Husband changed his mind about baby. AIBU

[Wantanotherandanother]

Name changed for this. Need a fresh perspective on this problem please but be kind...

I'm 35 and husband is 48. Always planned to have kids, number not discussed but hoped we'd have at least two (more if I was lucky!). Had our first and at 6 months pp I was broody! Waited and waited and he didn't mention anything so recently brought it up given neither of us have time on our side and our 'baby' is nearly 2. He said he now feels he doesn't actually want any more and he's very much done. I feel a bit short changed and although so, so grateful to already have one, I always hoped to have more and he knew that. I feel like he went into this knowing he'd always refuse any more. His reasons are related to his age and that he just feels physically done with having young children around. Financially we'd be ok.

He has 3 teens to his ex and so obviously has had his fair share of nappies and sleepless nights.

AIBU? Can a marriage even survive this difference in opinion about something so huge? Neither of us wish to compromise. I feel so sad every time I see a pregnant lady or baby and don't think that ache will ever go away.

I can't believe the word compromise is being used when talking about a human life. This should be wanted by both parties.

Bullshit on stilts.

No one is entitled to, or owed, a baby. A baby, however, is entitled to be wanted and cherished by both parents!

Actually I don’t think the experience of men and women can be remotely compared in relation to reproduction.

However there was a female poster recently in that situation you have posed and everyone was posting telling her she was BU, she should stop leading him on and leave the relationship 💁🏼‍♀️

It’s not the “right to produce” with a specific individual. You misunderstand me. My point is he can’t expect her to remain in the relationship, if she wants a baby and he doesn’t . That’s just as much of an “ultimatum” and just as “coercive” as her demanding he has a baby or she will leave. They are precisely the mirror situations of each other. Yet when these topics come up, women are told that their needs and feelings don’t matter, that DH’s wishes take priority and if she leaves because she is so deeply unhappy, then she is the one responsible for breaking up the family. It’s totally twisted and hypocritical.

So glad I’m not the only one. The advice given on these threads is always so twisted.

How so? I’m quite sincere.

Yet when these topics come up, women are told that their needs and feelings don’t matter, that DH’s wishes take priority and if she leaves because she is so deeply unhappy, then she is the one responsible for breaking up the family. It’s totally twisted and hypocritical.

It’s her wants, not her needs. Her existing child has needs.

@Tandora No, he can’t expect her to remain and if he tried to then that would be coercive. However, if she chooses to leave and he doesn’t stand in her way, then it is her that is choosing to break up the family. She cannot say that he forced her to do it by refusing to have a child, because that is coercion. The facts are the facts, and what she chooses to do with them is completely on here. His choice is have a baby he doesn’t want or divorce. Coercion. Her choice is have counselling to live with and be satisfied with what she has, or prioritise a need for more babies elsewhere and divorce. She has an option that involves no coercion. He doesn’t.

That’s why people say she’s responsible, because he has no option to keep the family together except be forced to father a child, whereas she has a way of keeping the family together without forcing another person to have a child.

It's a poor and badly expressed point, then.

Yet when these topics come up, women are told that their needs and feelings don’t matter, that DH’s wishes take priority and if she leaves because she is so deeply unhappy, then she is the one responsible for breaking up the family

No. The EXISTING CHILD'S needs take priority. Or they do to any decent parent.

I haven't read all the replies on here, however I felt compelled to respond because I have been exactly in your position.

When I married my husband he had 3 children with his ex and had them pretty much 50-50. I really wanted 2 children and felt we had pretty much agreed that. We had our first child together and then I brought up the topic of a second ... and he was not keen. At all.

It was devastating really. I felt it was so unfair that he had the number of children her wanted and I didn't. Felt enraged that I expended to so much time, energy, emotion and money looking after our child AND his existing children and felt I was getting a pretty crappy deal at times. He felt overwhelmed physically and financially, worried he/we couldn't cope or spread his time fairly. 4 children is a lot but 5 would have been a stretch for all those reasons plus practical ones too such as bedrooms, car, holidays etc.

Neither of us were right. Neither of us were wrong. We both had strong feelings. Maybe - maybe I could have begged, pleaded, sulked or "accidental pregnancy" changed his mind but I think it always would have been there under the surface. I didn't want to split up and start again with someone else; with the knowledge that I'd only see my child part-time and have to split christmas etc.

We did not have another child. I have, for the most part, made peace with it. I do sometimes feel sad about it. (But I sometimes feel relief when I see my nephews being hellions.) My daughter has sibling relationships.

I've had to challenge a lot of my own existing thoughts around things: why did I want 2 kids? (Because I was one of 2). Not wanting an "only child" (actually I quite like being able to give them my all and tell them they are my favourite). How it would have impacted me physically and financially with work. As older parents, what if there had been additional needs that overwhelmed us?

It is entirely up to you and your husband to work through. I 100% understand how difficult it is and how you feel. Keep having some really honest conversations with each other and I wish you the best for your future.

No no no no. She is not “choosing” to break up the family any more than he is. They are both equally responsible. They both have needs and they both have choices. It’s totally unjust to make his needs the “default”, so that if she insists on her needs it’s “coercion” , but if he insists on his, it’s just the way things are and she should just “be satisfied with what she has”. I honestly can’t understand the hypocrisy/ double standards here.

I can understand a parent at nearly 50 with 4 DC has said 'I am done'

I can understand why you would want another DC

You need decide whether this impasse is worth breaking up over.

You need to keep talking, not to persuade each other to change their stance but to see whether you are strong enough as a couple to work through this.

He has two choices. One of them is to have a baby he doesn’t want. That would be coercion and terrible for the child, which deserves to be wanted by both parties. The other is to not have a baby and face the consequences. If those consequences are that SHE leaves, it is not his fault that the family is being broken up. The only way he could’ve stopped it was by having a baby he doesn’t want, which he should never he expected to do because that is coercion. Not having an unwanted baby is a selfless act for that baby. Blaming him for not doing it to save the family is coercion.

She also has two choices. One of them is to accept the children she has, with therapy if needed. That would be good for her mental well-being and for the existing children. The other is to leave and have a baby with someone else. That would be terrible for the existing children. If SHE leaves, then she is doing so to fulfil her own wants, and prioritising herself over the kids. It is her fault that the family is being broken up. She could’ve stopped it by helping herself to accept her lot and prioritising the needs of the children. Leaving to have more kids is a selfish act based on what she wants, not what’s best for the children.

Their choices are NOT the same, and that’s why the blame is NOT equal.

This really isn’t rocket science. And I’m an ardent fucking feminist.

@Steppered - your post is eloquent and wise. Sadly I don’t think that @Wantanotherandanother is coming back to the thread, to read what you wrote.

I honestly don’t know what is wrong with that poster, that they cannot see the difference. It beggars belief.

I can only assume they’ve some skin in the game via personal experiences.

It’s completely ridiculous @ItchyBillco - I’m assuming wilful refusal to understand or like you said, skin in the game. I think a young child could understand why it’s not the same.

Yes, she would be choosing to break up the family, whereas he’s choosing to maintain the status quo. Not cowing to emotional blackmail and the threat of divorce is not the same thing as actively choosing to break up a family.

She is not owed more children by him, and putting her desire (not ‘need’) for more children over the well-being of the child she already has is a shitty thing to do.

His existing children are not merely his past, and nor are they outside of his current nuclear family. They are also his present and future.

He is quite reasonable to not want further children, and he would also be quite reasonable if he didn’t have other children. He isn’t obliged to have children he doesn’t want, he’s not denying OP something he owes her. Her ‘feelings that overwhelm’ are not something so important that have to be prioritised at all costs, they’re something she’s going to have to deal with for herself. She isn’t entitled to have them indulged at the expense of everyone around her.

I find it odd that so many people are calling out that it would be emotional blackmail to tell him he has to have a child to save his marriage, yet are in the same breath emotionally blackmailing OP into thinking she must not have another child to save her marriage. Otherwise she's a shitty person breaking up a family who are all perfectly happy (except her but she just needs to get over it).

That's emotional blackmail too. I'm surprised people don't see it and are still doing it.

The OP seems to have fucked off so I guess this will fall on deaf ears but if you never discussed the numbers beforehand then I think YABU. He has every right to refuse. Your choice to leave him of course but I think it'd be quite a bad reason unless you envisage starting all over again with someone else or getting a sperm donor.

To be honest, even if they did discuss numbers, and he agreed to a second child, @Wantanotherandanother‘s dh is still entitled to change his mind, once the tiring reality of having a baby and three teenagers, at the age of 48 had come home to him.

@aSofaNearYou It’s not emotional blackmail to say that she has to not have another child to save her marriage. It’s a statement of fact. She literally cannot have another child in this marriage. She can have one outside of it but that would break it up. It comes down to marriage or another baby for her, end of.

People are suggesting that she work on accepting the reality of the position (not just “get over it” - therapy might help) because it will help with her well-being to do so, and yes, because it’s in the best interests of the child she already has.

I guess the alternative is for everyone to say “you go girl, split up that family to get your extra babies” but that’s, erm, not a position I’d support even remotely.

In my opinion it is emotional blackmail to tell her she's a shitty person splitting up a happy family, if this situation means she is unhappy. It's not something that would be done in other situations where one person in the relationship is unhappy.

It’s not emotional blackmail though, but even if it was, it’s true. She’s prioritising having another child over the stability of the child and family she already has, to the point of breaking up said family. Conversely he wants to maintain the status quo, which is significantly less disruptive.

Is her happiness solely dependent on having another child? If it is, why does this mean it’s something that should be prioritised above everything else, at the expense of the happiness of the child she does have?