12
   

im pregnant and my boyfriend is cheating again and again

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 06:17 am
@shewolfnm,
shewolfnm wrote:
I can absolutely understand WHY you guys are saying it

but that is so damn brutal. Just telling someone Give up your baby! your gonna **** it up if you dont.
You are not what is best for that baby. You cant do it.


jesus people.

As a mother who DID have a baby at 19 and DID choose to give her up, I have to tell you, sometimes it feels the equivalent to an abortion. It is an extreme choice with some emotional repercussions that no one can understand unless they do it themselves. You all seem to have a glamorous idea of a woman just being able to walk away from her baby and move on. Im here to tell you 10+ years later it is still the most painful choice I have ever made and NOT a decision to make lightly and definitely not the decision to make on the weight of strangers.
If u coud change the past, woud u decide DIFFERENTLY ?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 07:07 am
@shewolfnm,
Well said shewolf. She wolves would never give up their pups.

If you do the right thing and it goes wrong you can blame the world. If you do the wrong thing you have only yourself to blame.

I think it's disgraceful to recommend a young woman giving up her baby on the basis of a few lines in a post which were probably written under stress.

engineer
 
  3  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 07:26 am
@spendius,
Certainly we are asked to give advice based on a few lines in a post and you get what you pay for on a chat board, but saying someone should "never give up their pups" is no better than advising this young woman to opt for adoption. Depending on what country you are in and what your support options look like, the future for a 16 year old with a child looks bleak. Where I live, without another functioning household to effectively adopt the child, the chances of finishing high school are very small. The chances of getting a job capable of supporting a family are smaller still. Yet there are plenty of great couples unable to have children and willing to enter into open adoptions where the birth mother can watch their child grow up in a healthy environment while having the opportunity to grow up herself. Is that a hard, very adult decision to make? Absolutely. It is disgraceful to recommend it? Not that I can see.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 07:33 am
@shewolfnm,
Believe me, I do not readily promote adoption. Of all options to unwed, teenaged mothers, it is probably the worst in psychological terms, although today's open adoptions ease much of that worry about how the child is.

However, this girl has stated how vulnerable she is to the baby's father and his ability to manipulate her. While she recognizes her vulnerability, that recognition is not enough. She is too young to avoid his cycle of pleading and cheating.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 07:47 am
@engineer,
You shifted the goalposts there engineer. I never said "never" choose adoption. Nor would I. My advice is based on motherhood being natural.

The future for many people not only looks bleak but is bleak.

What's the big deal about finishing high school? Who can say what Chelsea's kid will end up doing. Chelsea is Chelsea and not subject to chances and statistics.

I said it was disgraceful to recommend adoption on the basis of that post. I didn't say it was disgraceful to recommend adoption full stop.

Look at the argument Madonna caused.

Your society should support Chelsea's kid like our's would. It's rich enough so it does have the choice. What's the kid done to deserve all this ****?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 07:51 am
@spendius,
Chelsea has resisted the temptation to have an abortion. That's a double plus.
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 08:16 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

What's the big deal about finishing high school? Who can say what Chelsea's kid will end up doing. Chelsea is Chelsea and not subject to chances and statistics.

In our society, finishing high school is almost a minimum requirement for getting a job that pays a living wage. Everyone is subject to chance, but having an education makes withstanding the whims of chance more likely. As to statistics, this woman should do everything she can not to become another one.

spendius wrote:

Your society should support Chelsea's kid like our's would. It's rich enough so it does have the choice. What's the kid done to deserve all this ****?

Yes, but it doesn't. Giving advice based on how the world should run seems less helpful than giving advice based on how it actually does. As you say, we don't know all the facts here. Maybe this woman has a supportive family to help her raise the child (although reading between the lines about her relationship with the baby father, I don't think this is the case.) Maybe she is independently wealthy (but I doubt it). We really don't even know where she lives. Still, advising adoption (options around which have grown dramatically in the last couple of decades and is fully supported by society) is not to my view in any way inferior to encouraging her to keep the child. I don't think you can make a decision like this by listing all the pros and cons on a spreadsheet and certainly it is the mother's choice for both her and her child, but adoption is reasonable alternative and can have a lot of benefits for both mother and child. Advising her to keep the child and tough it out seems equally cavalier to advising adoption off-hand.

Quote:
I said it was disgraceful to recommend adoption on the basis of that post. I didn't say it was disgraceful to recommend adoption full stop.

That post is all we have.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 08:22 am
@spendius,
No,it is not.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 08:26 am
I hear what you are saying spen, but I cant agree with the statement of she wolves would never give up their children'

In fact, I want to flip that and say that she wolves WOULD give up their children if that is what the situation called for.
It takes one hell of a person, not just a woman, to walk away from their/her baby like that.
With absolutely NO offense aimed at the poster, the little girl here is NOT in a state of mind to even say no to an abusive user. How in the world can one imagine she could withstand the very act of giving up her child?

The future is bleak for all that ARE bleak, not just those with kids.

Anyone can get ahead in life with or with out children.

The decision to go for adoption requires someone to be on a much different level than our poster is. Imagine what she would turn into if she chose adoption in the state she is now. She is the kind of person you can TELL to do something and she will just do it. You have to be careful with those people.

I know, and I do understand and I even stand BEHIND the very suggestion of adoption in this case. I really do.

But the delivery here, of that idea really sounds like people have the idea that adoption is nothing, a simple decision that should just be handed around like a business card.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 08:29 am
@spendius,
Our society does not support kids like Chelsea. Our society is up in arms about sex education in schools, supporting the totally unrealistic option of abstinence only teaching. At the same time, it allows suggestive advertising that promotes sexuality. To further compound the problem, welfare has been limited.

I would like to speak frankly. Half a century ago, white Americans openly looked down upon black Americans for having children out of wedlock. The pregnant bride was a subject of scandal. Now, couples, regardless of race, seem to have a child first then marry.
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 08:31 am
@plainoldme,
it was not only the black people that were looked down on.

The white families did the same thing.
The difference was that the white person had more to lose with their social standing so could enforce the marriage before the baby bump showed.

The blacks did not have that power.
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 01:14 pm
@shewolfnm,
shewolfnm wrote:

The difference was that the white person had more to lose with their social standing so could enforce the marriage before the baby bump showed.


Shotgun weddings were certainly prevalent in Black neighborhoods too when I was coming up. Whites didn't have such a monopoly on that at all. But there were more options available to them simply due to finances. If the boy cut out and and left town, which often happened with the help of his own parents, the pregnant daughter of a white family was often shipped away to a home for unwed mothers or to stay with a relative far away. And then the baby was put up for adoption and supposedly, no one in their hometown was the wiser. But high school girls disappeared and then reappeared so frequently, that in itself became a joke. After awhile, no one was really fooled.

Black families often could not afford to send their daughter to a home or away to stay with relatives. So, those girls had to stay and face the music, with or without the boy.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2010 07:57 pm
the point I was trying to make is that most whites looked down on blacks for having kids out of wedlock but now whites accept it without batting an eyelash.

Another thing that was common place among more well to do white families was having the family lawyer arrange for a court ordered abortion for pregnant high school and college girls before abortions were legal.
0 Replies
 
The Pentacle Queen
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2010 12:13 pm
@Green Witch,
Green Witch wrote:

I don't know what help is available in England for teenage mothers, but in America the social system shows little mercy. The majority of girls like this end up in grinding poverty, dead end jobs, abusive relationships and living in squalid neighborhoods that turn their children into dropouts, drug addicts and/or gang members. The court system will go after the father for child support, but father's like this just end up in our version of the Marshalsea when they can't pay. Few can rise above the odds that are set against them.


In England you get so much free **** it's practically a career option. Free flat, free money...
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2010 02:12 pm
@The Pentacle Queen,
Free semi-detached house in many places. Free money yes. Free prescriptions, free dental care, freedom from parents, free double glazing, free central heating, free any other necessities on application.

Chaps allowed to stay over one night a week. Which is hard to police.

I once calculated that a single Mum would need a husband earning about twice the national average wage to get her better off than she is.

The trouble is that they try to make them get a job when their youngest has left education and they are generally not habituated to working by then.

We look after our single mothers. I daresay a fair proportion of our infantry were born of teenage Mums.

It's definitely a career option.
0 Replies
 
honeybabes0810
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 03:30 pm
@chelseaxo,
I'm in the same boat only I'm 22 and I already have one kid...I am going thru exactly the same thing I can't take it either I want to leave my bf but I've been w him for two years and he treats my lil girl so good but he don't seem to care abt me bc he's doing the same as ur bf...I can not give advice I just kno that its not easy and its not good for the kids to see there mom hurtin...but I have no where to go I've already raised one kid on my own so I'm not scared to b a single parent just can't leave my bf idk y and my family wants me to but I just can't Sad I have gotten to the point of givin up on her
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 09/21/2021 at 06:33:26