IphigeniaSaysHi Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 My boyfriend and I recently just purchased a Pomeranian puppy. He is cute, an awesome companion, but he sucks the life out of me. Constant fussing- and he's just a dog. I am a full time student, a full time worker, and I cannot handle all of the stress. A child would level me. I would have to give up a lot. You give up a huge part of your freedom, if not all of it, and I don't wish to. Link to comment
Seraphim Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 OK if you love your freedom and work and go to school why get a puppy? You will have your freedom limited for the next 14 odd years. Why not get fish? You just throw some flakes in the tank once a day and when you are on holidays you put in a cube, no impingment on freedom at all and they cost FAR FAR less. Link to comment
goodtimez Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Having a child you don't want is possibly the worst thing in the world. They deserve to be wanted! I agree, im a 22 yr old guy, with what i would say is a level head on my shoulders, Im in school trying to persue a career so i can provide for kids if i ever have them, not saying i will or wont (hopefully not til i get a good job anyways) but nothing pisses me off more than a guy who has a kid with some girl & doesnt take care of it, i was brought up in a house where my parents planned ahead very well before having kids & made sure they really wanted them & could support them. which I believe is the mature & responsible thing to do. kids dont deserve to be mistreated & should have every opportunity in the world while growing up Another thing i dont like is for mothers that will "pawn" their kids off on their mothers, i think if you dont want the baby use birth control & be prepaired for the consequences because it doesnt always work. anyways i just thought I'd post my $0.02 on the topic since it was brought up Link to comment
hers Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Victoria not all people who don't want children are incapable of loving & caring for another being. Some people, like me, love their dogs like a mother loves their child but do not want the same level of responsibility. If anything, my having a dog has helped me realize that I wouldn't be the best mother, strictly bc I'm selfish with my time & energy. My dog adapts to that fine but a child can't necessarily. So just bc we don't want children does not mean we are incapable of giving the same love to another creature. Link to comment
Seraphim Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Yes, I know, but she said she does not want impingment on freedom, and a dog is just that. They need care, a lot of the time. As you know because you have your own business caring for other people's animals. Animals are also a huge responsibility. Link to comment
hers Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 But its not impossible. I had my dog while I was in school 30 hours per week & working 20 hours per week waitressing. I know parents who do even more that & still are good parents. I missed my dog like crazy while working & being in school but I loved having her to come home to at the end of the day. Sometimes a person just wants that other being to be there waiting for them & just that makes it--the responsibility, the lack of certain freedoms, the financial setbacks--all completely worth it. Link to comment
Seraphim Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Yes, I see. It just struck as odd, that someone who is very outspoken about the loss of freedom then goes and buys a puppy, puppies require a lot of time, they are like babies themselves. Anyway, not something you and I are ever going to see eye to eye on, or the other poster for that matter. Link to comment
hers Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 I couldn't agree more that babies & puppies are very similar in terms of workload. My own dog's puppy stage played a huge factor in my decision not to have kids. I realized I don't have the patience to deal with it! Dealing with a boxer puppy was one of the hardest things I've ever had to do! My next dog will be at least 2 years old... Link to comment
IphigeniaSaysHi Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 thank you, hersmudders. Link to comment
IphigeniaSaysHi Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 I think it's fair to say you generally have a problem with me Victoria, and I'm sorry that I offended you by stating I don't like children or want them, honestly. But I have a right to post my thoughts as related to the thread without being insulted- just like you. Like Hersmudders is saying, I wanted my puppy. I love animals- they make me happy. Dogs are a really big part of my life. I have my pom, and a 10 year old sheltie. I think that babies are a bit more time consuming than dogs, and should be so. I am loving- a mother or not. My freedom is determined by the things I choose. Link to comment
Seraphim Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 No I have no problem with you nor did I insult you. All I said was dogs are time consumming. Link to comment
IphigeniaSaysHi Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 But worth it for me- that was my point. I knew the puppy would be tough. Link to comment
lady00 Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 I think you should stick to dating people who do not want children. It will save you both a lot of grief and heartache. Link to comment
Cognitive_Canine Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 I think you should stick to dating people who do not want children. It will save you both a lot of grief and heartache. I would agree with this. But, what about if the OP changes their mind and their SO doesn't? It's a tough situation since people change. Link to comment
Seraphim Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 The way I think of it is........ok men can have kids until they are like 90 if they want. A woman's fertile life is much much shorter. Say she stays with the OP until she is 35. NOw she wants kids and he still does not. So she leaves. It takes her say 3 years to find a man she wants to marry and have kids. Now she is 38. Say they try for another 3 years to have kids and now she is 41. Now she is at the very closing end of her reproductive life and she spent more than 10 years with some one that never wanted kids and used the most productive and fertile part of her life. I do not know about other people but I would be PO"D. I know my husband was very reluctant to have kids because he was a big kid. We had our son when my husband was 27. Then when he was 37 he decided more kids was great! I mean we had not stop conception all along and then we had 3 miscarriages. So to keep a woman with you when you do not want to have kids and she does some day and a woman's fertile life is limited, that is selfish. There are some women on this forum that never want kids and I am sure there are many more in the world. Link to comment
littlestar Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 But you also have the option of abstaining from sex - of course, that might not seem like a realistic option to you but similarly, perhaps doctors don't see it as realistic for a person your age to have her tubes tied. Or, you could decide to always use the pill and condoms and spermicide which is pretty darn close to 100% effective. There are other options -- it's not all in your doctor's hands. I agree with what you're saying but why do i need to take something every day or use something every day that reminds me "I dont want kids" I think making a decision to HAVE a kid rather than not have is a bigger responsibilty. People who dont want kids should taken as seriously as people who do. And be given the method of contraception they wish. Link to comment
littlestar Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 They also do not want to be sued 15 years down the line when you change your mind, or if you change your mind. It is almost impossible to be reversed and then you have the choices of IUI or IVF which most people can not afford, if you want biological babies, so that will leave adoption. What about people who DO have kids and change their mind later? Do they sue the Dr then? I think there is double standards for those of us who dont want kids and those us who do. Link to comment
littlestar Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 There's a book called "The Childless Revolution" by Madeline Cain. A very good book that explores "child free" lifestyles. A good read guaranteed for those interested on the subject. Link to comment
Seraphim Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Well once you have the kid you can not sue the dr.......lol..but you MIGHT change your mind and you MIGHT be pissed at the dr say 17 years from now. Why not go to another country and pay for it??? I am sure there is some country that offers it no questions asked. Link to comment
Batya33 Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 I agree with what you're saying but why do i need to take something every day or use something every day that reminds me "I dont want kids" I think making a decision to HAVE a kid rather than not have is a bigger responsibilty. People who dont want kids should taken as seriously as people who do. And be given the method of contraception they wish. Well, no, not everyone is entitled to the method of contraception they wish - it depends if the doctor believes it is safe for the person - not everyone gets to take the pill for example because of health issues. What you're asking for is major surgery that a doctor is within her rights and knowledge to believe is not safe for you given the reasons why you are asking for the surgery. You don't have to use contraception - you can abstain from sex. And many pills don't need to be taken every day - there are injections, etc. Link to comment
littlestar Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Well once you have the kid you can not sue the dr.......lol..but you MIGHT change your mind and you MIGHT be pissed at the dr say 17 years from now. Why not go to another country and pay for it??? I am sure there is some country that offers it no questions asked. I have thought about that but it's most of the "third world" countries offering it on a "no questions asked" basis and i am worried about the way they practice and if it would be safe. Link to comment
littlestar Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Well, no, not everyone is entitled to the method of contraception they wish - it depends if the doctor believes it is safe for the person - not everyone gets to take the pill for example because of health issues. What you're asking for is major surgery that a doctor is within her rights and knowledge to believe is not safe for you given the reasons why you are asking for the surgery. You don't have to use contraception - you can abstain from sex. And many pills don't need to be taken every day - there are injections, etc. I just dont think i need to put "drugs and hormones" in my body without really having it. Astaining is an option but that would be not making use of our god given gifts. For me its all about choice and i choose to have sex and choose to not have kids. But i believe i am also entitled to make decisions for my body with what form of contraception i would like and if it's permanent so be it. I have always believed there is a double standard and always will until something changes! Link to comment
Batya33 Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 I just dont think i need to put "drugs and hormones" in my body without really having it. Astaining is an option but that would be not making use of our god given gifts. For me its all about choice and i choose to have sex and choose to not have kids. But i believe i am also entitled to make decisions for my body with what form of contraception i would like and if it's permanent so be it. I have always believed there is a double standard and always will until something changes! Let's agree to disagree. good luck. Link to comment
Seraphim Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 I have thought about that but it's most of the "third world" countries offering it on a "no questions asked" basis and i am worried about the way they practice and if it would be safe. The reason dr's will not do it on younger women is because they have thoes same women come back later having changed their mind. I looked up tubilagation and where it is offered and I found reams and reams of pages on REVERSAL not on where to get it done cheap. That really tells me something. It means many women regret it later. You may not, but we can not have surgery on demand. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.