To think not having children because you've never met the right person...

[user1485342611]

is just as sad for someone as not being able to have children due to infertility?

I have a friend in this position. She has always longed for a baby but just never met the right person to marry and start a family with. She's 45 now and recently had to have a hysterectomy.

I was saying to a mutual friend how sad I felt for her because she would have been a great mum. The friend just shrugged her shoulders and said 'well, that's life'.

Fair enough, you might think. But mutual friend has been terribly sympathetic to other friends who have been unable to conceive. So AIBU to think she should be equally sympathetic towards this friend?

and both equally deserving of sympathy and empathy

But you don't get to decide what is deserving of my sympathy, or what I empathise with. You can only decide that for yourself.
Both situations may make the people involved equally sad, but I don't have to find them equally sad. That isn't how emotion works.

*As a childless woman who hasn't met the right person, and is probably now unlikely to conceive if I do, I couldn't agree more with the OP.

I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of compassion in some responses though.*

I agree with this. Going it alone with a sperm donor isn't an easy solution.

My take on it is that a single woman without children has a double whammy of no partner AND no children. A happily married woman who can't have children still has the partner

Good point.

LiveLong - of course nobody gets to decide who is "deserving" of your sympathy and empathy.

Equally, nobody gets to decide whether others are more sympathetic to someone dying from lung cancer as a result of smoking or someone dying from lung cancer as a result of exposure to environmental radon. However, I would think most people would be capable to recognising both are dreadful situations and worthy of sympathy.

Both situations are equally sad. For whatever reasons both women do not have a much longed for child. How can one be worse than the other when the outcome for both is the same?

Then why are people telling us that we should find them equally sympathetic?
You cant have it both ways.

LiveLong - I don't think anyone is telling you that you should be equally sympathetic to both.

Rather, people are a bit shocked that you don't in the same way people would be a bit shocked that you might be sympathetic to someone with lung cancer due to environmental reasons but either less, or not at all, sympathetic to someone with lung cancer due to smoking. Most people would consider both to be equally deserving of sympathy and would feel someone who felt differently was a bit lacking in compassion.

So you don't think anyone is telling us that, and then you go on to tell us exactly that?

No, I am not telling you that you should be equally sympathetic to both. I cannot tell you how to feel.

I am telling you that I believe they are equally deserving of sympathy and that I think someone who does not see that, while entitled to their belief, is lacking in compassion.

So you're not telling people how to feel, you're just judging them very negatively if they don't feel as you do.

Oh thats so much better then.

I think it's possible to judge your dismissive friend as lacking in empathy ("that's life" is an APPALLING answer) without having to rank and rate all forms of female suffering due to childlessness.

Anyone who is not sympathetic towards this situation must have a heart of stone

I wouldn't say I'm judging people very negatively because they feel differently to me. It's not something I would expend that much energy on.

However, in the sense that we all make judgements based on the information available to us, I would judge people as lacking in compassion in this instance. It doesn't mean I think they are bad people or incapable of being compassionate in other circumstances. Yes, it's a negative judgement but I am not judging the person as a whole, simply judging their attitude in this instance in the same way I would judge someone who littered or who thought people shouldn't get benefits if they haven't paid in to the system previously, for example.

In some countries, when they say 'that's life', they mean it in a sympathetic tone, i.e it's the way of the world but yes, pretty horrible. I was told a relative had died when I was living abroad and a colleague said 'That's life!' which I found quite upsetting until I'd got used to the different use of the phrase. No excuse for your friend unless she's not British though as I think it always sounds flippant to our ears.

I just like this foreign sense of 'that's life' for expressing that parts of it are utterly horrible but all part and parcel of its random nature. It's how I feel about fertility (from personal experience) and how I would feel about the childless friend - sympathetic and sort of hopeless accepting.

Anyone who is not sympathetic towards this situation must have a heart of stone

You can be sympathetic, but to a greater or lesser degree. And like pretty much everything in life, it very much depends on the individual circumstances.

I wouldn't say I'm judging people very negatively because they feel differently to me

You should, because you did. That is what your post was. It was entirely unambiguous.

Let it go.

LiveLong - you have taken a single segment out of my post and misrepresented it.

If you read my full post, you will see I am not denying that I am judging. I am denying that I am judging people very negatively.

My judgement is not strong enough to be classified as "judging them very negatively". I am judging a particular attitude as I think they are lacking compassion in this instance. However, I am not judging the person as a whole. I know nothing about the individuals who are posting here so I can only judge based on what is posted. I make no apologies for judging particular attitudes. I expect most people do the same as otherwise we would have very little discussion about topics.

Both situations are equally sad. For whatever reasons both women do not have a much longed for child. How can one be worse than the other when the outcome for both is the same?

The outcome for both women isn't the same. One has partner but no children. The other has neither a partner nor children. However, some people will be more resilient, cope better with their situation

I disagree. Telling people they lack compassion is a very negative thing to say. In fact I think its one of the worst thing you can say to someone. And it also makes you sound arrogant as well as judgemental, as if your style of compassion is the only valid one.

Please read my posts. I said lacking compassion in THIS instance. We all have different situations for which we will feel compassion. We all judge others based on our own attitudes and experiences.

You seem to be taking it as an attack on the person as a whole, rather than a judgement of a single attitude the person has. That is not my intent.

We're obviously not going to agree on this so I'm leaving it here.

As a childless woman who hasn't met the right person, and is probably now unlikely to conceive if I do, I couldn't agree more with the OP.

I'm with you, BeBeatrix. I think of myself as "socially infertile" - I think it's more officially called "childless by circumstance." And I did think of going it alone, but for all sorts of reasons - ethical, emotional, financial - I didn't think it was right to have a child simply to satsify my own emotional neediness.

although plenty of couples do exactly that

I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of compassion in some responses though.

Indeed. All those people who say that having a child brings out their deepest feelings & they are more compassionate & less selfish?

All those people who say that having a child brings out their deepest feelings & they are more compassionate & less selfish?

Who has said that?

as if "going it alone" was just a matter of choice and in every way as straight forward as doing it with a partner....
...you can't seriously think that can you????

This. For those of you who glibly say "she could go it alone" - have you ever sat down & thought about doing it? I have, and I know quite a few other women who have. We all made different choices & decisions. But it was not easy. No way was it simply "Oh I want a child. I don't have a husband, so I'll just dial up some sperm." And those of you who judge an infertile by circumstance woman for not doing this, Have.No.Idea.

Nobody said it was simple or easy. Nobody judged anyone for not doing it. All people said was that it was an OPTION that a single woman has if she wants children. Which it is.

I wouldn't do it, far too hard. But it's a fact that it is an option that people can and do choose.