Letters to the Editor
-
Heinous.
Absolutely heinous advice. A child should come into the world WANTED by the adults who will live with and care for him or her. If that's a single parent, fine. If it's a couple of any orientation, fine. If it's a grandparent, aunt, uncle, or any permutation or combination of the above, or the members of a commune, or whoever else, fine.
What's not fine is to have a main caretaker (which the LW will be; legislate/fantasize about it all you want, but if you bear the child and live with the 'primary' caretaker, who also happens to be your beloved husband, you ARE a main caretaker) who's deeply equivocal at best about that child's existence. I put the husband at around age 47 now, given the details of the letter. Will he have the energy at 52 to give a 5-year-old what that child needs? How is his health? Even if it's flawless, what if he's in an accident, or the marriage breaks up, and the mom must assume primary caretaking responsibilities? This is a crazy idea. Just crazy.
Kids know when they're not wanted. This scenario sets in motion a perpetual tug-of-war between this woman and the child over the husband's love and attention -- a struggle each one is bound to lose in his or her own way. And do we really think the marriage will survive and thrive under the circumstances?
Get real, folks. When it comes to doing the right thing by kids, you CAN'T have it all. Grow up and make an adult decision for once in your lives.
-
Make Him Raise the Kid?
Cary? You're not outsourcing your columns to Bangalore again, are you? "Make him raise the kid"?? That sounds a little like "make it not rain this year."
You cannot be serious, Cary. Suppose this child has serious health problems or birth defects? She is close to 35 and has a gynecological disorder, so it could very well happen. Is the LW supposed to just go skipping tra-la on her merry way and say, "Sorry, hubby, you're the one who wanted the baby, you deal with it"?
And what if her husband -- who, after all, has never been a parent before, and has no direct experience with babies -- can't handle being the primary caregiver after all? Of course she'll have to step in. Even if she isn't the primary caregiver, it's illusory to think she can just go on living her life the way she has with two teenagers who have by this time attained some degree of autonomy. Babies are work, serious work, for any parent, even one with full-time help. And given that she is the biological mother, she will also have to deal with the physical and psychological fallout (including possible postpartum depression) of having a baby in her mid-30s, episiotomy or cesarean scars, breast-pumping, sleep deprivation, etc. Mid-30s may sound young to some people, but the LW has already made it clear she is not up to the task, and has never been anything but straightforward with her husband about this.
If they are actually considering going through with the pregnancy, the very least they can do is "borrow" a baby for a week or so -- preferably a colicky one! -- so the LW's husband can find out first-hand what it's like to care for one, especially if he figures to be the one missing out on most of the sleep. They (and especially he) should NOT romanticize parenthood and stumble into it blindfolded. Some people take to it like a duck to water, others like a cactus to a swimming pool. The LW already knows which category she falls into; this means her husband had better be damned sure he's completely the opposite.
-
Are you crazy, Cary?
Assume (at least for the sake of argument) that Cary's suggestion would fail if the parents remain married. They would both be equally responsible for the child, and societal and marital pressures would inevitably place the onus of childrearing upon the mother no matter what they privately agree. If they did reach an agreement and things soured, keep in mind that this would not be an enforceable contract in any U.S. jurisdiction. It's unconscionable, pure and simple. The only way it could work, legally: They divorce and she terminates her rights to the child. Because no judge in his right mind would deem it to be in the best interests of the child to enforce such an arrangement.
-
Just right
Bravo, Cary. That's a civilized solution to a gnarly problem, and I hope it works.
-
Cary is playing King Solomon!
By positing an absurd solution (cut the baby in half! have it but don't raise it!) Cary is testing the LW to see if she's really got motherhood in her. Based on her letter, he could easily have gone either way with his advice. It's clearly a tough, tough situation. However, if she actually goes through the exercise of writing down her dreams and ambitions for the future, they will either seem more important than her marriage (for that's really what's at stake, isn't it?) or they'll seem silly in the face of what her husband is giving up. Or, maybe she'll see that she can fulfill those dreams even with another child.
This situation reminds me a lot of that recent case in Britain where a woman and her partner created embryos, but they broke up before there were inseminated. He withdrew his consent, thereby denying her the possibility of ever having her own biological child. Maybe the LW could have the baby and her husband could raise it with the Brit?
-
Worked For Me
When I got married, I was totally ambivalent to having children, but my husband really really wanted them. So, I made him a deal: I'd get to work and follow my career and he could stay home and raise them. Of course, we are fortunate in that he is certainly more suited (temperament-wise) to daily child-rearing than I ever have been, so that has certainly increased our odds of success. But, so far, so good. In fact, a few years into parenthood I decided to change careers and have quit my job and we are spending our savings on graduate school for me. My husband continues to care for the children and make the house run while I go to school.
I mean, I do my fair share of parenting - putting kids to bed, helping with homework, caring for them while he gets to have adult time with his friends, you know all that stuff. But, as a general rule, he is the primary care giver and I am the secondary parent.
Having children is a huge decision and everyone should discern carefully what is right for them and their family. But, don't discount Cary's advice too quickly - it really is a reasonable alternative.