Won't live with me until we're married???

[Saffron_]

We are all influenced on how we were raised - LS sees no problem accepring and he does. This is clearly a difference of fundamental values. I was raised like your boyfriend - while its easy for you to see how great an oppurtunity this is (and it is) I couldn't accept it if I were him as well. Some people like to rely on only themselves and what they cam afford.

 

 

 

Very true. I couldn't accept that kind of offer either. Some could, but not me.

 

Lost, nobody's painting you as a spoiled brat but you do sometimes come accross that way. For instance, your description of his desire to fend for himself as "cute" and the way you talk about having an "okay" two bed appartment and how you say you're "only" having a nanny from 6am to 12pm. It sounds to me like you've been very privileged. Lucky you. But not everyome wants to live that way even if it's on offer.

 

I hope the two of you can reach some kind of agreement but the way things are going, I dunno if I can see this ending happily in the long term. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

Edit: By the way, the desire to earn something off your own back, even if it means struggling, rather than accepting hand outs is a very admirable quality and something I'd be damn proud of in a partner. It's also an excellent lesson for your children. I'd never scoff at that!

[Seraphim]

A lot of people would be surprised what they would accept if their child is going to benefit.

[OptomisticGirl]

I dont understand. You and the kids will be in the house, will have access to a nanny, and he has no problem paying the bills even though he isn't living there. How exactly will the kids suffer? If he suffers for his choice that's HIS choice. Frankly I don't think you guys are ready to live together. What's worse - he moves in even when he doesn't want to, resents you more, the two of you break up and raise your kids from seoerate houses OR you spend this time apart raising the kids and working on your relationship and giving it a fair shot? Which really sounds better for the kids?

[lostnscared]

Very true. I couldn't accept that kind of offer either. Some could, but not me.

 

Lost, nobody's painting you as a spoiled brat but you do sometimes come accross that way. For instance, your description of his desire to fend for himself as "cute" and the way you talk about having an "okay" two bed appartment and how you say you're "only" having a nanny from 6am to 12pm. It sounds to me like you've been very privileged. Lucky you. But not everyome wants to live that way even if it's on offer.

 

I hope the two of you can reach some kind of agreement but the way things are going, I dunno if I can see this ending happily in the long term. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

I didn't mean "cute" as in I was making fun of him, but that maybe to him it seemed like a romantic story of an up and coming couple struggling and making it together. Because it does feel like at times that how he feels. I took care of myself earlier this year--paid my rent, paid all my bills, food, etc. I got no help. So it isn't as if I immune to fending for myself. I've done it before and CAN. I am not saying that is "bad". I am only saying that the reality is that when it's just you, or just "us" it's ONE thing, when there are kids involved, put the egos aside.

The comment about the apartment--meh how else could I have described. Again we would be living on savings, and on one income and rearing two children--so the apartment would probably be decent, but would be nowhere near as nice or have as much room as the house. I don't know how else I could have described and I was only comparing the apartment to the house--not saying anything is wrong with an apartment. I LIVED in an apartment up until January.

I said "only" because there are people who have nannies that stay there all day, or nannies that REAR the children. My nanny would be no different then having a babysitter or putting the children in daycare for 6 hours a day. To me the whole thing about the nanny is silly, when her role could be compared to what would occur if we had a babysitter or such.

I know not everyone wants to live that way--and I wasn't saying everyone should. I was only pointing out that the "help" we are receiving is better than the "alternative" which would basically put us in a position where we would be struggling a lot more.

I know not everyone would accept the offer. You are not the first person who has told me that--but like I said I am also considering the kids in the big picture--who was he considering?

[Saffron_]

A lot of people would be surprised what they would accept if their child is going to benefit.

 

If the child is going to benefit or if Lost is going to benefit...

 

Even at the detriment of the relationship with the childs father? No amount of money can compensate for a wrecked relationship and two part-time parents. Which is how these things sadly end up when people can't compromise.

[lostnscared]

I dont understand. You and the kids will be in the house, will have access to a nanny, and he has no problem paying the bills even though he isn't living there. How exactly will the kids suffer? If he suffers for his choice that's HIS choice. Frankly I don't think you guys are ready to live together. What's worse - he moves in even when he doesn't want to, resents you more, the two of you break up and raise your kids from seoerate houses OR you spend this time apart raising the kids and working on your relationship and giving it a fair shot? Which really sounds better for the kids?

 

My mom is paying for the nanny. The only bills my bf has to pay are the utilities, cable/internet, etc, groceries, and pampers, and anything pertaining to the babies. As guestimation I would say that this would be a grand sum of $1500 a month. As opposed to paying rent, AND utilties, AND groceries, AND pampers, and everything pertaining to the babies, AND cable/internet.

He doesn't have a problem paying the bills, even though he won't be living there, because I will have the kids, and because he did make that "Deal" with my dad and did tell me that although he will not live with me he will stick to that part of the deal.

But now do you see why I don't think it's the house. If the house was really the issue then he wouldn't even participate in paying anything for it.

I'm not making him move in with me anymore BTW. I let that go the other day. I'm only saying that it bothered me that at the last minute he changed his mind, and that BOTHERED me.

[Seraphim]

I agree, it IS the same as going to daycare. I think what he is telling you is that he wants YOU at home looking after the kids, not a babysitter/nanny/whatever. I had a live in babysitter when I was about 8 and we were not rich. My step dad made good money but he had to pay child support for his 3 kids and alimony for his ex wife because she OUTRIGHT refused to work. My mother had to go to work so they could pay for the two families. My brother and I had to be looked after by SOMEONE. If there is no parent home full time SOMEONE has to do it. So call her a babysitter. Basically he is playing semantics, and is trying to tell you he wants you home and YOU rear the kids.

[Seraphim]

If the child is going to benefit or if Lost is going to benefit...

 

Even at the detriment of the relationship with the childs father? No amount of money can compensate for a wrecked relationship and two part-time parents. Which is how these things sadly end up when people can't compromise.

 

Well sure people have to compromise, BUT, if he wants to struggle for just for the "glory" of telling people he struggled to raise his kids that is called "pride and ego". If he wants to give up the opportunity fine, if he does he asks his kids to do the same.

[lostnscared]

If the child is going to benefit or if Lost is going to benefit...

 

Even at the detriment of the relationship with the childs father? No amount of money can compensate for a wrecked relationship and two part-time parents. Which is how these things sadly end up when people can't compromise.

 

The children WILL benefit. Yes I will too, but the children will benefit just as much(if not more).

How will our relationship be wrecked because of a house and a nanny? Like I told OG, if the house was as much of problem as you've implied then why wouldn't my bf have said that is why he is uncomfortable with moving in with me rather than saying he was uncomfortable because we aren't married? the house and the nanny are probably MINOR in his mind, but I do believe from the conversation that he was more uncomfortable with us not being married and with the fact that I've not given him the opportunity to have "say" in this pregnancy so far. Also want to say that years ago, this man told me he had no problem marrying a "rich" woman if he were poor (we were talking hypotheticals) or being a stay at home dad even though people may look down on it. So I REALLY think that money is the "least" of it.

[Seraphim]

I know you all think she is just wanting things for just her but I think she is trying to give her kids the best she can, and the best opportunities she can.

[lostnscared]

I agree, it IS the same as going to daycare. I think what he is telling you is that he wants YOU at home looking after the kids, not a babysitter/nanny/whatever. I had a live in babysitter when I was about 8 and we were not rich. My step dad made good money but he had to pay child support for his 3 kids and alimony for his ex wife because she OUTRIGHT refused to work. My mother had to go to work so they could pay for the two families. My brother and I had to be looked after by SOMEONE. If there is no parent home full time SOMEONE has to do it. So call her a babysitter. Basically he is playing semantics, and is trying to tell you he wants you home and YOU rear the kids.

 

Exactly! People hear the word "nanny" and assume I mean what Angelina Jolie has for her children, and that is NOT what I mean. I would even call this woman a babysitter, BUT the only difference is that she will be getting groceries for us throughout the week, and will clean up. Beyond that she is for all intent and purposes a BABYSITTER and is only coming 6 hours out of the day--leaving us with the babies for the remaining 18 hours. And ONLY for the first 5 months of their lives.

I would have been okay without the nanny if it was just ONE baby, but with two YES I do feel as if I have a right to want extra help.

He is just oldfashioned, and that is what it is. But I just want people to understand that the nanny thing is not what they think it is!!!! lol.

[Seraphim]

Exactly! People hear the word "nanny" and assume I mean what Angelina Jolie has for her children, and that is NOT what I mean. I would even call this woman a babysitter, BUT the only difference is that she will be getting groceries for us throughout the week, and will clean up. Beyond that she is for all intent and purposes a BABYSITTER and is only coming 6 hours out of the day--leaving us with the babies for the remaining 18 hours. And ONLY for the first 5 months of their lives.

I would have been okay without the nanny if it was just ONE baby, but with two YES I do feel as if I have a right to want extra help.

He is just oldfashioned, and that is what it is. But I just want people to understand that the nanny thing is not what they think it is!!!! lol.

 

Two babies are VERY hard to look after and MANY mothers of multiples have extra help. It is nothing to be ashamed of.

[OptomisticGirl]

And the kids do have the best opprurnity. They won't suffer. He will, if he does. I'm sorry but because he doesnr feel comfortable taking this offer does not mean he is putting his kids in jeopardy. He is caring for them even though he isn't there. The two of you clearly need to sit down and figure problems out. If you are okay with him not moving in what exactly is the problem?

[lostnscared]

I know you all think she is just wanting things for just her but I think she is trying to give her kids the best she can, and the best opportunities she can.

 

I really am... It isn't just about me--really the house and nanny would have benefitted all FOUR of us and all in different ways. I am NOT the only one benefitting. As I said on the other page, having this house already paid for means my boyfriend does not have to work as much, means that we have more disposable income, means that he can have his family come visit and have a place to stay, means that he will be able to spend time with the children. Having the house and the nanny means that I will have more room, kids have a backyard, and we have a home. All of this benefits the family. It is not only ONE person benefitting here.

And for the record, with the nanny all it does is gives me a chance to get REST. A rested mommy makes a happy mommy does it not? I am not saying I would not be happy with my children unrested, but simply that it will allow to do in even better job with them since I do have that "break".

[OptomisticGirl]

You have the house and everything will happen - again, I'm not seeing what the issue is if you are truly okay with him not living there.

[penelope13]

I think this has gone quite off track: everyone seems to assume that the disagreement is about the house or money; maybe it's really about him wanting to be married before playing house. Simple as that. Regardless if he has been religious or not about other things, maybe this is one thing he strongly believes in. Many, many women complain here about their partner not wanting to marry, but they moved in, and now years later there is still no set wedding date. In all those cases (as far as I can remember) the consensus seems to be that wanting and believing in marriage is something quite fundamental to people and that they should if at all possible not compromise on that. In this case it's just a gender reversed scenario.

 

As it sounds, the bf is not intending to contribute any less financially and otherwise to his children. He is not even losing extra money, since he doesn't have to pay rent either with the friend. Thus it seems more likely a statement about his seriousness about wanting marriage first before living together. Given all the relationship issues (not talking here about the parenting aspects), it doesn't sound like such a bad idea to live in separate places until a better communication has been established.

 

As to the possibility of selling this house at a later point, from what you describe, I don't think that your boyfriend considers it right to count on any of this money for his use, unless you would specifically 'give' him the money at the time when it will be sold. Since he is not married to you, and the house is in your dad's name, in case you sold it and your father didn't want the money back, your dad could then decide to give YOU the money, but legally and morally your boyfriend has zero ownership of it. Sure, he is probably prudent enough to understand that given the circumstances it is best for the twins to have a secure living environment, but that doesn't mean that it has to give your boyfriend the feeling that he really is a co-owner and the property is his to do as he pleases.

[Seraphim]

Every new mother needs a break. Being a new mother is REALLY hard, the sleep deprivation alone is crushing. NO one knows how this is unless they ARE a mother. If he does not want the nanny then HE has to step up to the plate because you will have twice the work every other mother has and twice of EVERYTHING. I think he is not really being realistic, but the only thing that might bring him into what is really happening is if he experiences it.

[lostnscared]

And the kids do have the best opprurnity. They won't suffer. He will, if he does. I'm sorry but because he doesnr feel comfortable taking this offer does not mean he is putting his kids in jeopardy. He is caring for them even though he isn't there. The two of you clearly need to sit down and figure problems out. If you are okay with him not moving in what exactly is the problem?

 

I am not persay "okay", but in the last two days I have gotten over it, and am now just trying to understand why he changed his mind. The thread has derailed a bit though. lol.

[OptomisticGirl]

Only he can answer that question LS, we can only speculate.

[Seraphim]

I am not persay "okay", but in the last two days I have gotten over it, and am now just trying to understand why he changed his mind. The thread has derailed a bit though. lol.

 

You really have to get to the bottom of that. Why he changed his mind and why he is playing floppy fish. In a few months more the time for floppy fish is over.

[lostnscared]

You have the house and everything will happen - again, I'm not seeing what the issue is if you are truly okay with him not living there.

 

I am not "truly" okay, I am okay with it only because I don't have a choice. I am MORE concerned with WHY he changed his mind, then I am with him not living with me. I thought it was because of the marriage, but then on this thread everyone has said it's because I am controlling or because of the house. I guess I'm just confused about why he would rather live with this friend. I tried to ask him over the phone and he just said we would talk about it when we see each other, but that he has FELT as if our communication has been bad lately due to the distance, so he would rather talk face to face about it. I just don't want him lying to me about his TRUE intentions--if it is about the house, then I want him to tell me that rather than making it because we aren't married. In other words I would like some clarity, and would also like to prevent this from happening again(last minute changing his mind) because I still think it was RUDE and tacky.

[Seraphim]

I agree with it should be face to face. I would also tell him you want no blowing smoke, you want the truth.

[lostnscared]

Only he can answer that question LS, we can only speculate.

 

I know. The thread just got derailed. It started off one way, and then it turned into me being accused of being spoiled, and whatnot and I just wanted to clarify that I am not!!!!

[Seraphim]

I know. The thread just got derailed. It started off one way, and then it turned into me being accused of being spoiled, and whatnot and I just wanted to clarify that I am not!!!!

 

It really does not matter if you are or if you are not. All that matters is if you can communicate well with him and he with you.

[petite]

But you have changed your decision - you were living in Chicago and decided to move to TN because you wanted to; whether he liked it or not.

 

I do see the problems here and a lot of the issues come down to communication - if you don't get help for it now - I fear eventually the relationship will get worse once the kids are born because it's so much more stressful having children.

 

 

 

It almost sounds like you believe that just because you're the mother everything has to be your way and you're dismissing couples counseling based on your parents relationship - which I am sure was nothing like your own. It's better to tackle problems right at the start than trying to solve them at the end.

A lot of people get such positive outcomes from couples counseling and you're not willing to even try because it didn't work for someone you know. They are not you, and if you really want to improve your relationship there has to be a professional mediator so to speak to help you both understand the other parents position.