Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think people shouldn't be so selfish

176 replies

Christmasishere · 16/12/2011 18:51

I was listening to the radio the other day and a Mother was talking about how she chose her career/studying over living with her son.
She fell pregnant in her last term of Uni, had the baby, then broke from the Father. She wanted to do a masters in Leeds (or somewhere...can't quite remember) but could not get childcare/appropriate in the city where she wished to study. So, the child went to live with his Father in, say, Birmingham. Her career took her to Norfolk, she found the distance very hard and couldn't think of things to do with her son once she got there. The distance and work commitments meant she didn't see her son much at all while he was growing up.
Now, to most people, she pretends that she doesn't have a child as it hurts her too much to think that she doesn't have a good relationship with her son. She mentioned nothing about how much this would have hurt her son, knowing that his Mother chose work, money etc over raising him, and not choosing to live closer at least.
I had my child young, whilst not being with my now Husband very long. We made sacrifices, but thats just what we did - there was no option - we were a family. Because of the way we threw ourselves into being a family and made it work, we are a very happy little family. Yes, there were things I wanted to do - travel, start a career etc but, it is not our child's fault they came along at a time in our lives when we weren't settled so why should he suffer?
I am not saying everyone should marry someone and set up home with partners they don't want to. All I think is that a career and life dreams that do not fit around the children should come second to raising the children that were brought into this world through no choice of anyones other than their parents.
I just think this women is truly selfish and raising our children should come above all other aspects of life.

OP posts:
LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 21:13

I've just quoted you.

She was not a loving Mother - she pretended he did not exist.

You explicitly associate her not being 'loving' with her pretending he didn't exist, implying that the one is evidence of the other. But earlier you said it was because she was hurt. This is really inconsistent and I do think you are twisting your own OP to make her look worse.

Original poster
Christmasishere · 16/12/2011 21:19

LRD not loving her son, and not being a loving parent are two different things. Yes she said she had no son because she was hurt by her own actions. However, she did not think of what denying her sons existence would do to her son emotionally.
I have in no way twisted my op. I have no need to do so.

OP posts:
LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 21:21

Yeah right! Grin

You took ten minutes to come up with that because you really think they're different things? No, I don't think so.

You are getting more extreme in your interpretation of the behaviour of a woman you don't know. It's quite obvious.

ViolaCrayola · 16/12/2011 21:23

YABU - it isn't a decision I would make but the part of your post that is really unreasonable is

Yes, there were things I wanted to do - travel, start a career etc but, it is not our child's fault they came along at a time in our lives when we weren't settled so why should he suffer?

Are you really saying that people shouldn't travel or start a career when they have had children? Or that it will necessarily lead to the child suffering? Surely people can do these things and have children? It is obviously sad that this woman had to live apart from her son, but your post overall suggests that people are selfish for pursuing their own dreams when they have children - which I don't agree with at all.

Original poster
Christmasishere · 16/12/2011 21:25

I think you are over reacting a little bit now.
I don't know what the 10 minutes thing is about.
I do not think I am getting "extreme" at all.

OP posts:
LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 21:27

Really?

Well, if you say so.

CurlyhairedAssassin · 16/12/2011 21:31

Op, I'd give up if I were you, I think people are being deliberately drunk obtuse about your thread.

ANY parent, whether they live in the same house as their child or not, who does not make much effort to be a loving parent to their child is shit in my opinion. It's all about the effort. FGS, most military parents are just not even in this equation, there are plenty of army parents who write, email, Skype their kids as much as they can while they are away and who spend every second of leave with them when they are at home, taking an interest in them, making the effort to play with them and take them out and listen and talk to them and just, well, LOVE them. I'm pretty sure that all the lone parents on this thread whose ex partners don't bother to see their child anymore and who post on here so upset, know exactly what parental shortcomings I and the op are talking about.

It is down to effort and trying. If the op is right and the radio woman just found the journey to see her child too much of a hassle and couodnt be arsed in the end then bloody hell - yes, she SHOULD feel guilty! Most parents would go through hell or high water to be with their child.

As for people even bringing bereaved parents onto this thread, then really, you should be ashamed. The op is simply saying that if you are a parent, alive, and on this planet, then the EFFORT to be actively involved in your child's life is what is important. I didn't hear the radio item but I guess that what the woman was admitting to is a lack of extra effort, and it's for this that she is now feeling guilty.

Feminine · 16/12/2011 21:32

Excellent post curly totally agree!

Original poster
Christmasishere · 16/12/2011 21:33

Thanks Curlyhaired. x

OP posts:
Original poster
Christmasishere · 16/12/2011 21:35

Thanks Feminine x

OP posts:
TheRuderBarracuda · 16/12/2011 21:35

Do you have a link OP or do you know which radio programme this is on and I'll have a look and listen

I wonder why this was considered newsworthy/worth discussing. I hardly ever hear interviews with non-resident/absent fathers bemoaning their decisions to abandon their children and yet statistically there's a lot more of them around. How odd.

FWIW I don't think 2 unhappy parents together 'for the sake of the kids' is the best thing for children but I do think both parents (together or apart) who are loving involved and engaged in their children's lives are the best thing for children. The fact that she was the non-resident parent (presumably the dad was a good dad but we don't know that?) needn't have meant she couldn't have had a relationship with her son.

What do you think happened OP? Did "Mother Nature" malform this woman in some way so that she didn't do what was expected of her?

Original poster
Christmasishere · 16/12/2011 21:41

It was on Radio 4, in the evening last week I think.
I just think that she had her heart set on a study/career path and when a baby didn't fit into that she ran away. Now she is older she regrets it but feels sorry for herself, not her son. She is sorry for what SHE missed out on, not what her son missed out on. I don't think she shouldn't have studied or worked, just made better choices after deciding to have a child.

OP posts:
LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 21:45

But she did choose to have the baby, didn't she? I mean, we can't know why exactly but presumably she thought she and her partner could be good parents - and obviously he did take the child on and presumably did want him.

I'm really not convinced she could have studied anywhere and looked after the child, though. Especially after doing an undergrad degree with current fees, she must have had finances on her mind.

I mean, it's all very well to say she should have made 'better choices', but what was really available? Maybe the MA was the best option.

CurlyhairedAssassin · 16/12/2011 21:48

Oh, and just wanted to respond to littlestlightonthetree's comment: "since when does life revolve around children?"

Well, what a strange comment! duh, when they are little, yes it DOES!!!! That's what the sacrifices of parenthood entails when children are small, you put their needs before your own. If parents didn't recognise this then we'd have far more feckless parents buggering off to benidorm for the week leaving their 2 year old in the care of their 12 year old.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 21:51

curly - really? With most couples I know, actually, at least one person's life does not revolve around the child - because that person is out earning money to feed the family.

You cannot hold down a job and let your life revolve around a child. This is IMO a problem.

CurlyhairedAssassin · 16/12/2011 21:58

Yes, but you can let your life OUTSIDE of work revolve round the child, which is what my husband does. He works long hours yet still recognises the need to make the effort to spend time with the kids at weekends rather than in the pub or at the match (give or take the odd time here or there!).

Again, it really is all about the effort you put in to be there for your kids WHEN YOU CAN.

CurlyhairedAssassin · 16/12/2011 22:01

Btw, OP, I am really curious to know what career this woman chose that was so specific that she could only live in one far-away part of the country? [nosey]

LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 22:02

Yes, that is true.

I do see that it sounds like she struggled a lot to spend time with her son and probably lots of us would not have done what she did. It just seems unfair to say she is selfish when she was doing work, not just enjoying herself, and she sounds to have been upset she wasn't more involved, not complacent.

I think if there were better options for women to have children and be parents, maybe she wouldn't have felt she had to make this choice. That is the thing that seems really sad to me.

LikeAnAdventCandleButNotQuite · 16/12/2011 22:03

Loving the fact that this woman (subject of the OP) is getting slated for doing what many men do Hmm

As she is a mother, she is expected to be the main carer and forfeit her career. How dare she break from the norm and allow the OTHER PARENT to be the main carer??

helpmabob · 16/12/2011 22:10

And I am loving how many people are defending this woman yet there are threads devoted to the evil, feckless parents that wean a few weeks early/feed kids going round the supermarket/don't teach them table manners - then the insults and criticisms of lazy parenting come thick and fast. But a woman who buggers off to study and can't be arsed to travel 4 hours to spend time with her ds is a paragon of feminist virute and just a poor victim of misogynist society. MN at its most rational Xmas Hmm

helpmabob · 16/12/2011 22:10

not virute, virtue

LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 22:13

MN isn't the borg. We all have different views - there's nothing irrational about it.

CurlyhairedAssassin · 16/12/2011 22:14

I would slate any man who doesn't make an effort for their kid too. What I think is the reason this woman's story was highlighted on the radio is because she felt guilty about what she'd done. You don't hear of many men going all angsty about having missed their kids' childhoods, maybe that's because they just don't feel as guilty???? Men and women DO see things through different eyes, emotion-wise, they do. And men generally don't tend to sit and brood about their past actions too much.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 22:21

I have to say, I don't believe the stuff about men and women being that different.

I think it's more that this woman is encouraged to feel guilty - so she does. Sad

LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/12/2011 22:22

I wish they'd interviewed the dad too though - it would have been interesting to hear what he thought about the path he took.