is it wrong to have a baby?

lunarla

lunarla

Well-known member
I don't think it's necessary to be SA-free before having a baby. Though I really don't think you should put so much weight and hope on the idea to change you, per se. I can attest to the fact (for me) that being around little ones can bring a lot of joy into your life though.
 
kihira

kihira

1
I believe you are on track in how you are thinking about having a baby, and that there can be benefits from it, that you shouldn't wait to be SA free. Contact with other parents at playgroup and school has been very good for my social skills. Of course, consider other the aspects with being a parent, but don't wait for circumstances to be perfect because they never are.
 
MsBuzzkillington

MsBuzzkillington

Well-known member
I would have to say, that a baby is not going to change everything. It is not going to fix your problem. Coming from someone who had a very, very, very anxious mother... I would recommend getting a healthier and more stable mindset BEFORE you have a baby.
 
P

Patrick26

Well-known member
Should be 1 baby per family, the world is WAY WAY overpopulated as it is. Hate seeing someone with 4 or more kids...seriously?
 
KnuffleBunny

KnuffleBunny

Well-known member
Just be sure you want to have a baby because you want to have one, not because you believe it will cure you. If you are ready as well as your fiance, by all means. :)
 
Aussie_Lad

Aussie_Lad

Well-known member
Make sure it's for the right reasons, not just to help cure SA. Having a baby is a big step and quite often a life-long commitment, so make sure you are up to it both mentally and financially. You also have to keep in mind that having a baby may not cure your SA, but having a baby can be a very rewarding experience, so when you feel like it's the right time, then go ahead. I am sure you can be quite a successful parent, even if you are suffering SA. A lot of mothers suffer post-natal depression yet still do a remarkable job of looking after the baby so the baby does not have any ill effects from it.
 
K

Kinetik

Well-known member
Well, you're still young (24 from what I can gather) and I can't help but feel that you should give it some more time regardless of social anxiety. Perhaps it's just my personal bias, but I feel that people should be a little more established in life before having children. Are you in a good place emotionally, and can you give this child everything it deserves, putting your own problems on the back burner all the time for the sake of the baby? If so, then by all means go ahead. But do ask yourself some tough questions beforehand.
 
Newtype

Newtype

Well-known member
I think you should cure your SA first. Part of being a parent is to be there for your child and do everything for him. If you're scared to be around other people, then... it might be hard for you to do that, no matter how much you want it. Also, I think your life would become really stressful if you had to deal with SA and a child at the same time.
 
B

Beatrice

Guest
Patrick26 said:
Should be 1 baby per family, the world is WAY WAY overpopulated as it is. Hate seeing someone with 4 or more kids...seriously?
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. I believe siblings are wonderful and many kids wish they had them. They can be closer to you than anybody in the world. Of course, it doesn't ALWAYS work out that way, I realize that. Of course, there are also children with siblings who wish they didn't have them.

But, having grown up with 5 other siblings, I have nothing but wonderful memories. My siblings truly are my best friends. And I would want my first child to have at least one other sibling, maybe two. That would probably be the cutoff for me.

I don't agree with restricting families to one child. I think it's wrong. And wrong to judge larger families.
 
vancouver24

vancouver24

Banned
um beatrice and patrick. why is it wrong to only have 1 child? nobody has the right to say what is wrong. Being an only child or having 5-6 siblings BOTH have their GOOD and their BAD. You know what, im not gonna say theyre both wrong. but i will say 2-3 kids is just perfect..not tooooo much and not too little. siblings do not act as friends, if they do it means. its different with family. thats what friends are for..to be friends and siblings to just be family.. i dont share everything with my siblings as much as i share with my friends.,
 
B

Beatrice

Guest
twiggle said:
I respect your opinion but that isn't what the OP asked, and given that that's the sort of thing that could cause offence to people from larger families particularly any mothers on here who have 4+ kids I'm not entirely sure why you believed it necessitated a mention.

Edit: Just realised I have already contributed to this thread once. Jokes on me.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with this. This is a controversial topic and people are divided. Very strong feelings. Best left for another thread.
 
B

Beatrice

Guest
vancouver24 said:
um beatrice and patrick. why is it wrong to only have 1 child? nobody has the right to say what is wrong. Being an only child or having 5-6 siblings BOTH have their GOOD and their BAD. You know what, im not gonna say theyre both wrong. but i will say 2-3 kids is just perfect..not tooooo much and not too little. siblings do not act as friends, if they do it means. its different with family. thats what friends are for..to be friends and siblings to just be family.. i dont share everything with my siblings as much as i share with my friends.,
Click to expand...

Um, I never said it was wrong. And I said I'm aware it's not always the case that siblings are best of friends. It would have been much appreciated if you had read my post in its entirety and realized I mentioned the different sides of each. But anyway, this is the wrong thread so I won't mention this subject again here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top