Partner does not want another baby but I do

[Septmum2023]

My partner (33m) and I (32f) have been together almost 6 years and we had our DS in Sept 2023. We always said we wanted 2 children and decided we would start trying for baby no2 this month. He told me yesterday he has changed his mind and only wants one now.

I am completely devastated as I always imagined myself with 2 and I want my son to have a sibling. I feel like I've been blindsided as he is telling me so late.

His reasons are: having less time, being more stressed, money and just not looking forward to having another.

He has now said, its a never say never, but equally, cant see himself changing his mind. I don't want to split up our family as I love it so much but I worry if it does not happen I will struggle to get past it.

Does anyone have any advice?

It’s totally valid to end a relationship if it is not what you agreed, and you are not happy. Stop making it out like it’s not.
Furthermore, it is OP’s DH who reneged on their plans for their family, so if the result were the demise of the marriage the primary responsibility for that would be on him.

Curious logic. Feeling at one’s limit with child rearing- and deciding ‘no more’- can hardly be compared to DV or adultery, where clearly the perpetrator is at fault for the end of the relationship.

But otherwise I agree that if the relationship no longer works for one party, then he or she has the right to end it, and must take responsibility for that. To suggest otherwise smacks of emotional blackmail.

No one is owed or entitled to x number of children, but a child is entitled to feel wanted by both parents. A child is not a new toy where any and all means to get it are legitimate.

Obviously there are relationships where one partner can’t have a child and their partner has one with donor contributions and they stay together happily. Duh. In those relationships, both people wanted to raise a child together.

But I literally don’t believe you that there are relationships where one parent doesn’t want a child and is happy to help raise a donor conceived one their partner has. It just doesn’t make any logical sense. People who don’t want children object to living with them, the daily work of raising them or being financially responsible for them, there’s no one out there who is fine with both of those things but is adamantly against having a genetic link to their wife’s child.

And if you’re not stupid enough to think that OP’s husband will be happy to equally raise OP’s donor child, what are you suggesting? That the husband just lives in the house with the child and doesn’t interact with them? Like a pet he didn’t want- “I don’t want a cat, so you need to pay for everything, do all the care and attention while I tolerate its existence”. What a disgusting way to suggest raising a child, particularly when there’s a sibling involved who the father would be loving in front of them.

It’s not curious reasoning at all, it could apply to many thing. One person decides they want an open relationship- for example. Or they never want to work. Or they want to live a particular lifestyle that would be intolerable for OP, or move to a different country or part of the country. Would you then blame OP for the end of the relationship if it were something she couldn’t tolerate or would make her miserable ? Of course not. Only on the children issue, because mumsnet holds some ridiculous line that it is unreasonable and entitled for a woman to want children . Which is absurd- since wanting children is one of the most natural, fundamental, important aspects of life, family and relationships, and the right to reproduce/ make choices for oneself about reproduction is one of the most important rights there is.

Such reproductive choices are not made in a vacuum, however.

Do you work full time or is your DH mainly supporting the family? If so, I understand how stressed he is. Your son is close in age to my dd and I don’t want another any time soon. I thought I wanted 2, but you never know until you’ve had a child.

If you don’t believe me, I can’t help you. Clearly you lack both life experience and imagination such that you can’t even begin to conceive of situations different to the heteronormative, white picket fence bubble you are in.

As I said, there’s no need for this obsession with sperm donation. There’s also coparenting. And absolutely there are families where one part of the couple didn’t want/ produce a child, the other did, and they worked it out- remained together. In straight couples it might happen more with men as women are less likely to assert themselves in that way, but it happens the other way around to. Of course it does. Whether you believe it or not is neither here nor there.

Anyway, I didn’t want to derail the thread.

The point to OP was simply to remind her that she is entitled to have boundaries for herself regarding what she wants for her family, her fertility, her life, her existing child (eg another sibling). Her husband has made these choices for himself without thinking about the impact on her happiness- she’s entitled to do exactly the same.
She should think about what her boundaries are and hold firm. Hopefully they can work it out
x

No choices are made in a vacuum

there’s no one out there who is fine with both of those things but is adamantly against having a genetic link to their wife’s child.

Yes, astonishing that you had to say it.

I think you're right to give it a few weeks and then calmly revisit.

One suggestion though - when you're doing that, make sure you're listening. Really listening and trying to understand. Your posts set out how you've been telling him that his feelings/views are wrong - eg you've "explained" to him about things. (And ten years down the track or two, I totally disagree that two don't take up more time that one, at any point in their lives so far.)

Instead, just make sure you're listening. Ask questions that are about trying to further understand his feelings and viewpoints, rather than trying to convince him that he's wrong. Neither of you is objectively wrong, neither of you has the "correct" viewpoint or right answers. This is likely to take time and working through if you want the relationship to survive, regardless of what the final result ends up being.

Clearly you lack both life experience and imagination such that you can’t even begin to conceive of situations different to the heteronormative, white picket fence bubble you are in.

You spout this at everyone who disagrees with you.

It's getting boring.

If someone decides that they want to change the established fact and current practice of their relationship in a major way - whether shifting to an open relationship, moving country, having another child, whatever - then it is on them to decide whether that things is more important to them than their relationship, if their partner doesn't also want to make the change.

In an actual equal partnership, life-altering changes need to be agreed to by both partners. If one partner doesn't agree to the change, the one seeking it needs to decide what's more important - the relationship and everything that comes with it (eg existing children) or the change they are seeking. If it's the latter then yes - it's their choice and responsibility to break up the existing relationship so they can pursue that change.

That's not saying they are wrong, or bad, to do this. But it's recognising that it's an active choice - and so the comparison to a partner who doesn't want to make the life-altering change isn't valid.

he’s the one making the change.
The plan was for two children - that’s what they agreed for their life and family. Of course he can change his mind, but he’s the one making the change.
If a couple agreed to marriage and one party changed their mind, would you blame the other for breaking up the relationship?
The distinctions you are trying to draw are false.

Anyway, this discussion is neither here nor there.

The facts are that OP has choices.

You present one set of options as the moral, practical choice, and the other set as the selfish, impractical option. (I think that perspective is narrow, judgemental and informed by patriarchy , but, whatever).

OP has a range of choices and equal power in the relationship to decide what she wants her family, life, fertility to look like. Just as her DH does.

Rhetorical question for your reflection -

Why is that proposition so astonishing to you? Aren’t there people who are adamant they must have a genetic link to their children? Why is the reverse so inconceivable?

It’s not a question of agreeing or disagreeing with me. I’m sharing some information about how some families work things out- these are social realities. You and other posters are saying that’s impossible because it doesn’t fit your life experience and you can’t conceive of it 🤷🏼‍♀️.

It’s all starting to sound like a Friday afternoon debate in a 1970s Sociology A-level class…

I hope the OP and her DH are able to sort this out between themselves.

@Tandora do you have any thought about the child?

If you always spoke about 2, and you married on the assumption that you would have 2. He should at least discuss openly his reasons and try to understand you. Can you try couples therapy?

I wouldn't like if my DH suddenly took such a decision without discussing with me. I would resent him although Probably wouldn't divorce over that because of the current child.

Are his reasons valid? As in, you wouldn't have enough money to support both well? Does he work a lot that wouldn't have enough time for both?

😁
Indeed

Too much theorizing and what ifs.

Yes, that's why I specifically qualified the concept of change in my post to be around life-altering changes. There is a massive gulf between "let's aim to have two children" and then finding, when faced with the realities of parenthood, that you find it far too daunting and that changing the current situation in an irreversible way is something you don't feel able to do or have reservations about.

People change as they gain age and experience. They learn more about themselves, what they value and what they struggle with. Healthy relationships find ways to navigate the changes - whether by adapting and changing too, or by acknowledging that the change is too much to make the relationship tenable.

I agree the OP has choices around whether the change she wants is more important than the reality she currently has.

Of course.

Presumably that's one of the reasons that OP would like to have another child - to give her DC a sibling? Not that there's anything inherently wrong with being an only child; of course that works for some families, and there are significant advantages to that as well. But from my own personal experience, having my second DC was honestly one of the best things I ever did for my first DC. I also have siblings myself and I wouldn't be without them for the world (as a child or now as an adult).

Meanwhile, having a happy mum, who feels fulfilled and satisfied with her life is also another really important factor in protecting the best interests and wellbeing of the child.
A deeply unhappy mum, who resents her DH and feels dissatisfied by the life choices he imposed on her - but who acquiesces for the sake of her child - does no good for any child at the end of the day, and isn't a good example to set for them either.
That's not to say that people can't compromise. Maybe OP can talk it through with her DH and realise that she can be happy with one, or maybe she will change his mind.
But OP has every right to consider her own wellbeing and set boundaries for herself, just as her DH has done.

You have to respect his decision and decide if a family with him and your existing child is enough, or if your desire to have another baby is more important. It's not really a right or wrong situation, but only you can decide what is the main priority for yourself.

A deeply unhappy mum, who resents her DH and feels dissatisfied by the life choices he imposed on her - but who acquiesces for the sake of her child

Or a deeply unhappy father who resents his wife by forcing fatherhood on him?
Then the mother resents her partner for not pulling his weight to parent a child he didn't want?

If having another child is more important to her than anything else she needs to leave and find another option.

@JassyRadlett you are the voice of common sense.

Haha. That's fair. It wasn't my intention to bring the conversation to that level, so apologies for that.

Yes no one wants a situation where either parent is unhappy. That's why they have to reach a compromise that works for both parties. OP and DH are completely equal in that. Why are you putting it all on OP, to sacrifice, to compromise, to take responsibility and blame?

Why don't you say for example of the DH:

"if not having another child is more important to him than anything else, he needs to leave".

It's the imbalance with which you are analysing the situation - whereby DH's choices are reasonable, the default, the trumps, (even though he is the one who has changed the goalposts!) and OP is the one who needs to compromise or be held responsible for breaking up the marriage. It's that part of your reasoning that I strongly object to. It's not only unfair, it's false.

Meanwhile, OP's DH probably see's things this way (your way) too! Which is probably why he feels entitled to make independent decisions for himself, without considering broader impacts on his wife and family, and without any willingness to consider a compromise.

Equalising that power imbalance is the best means of helping OP and her DH come to the fairest compromise, which balances the different needs of each partner most equitably - arriving at a solution that will ultimately work better for everyone, including their DC.