In today's economy, how can U stay home?
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 08-07-2006 - 2:46pm |
I am 33 and am basically now sadly coming to the conclusion that we just can't have kids. I just don't know how people do it. In order to afford our mortgage, my husband and I both have to work full-time. And we bought a home in the least expensive market we could find in proximity to our jobs, so we commute up to four hours a day to make this work.
However, we both agreed, long long ago that we would only have kids if we could raise them ourselves. We just can't in good conscience reconcile the idea of having children and then handing them off to some stranger who is making close to minimum wages to rear them, and who can't possibly care about them as much as we do. And what would be the point? We would miss all their development and "firsts" and wouldn't be a close family, and they would grow up with attachment issues due to rapidly changing daycare staffing. No, if we can't do it the right way, we don't want to do it at all. We feel it's selfish to have them because WE WANT them; we decided long ago only to have them if we felt we could give them a wonderful life filled with love, hope, and opportunity.
So I am getting up there in age now, and I don't see things changing. The only people I see around me having children are people who 1) have family who live close by and can take care of their kids, 2) rich people, or women who marry rich men to be more specific, and 3) people whose families help them out financially.
Is there a chance for two people like us to have a family, when we don't have any of the above advantages? It doesn't seem like it should be THIS impossible! We're both hard workers who make decent money TOGETHER. Separately, it's not enough, but together, it's a good amount.
HOW could we make it happen? I have heard that having children after 34 the risks just go up and up and up, that they may not be healthy...

Pages
What if it turns out you wouldn't?
Last evening I was at the supermarket. A Mom, her small child and probably the Mom's Mom (an older lady, in the event) were standing to one side of the aisle. The two ladies were talkiing, the small boy was in the basket part of the cart. I stopped nearby to look at the tea.
There was a sound that caught all our attention. We turned. the little boy was climbing out of the basket, seemingly oblivious to the fact that the entire cart was tilting towards my cart--falling and would probably crash and pin the boy between the under tray of my car and the basket of his. We women were all about equal distant. The Mom froze.
I'm the one who ended up with the boy in my arms and, now, a huge purple bruise down my left hip and thigh where the cart slammed into me and slid down my leg. The mother burst into tears afterwards, as distraught over the fact that she froze and did nothing as she was grateful I grabbed her boy out of danger.
I'm not a hero. I just reacted. She's not a neglectful mother. She just froze.
It could happen as easily that you would freeze that fateful second, rather than react. You don't KNOW that you would take that bullet. You don't KNOW that you won't. You don't KNOW that some stranger witnessing the event might not see you both in danger and take the bullet instead. You just don't know.
<>
Then you can hardly be surprised when your readers fail to understand the point you're trying to make, can you? It's not OUR responsibility to read your mind; it's your responsibility to communicate your ideas clearly so that they may be understood.
LOL....Thank you for playing Goodbye Cruel Forum: The Passive Aggressive Edition. Even veiled inference of feeling sorry for the kids of WOHMs. All that's missing was an all caps rant and excessive punctuation, preferably lines of exclamation points, interspersed with the occasional "1" for real effectiveness :)
http://people.delphiforums.com/kiwilass2/smash.gif
Edited 8/26/2006 2:09 am ET by punkalicorn
What if, God forbid, your dh isn't killed, but only wounded so dreadfully that he is discharged from the military? Scores of US military folks are discovering that the military only looks after those still fighting and only paying off those who died. The soldiers grievously injured are not only not well cared for long term, despite the severity of many with long-term disabilities, many have been billed for equipment they could not possibly have had control over.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/07/11/wounded-soldiers-say-mili_n_3994.html
http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/7779/1/287
<>
Ha! I like that. Like it's cl_Laura's fault....
Right. It's all a massive, world-wide conspiracy against you personally. You caught us out. We've been planning this for YEARS. Frankly, we worried you might never ever come and post here; imagine our relief when you FINALLY showed up.
You're too smart for us; you caught us red-handed. All of us...every single of one of us are faking, just to bother you. It's all you, you, you. You're the victim and we're just the great big meanies who pretend not to understand.
I've got about a metre of bruising that begs to differ with your allegation that I just sit around with nothing better to do than to abuse you personally.
I guess the big difference between me and you is that you can't conceive of a stranger endangering herself for someone else's kid and I can't conceive of any decent, moral HUMAN who wouldn't.
Pages