AIBU to think choosing a second child with an absent father is selfish?

[Havemechippytea]

NC for this because outing. My cousin admitted to me last night she’s pregnant again with her on off boyfriend whom she’s now dumped because she “has always wanted two kids” and I’m shocked. I don’t know if I’m being very judgy here but I’d have thought the wellbeing of the existing child should come first and you shouldn’t just have more kids with a crap father because that’s what YOU want?

I almost understand having one child with a crap bloke as they may not have realised what a useless father he is or desperately wanted a child, but AIBU to think going on to have a second with a useless/absent father is very selfish and not good parenting? Or do the benefits of a sibling outweigh the impact of a useless father?

I suspect I’ll get flamed so got my tin hat on.

Disappointed, I thought this thread was going to be about Molly-May and Tommy...

Ah that would be ‘for money and publicity’ in that case

Agree, blended families is really selfish to me. And this woman isn’t relying on the taxpayer so I really can’t judge her.

When the desire to have a child overrides any actual consideration for the circumstances into which that child will be born, of course it is selfish.

Giving her child a sibling who could be there for each other throughout their lives especially if they have a useless dad.

Easy to see that point of view.

It's not ideal but if the first child is thriving then the devil you know might seem attractive. The feckless man is already a part of her life and there's less risk of clashing parenting styles or custody battles if he's generally disinterested.

We do actually need people to have children, and I'm not sure there's enough interested and involved men to go around. Sadly.

The misogyny in assuming a single must be on benefits is off the charts

I wouldn’t judge this either, she obviously wanted siblings with the same dad and they’re probably better off living with her without his involvement and - thank the lord - no step parent (unless she acquires another partner in the future of course)

I don't think there is anything wrong with either. As long as the father isn't a terrible person and if he's just a bit useless (as many men are) then it might be actually better for the kids to know him and his family. It's potentially more people for the kids to have as support. Siblings are also a huge support as you go through life. If she can support the kids and raise them on her own then good on her.
I agree with PP blended families can be very tricky for children though.

I know a few acquaintances who had kids in their late 30s with sperm donors and have lovely happy children. I notice on mumsnet mums who chose to do this get an awful lot of criticism yet having a child with a wildly inappropriate partner seems acceptable. The amount of women who “accidentally “ get pregnant with such partners as well… I’m sure some are accidents but a lot are not . I personally think it’s much worse than using a sperm donor.

Basically what @tiramisugelato has posted ⬇️

Because it’s done for entirely selfish purposes. Nobody has kids to benefit the workforce or to contribute to society - they do it because they want them.

No-one has children for altruistic purposes.

and this from @PollyBell ⬇️

Women's justifications to breed shouldn't go before what is best for the children they keep on having

Although the wording could be less controversial.

Interestingly, I have had a lot of likes on my post from many people who agree with me.

OK sorry I got confused in what you were saying. I should have said what has pensions etc got to do with this topic? In response to someone saying it's selfish having children. If the mum isn't scrounging off the system then its not selfish, however I DO believe its self indulgent to have multiple children.

Totally agree like a sperm donor has actually volunteered to give sperm and nowadays kids can have the right to track down the donor so there is no excuse for dragging some useless unwilling man into the mix. Yet somehow this is seen as the more acceptable thing to do

Not remotely as 46% of single parents in the UK are claiming benefits. That's nearly half the single parent population so as an assumption it's not unsurprising.

YANBU. At some point in my lifetime we have moved from supporting and appreciating single parents, and fighting the demonization of them by people like Peter Lilley; to societal acceptance that children don't need fathers, men don't even need to pretend to step-up, and the self-actualisation of the parents outweighing the needs of the child.

I don't think this development has been good for women, children, men or society as a whole.

no OP, I think this is logical. She wants 2dcs. She can afford to support them as a single mother and accepts she will be a single mother.

She hasn’t tricked him- as an adult if he didn’t want a second child with his partner he could easily use contraception and he knew they were on and off relationship, that his partner and mother of his child was beginning to have enough of his behaviour.

This all seems a logical way to approach it.

Not having 2 “baby dads” to deal with, only one. She knows he won’t pay out, she’s budgeted accordingly. It’s safer and easier to get pregnant naturally than via ivf. She knows what she’s getting, his family and both dcs are full siblings.

it wouldn’t be my choice, but now she’s had one child with him, having the much wanted second with the same man rather than trying to date to find a good man or the costs and risks of using a donor makes perfect sense.

Let’s not pretend that women have babies as a service to society though. It is a biological urge to continue your genetic line.

Why are you thinking that all retirees are thick? They know they funded the pensions of the older generation and that the current system is set up in that way.

The social model is outdated. society is funding education, healthcare etc for the future workforce and helping their parents with the cost of raising them, but in return those children need to contribute economically as soon as possible. The better educated aren’t contributing until later (obviously) and the less skilled are having to have their NLW earnings topped up. Then add women taking time out to have babies which need to be funded etc…

It isn’t going so well for the current younger generation right now. Too many people getting degrees, not enough jobs, then expecting to jump into high paying jobs. Reluctance to understand that a job is a job and sometimes not ideal. So we have a huge amount of NEET people. The use of COVID as an excuse for everything.

The whole thing needs to be reviewed. Everyone should have the right to be supported but also the responsibility to contribute where possible.And it’s not happening

I didn't. For the very good reason that the rationale for having those babies has no bearing on our need for them. It's immaterial.

Utter nonsense.

Why utter nonsense? Can you not see merit in sibling having both parents and all grandparents in common?

I suppose it's better than going and having a second child with someone else. The results of that would be either 2 irresponsible father's in the families life, or the siblings having a disparity in how they are treated by their father. Being an only child with one parent isn't ideal either. I think your cousin is probably doing what is best for the first child with the poor circumstances they are in.

Totally agree, I'm surprised some posters think a dad that's quiet absent and useless is in any way better than a sperm donor. I think they haven't actually thought through the effects on a child trying to understand why their Dad doesn't love with them, make an effort, see them in a way everyone else's dads do. It's setting them up for a bunch of emotional problems that wouldn't be there with a donor.

Oh but it's everybody's business how many kids people have. The planet is becoming seriously overcrowded, great swathes of Africa and South America are being devastated because people keep breeding kids, and it's mostly kids they can't afford. Why the hell are so many women obsessed with babies babies babies? Is that all they can do, f*CK and drop kids??? And men think they have an absolute right to climax inside a woman whenever they want to, even if another baby might kill her, and he can't feed and clothe the brats he already has. And every taxpayer is paying far too much for these irresponsible, feckless breeders. I'll stand by for all the outraged illogical replies!!!