anxiety and resentment toward him. He is not sensitive to my feelings and wants me to just get over it, move on, be happy and stop talking about it. all of which is making me feel like he doesn't care about me.
I'm considering leaving him even though it's the last thing I want for us. I just cannot take this emotional stress and depression anymore.
We have been seeing a counselor but it's not really helping.
Anyone going through this? Any advice? Am I being selfish to now expect him to sympathize with how I feel?
I'm so sad, devastated and lost....
Well you feel what you feel I guess....if your life is going to be incomplete (to you) without a child, then you may need to divorce this husband of yours and quickly find a new suitor....you are not in a good position though all-around being that you are already 38 years old.
Just to throw something outside the box out there, maybe talk to the husband and tell him you are interested in divorcing him, and then having his kid anyway! If the lack of freedom is the issue, he might see this as a reasonable alternative....although you might find yourself doing all the parental duties, except for the times he wants to participate....anyway, just a suggestion.
Prior to the 20th century you know what else was obvious to everyone? That Tobacco smoke enimas were good for you, syrup containing heroin for hyperactive kids helped calm them down, and "female hysteria" was a real diagnosis and thought to afflict as many as 1/4 of all women. So your claim that we knew better back then does not hold water. We are supposed to get smarter as time goes on.
Just because you can have kids it does not mean you should. Not everyone who has kids wants them. So no, you are wrong when you say "one time or another in a marriage, sex SHOULD be open to creating new life" First of all, it seems in your statement you are saying all marriages if that is what you are saying you are wrong there.
The second thing that bothers me about your statement is the word "should" which a quick peek at the dictionary says:
Should (shood) must; ought (used to indicate duty, propriety, or expediency):
People SHOULD have kids if it suits them and their circumstances not because of some societal pressure by baby hungry people that cannot understand how an unwanted baby (even by one parent) does more damage than not having that child at all.
So no I will not call you an elitist snob (not sure that word means what you think it does but whatever) but what I will say is your views are antiquated (you do realize that overpopulation is a more real danger than underpopulation, right?) and downright obsolete
Never mind, you totally did not get what Im trying to say. Your opinion is a luxury that people could have only had over the last 100 years or so. If most people up until then didnt "feel like" having children or didnt fit their lifestyle, humans would simply not exist.
People have very little awareness that we could easily be thown back into that world. A major pandemic or worldwide catastrophe and people would default back to their natural state. The current morality may be an adaptation to overpopulation and living in an urban environment. Historically speaking it is an anomaly. Dont act like this has been the norm throughout history.
After population peaks in 2050 and then starts a rapid decline after 2100, you will likely see traditional morality return with a vengeance.
Last edited by Port North; 09-28-2014 at 07:47 AM..
Never mind, you totally did not get what Im trying to say. Your opinion is a luxury that people could have only had over the last 100 years or so. If most people up until then didnt "feel like" having children or didnt fit their lifestyle, humans would simply not exist.
It wasn't so much a luxury as a medical inevitability. Reliable birth control has only been available to the masses for less than 75 years. Prior to that, regular sexual activity was generally going to end in pregnancy at some point. Now that people can control their fertility, they can control their reproductive futures without entirely abstaining from sex.
Never mind, you totally did not get what Im trying to say. Your opinion is a luxury that people could have only had over the last 100 years or so. If most people up until then didnt "feel like" having children or didnt fit their lifestyle, humans would simply not exist.
People have very little awareness that we could easily be thown back into that world. A major pandemic or worldwide catastrophe and people would default back to their natural state. The current morality may be an adaptation to overpopulation and living in an urban environment. Historically speaking it is an anomaly. Dont act like this has been the norm throughout history.
After population peaks in 2050 and then starts a rapid decline after 2100, you will likely see traditional morality return with a vengeance.
Seriously? You do realize, don't you, that the reason North America was colonized is that Europe was bursting at the seams with overpopulation? And those colonists and their descendants through the 1800's generally had 10-12 kids each. Some male colonists had twice that amount, because they'd remarry young women after their wife expired after so many pregnancies. And that's just Europeans and their descendants. Some Asian and Latin American nationalities are still having 8-15 kids per family.
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.
