@dr_st

Yes.

An attempt to describe ones real life suffering in words will always be ineffective. Another cannot really know what its like to be in someone else's situation unless they are living it in their body and living their life. Words are limited approximations. Even a million words would just be an external approximation. The other issue is conveying in words the suffering that goes on in one's own mind, and as dr_st pointed out, this varies by the individual. Trying to convey in words can be likened to reading about a Caribbean vacation - if the words were sufficient to experience the trip, then there would be no need to actually go on the vacation. The words alone are generally insufficient.

Even two adult males of similar age, from a similar background, with 3 kids of identical personality, identical age, identical disabilities, the same wife, no childcare, no family help, no respite, no after school care, similar finances, etc may mentally handle the same situation entirely differently. The complexities of personality are vast. However, from my experience, I've yet to find someone else in my situation. The closest example was a guy from my old work, also an engineer, who had [only] two kids. He stayed home with the kids for about 6 months and then he couldn't take it anymore. He sold his investment condo and payed an outrageous amount for childcare, and that was while he was jobless. His wife also stayed home the first year (whereas my wife went back to work after 6 weeks). He'd rather be unemployed and loose money to childcare rather than care for his children at home all day. After more than a year of this, he started working contract jobs on and off, but according to his wife, he isn't even making enough to cover the childcare expenses; he is just trying to escape taking care of the children. I don't blame him, but they clearly have more money than we d. Perhaps there is something in male genetics which make caring for kids all day particularly difficult. I don't know. When I have construction projects to work on around the house, or if I get sick, my wife has to do the hard work. After about 3 days, she is clearly piss faced, exhausted, agitated, and going insane. Even to this day, when she gets home from work, she is super happy to see the kids for about 15 minutes, then she starts to get agitated as the kids drive her crazy. Everyday is like this, and from what I can tell, she has a strong mothering instinct. She [quietly] admitted once that work is a vacation compared to taking care of kids all day.

chinny22 wrote:

But you know that warm feeling you get from having a pet, multiply that by 1000, With the bigger lows come bigger high's

My experience was very different. I felt that caring for my cat was many times more rewarding than caring for the children. I had a cat who I lived with for 18.3 years. I raised her from a kitten. The palliative care I gave the cat on her last week of life was probably the most rewarding in my life; it felt like I was giving back to her for all the mental support she gave me over the years. The palliative care was a lot of work. I had to wrap my whole office in 10 mil plastic because the cat lost control of her urine. She couldn't stand for several days following her seizure, and I had to hold her over the cat box to pee and poop. I had to hold her up and lift her tail in the cat box. While the cat was ill, I took her everywhere she wasn't allowed to go in the past. I could tell she was really happy to have all my help. I moved my bed to the office for that week and setup an air conditioner in the room. She started to get better, and was walking 80% again; I thought she was going to make a come back, then all of a sudden, she started to seizure uncontrollably for 12 hours. I had to jam various medications in her butt, which didn't help at all. In the end, my daughter helped me bury her in the backyard when she died. In my experience, and in my mind, I found caring for the cat a lot more rewarding than caring for the kids. Cats don't talk back, don't hold grudges, and you can feel their appreciation. They are simple and unselfish. I can see if you have only one child, how your view might be different, as was mine when I only had one child. Life became progressively worse with n+1 children. Girls are generally a lot easier to deal with while young (per-puberty) compared to boys. I felt bad for the cat as her quality of life reduced greatly once our 2nd kid was able to craw. He was always trying to pull the cat's tail and headbutt her. The last year of her life was pretty miserable as she hid under the desk downstairs away from the headbutter. She also didn't take well to the new house. She had been on prednisilone for 3 years for inflammatory bowel disease, and/or cancer, and renal failure. The 2nd kid still head butts - he head butts my oldest daughter in the head now and makes her scream in agony. He runs around the house on all 4's pretending to be a wild animal. He cannot seem to control himself. It is awful. He is in therapy, but he won't stop. That is the tip of the iceberg, so to speak; he's in therapy for multiple deficiencies, each one sufficient to drive any parent insane.

We have no relatives in town, or within 1000 km. Actually, I hardly have any relatives at all. The kids are so much work that my mother only comes once in 2 years and doesn't last more than 5 days. My ole mother also thinks that she is 'on holiday' when she comes here and doesn't lift a finger. She brings her 5th husband with her and expects to be catered to. She wouldn't even watch the 3 kids to let the wife and I go grocery shopping for her diner ingredients. It is liking having 6 children with her over and we have begun expanding our excuse database for reasons for her not to come. She brags about how energetic she is and full of life for her age, then when it comes to helping with the kids, she magically turns into an old lady.

@luckybob
Sounds like you are "unclebob" now! An uncle is sure easier than a father. What's the longest duration you've had to take care of the little bugger for on your own? I take it your cousin isn't looking for an apartment anymore? I suppose it could be worse. When I was growing up, my mother had a new live-in boyfriend every year. She's on her 5th husband now, just like her mother was. If she married all the live-in boyfriends, she'd probably be on her 12th husband. At one point in my youth, we had my mentally unstable cousin move in. It was hell. I cannot even begin to describe that torment. My cousin also had an illegitimate child at the time. And the father was in jail. Sometimes, it is better not knowing who the father is, like in your cousin's case. Last I heard, that guy is still in and out of jail.

Living wrote:

my syster -30- got pregnant at the age of 17 and now she has 3 childrens...

I sometimes wish I had kids early on like that. I'd have my life back now. I had so much more energy in my teens and 20's. Not sure how I'd handle that mentally though. At least I'd be young enough to go back to school.

There is no perfection solution. All you can do is to do the best you can. If you try your best, there will be less regrets.

Wow amazing honesty there feipoa! Sorry to hear that you're having a tough time and as a parent of 2 I can understand your pain to some degree - kids push you to the limit, and it's easily the hardest thing I've ever done. But luckily for me - and yes I really do think some of it is luck because a decent portion of the equation is out of your control - having kids is easily the best thing I've ever done. They're 7 and 9 now and are happy, well behaved kids who I love being around.

I'm not trying to make you feel even worse, I just want to put my hand up as someone who doesn't hate it.

Its all a matter of which variables you get. If had someone to pick the kids up from school, ferry them around, do the household chores, cook diner, and I could come home from work and spend just half an hour playing with the kids before they were off to bed, I'd probably have a much more positive outlook on parenting. That's all my father's generation ever did. I think the vast majority of educated males who, out of necessity, must spend their every waking moment, year after year, with 3 kids in their face would be miserable. I know a few other [male] friends from engineering graduate school, who only had one child, and who are always finding ways to run away from taking care of their kids. Sometimes they re-enroll in school so that can get childcare, and spend their life savings paying for it. Some with more favourable parents, get the babies grandmother to come for six months, then get the other grandmother to come for six months, and back and forth... I've seen some, usually asians, who have the grandmother move in with them to take care of the kid(s). It is very rare to to have an educated male, wasting away his working years, raising 3 children while the wife is working 'til late in the evening. I've heard of nearly a dozen cases whereby the husband caves in and just can't do it. Anyway, enough of this ranting. I look forward with anticipation towards the future because it can't possibly get any worse.

Its midnight now, my oldest daughter is yelling out of her bedroom "Mama, mama... my eyes cannot shut, they won't shut, I cannot sleep. Can I come down stairs? Please. Mama, my eyes are wide open and won't shut, mammmmmaaa..."

I seemed to have missed this thread in the last week or so... very varied views, interesting to read of everyone's experiences... though it is also quite humbling to hear of less fortunate parenting journeys... it brings balance. I can only hope for better things to anyone where circumstances have transpired parenting to be a less than positive experience. In this instance... it would be nice to think that our kids, when older, will recognise the care put into them over time and have the audacity to return the gesture to some degree.

For me, I wouldn't go back... admittedly for many years I was resolutely against having kids... and for many reasons, some selfish, some less so. The last couple of years however I had began to think if anything were to happen to me, what (materials) would I be leaving behind for relatives who remain alive here in the matrix... then I started to think who (bloodline) would I be leaving behind. Now that i'm 35, and have done everything I could possibly want to do in life (except some electronics/computer projects... this is endless), been everywhere I wanted to go to the point I got tired with travel and just wanted to come home (with some memorable experiences along the way)... the only thing that really remained for me to do was to be a dad.

I've come into it with eyes open and i'm fortunate to have the girl I have, as she really is not too much trouble and generally only makes noise when hungry. If I can show her the way and teach her to block out the shit things in life, while maintaining a certain level of happiness and have respect for others, then I would say I have done my job. If she sticks around when I'm back in nappies and I can no longer remember her name... then i'll have excelled!

Saw this family in the news the other day about going on a family holiday to Disneyland Florida, I didn't think much of it until I realised how many would be travelling: -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radford_family

Nothing is more important than having children. Members of a group with a shared ancestry have a duty to past and future generations to be responsible caretakers of their group's cultural heritage and continue the genetic legacy. A society/culture has no future if it does not generally regard as failures, assign very low social status to, and regard with great suspicion, childless men and women over a certain age.

Belated congrats to the new father!

First of all, I want to congratulate 386_junkie for the new baby girl (a bit late, since I missed the thread when it was first posted). May she bring joy (and new old stock 386 stuff 😁) to your life!

Also...

SierraGamer wrote:

A society/culture has no future if it does not generally regard as failures, assign very low social status to, and regard with great suspicion, childless men and women over a certain age.

This has got to be one of the most idiotic things I've read in a while. I'm not downplaying the importance of having children, but: in your ideal society people like Nikola Tesla (just an example among many) who chose not to have children would be a "low social status failure regarded with suspicion"?
Or men/women who for medical reasons cannot have children (again, many many examples)?
Or men/women who can have children but choose not to due to not being able to provide them with a proper education?
I definitely wouldn't want to live in a society like that.

TheMobRules wrote:

This has got to be one of the most idiotic things I've read in a while. I'm not downplaying the importance of having children, b […]
Show full quote

SierraGamer wrote:

A society/culture has no future if it does not generally regard as failures, assign very low social status to, and regard with great suspicion, childless men and women over a certain age.

This has got to be one of the most idiotic things I've read in a while. I'm not downplaying the importance of having children, but: in your ideal society people like Nikola Tesla (just an example among many) who chose not to have children would be a "low social status failure regarded with suspicion"?
Or men/women who for medical reasons cannot have children (again, many many examples)?
Or men/women who can have children but choose not to due to not being able to provide them with a proper education?
I definitely wouldn't want to live in a society like that.

What he wrote is very extreme (obviously to prove a point), but not very far from the truth, if you look at it the right way. First, notice the word 'generally' in the first sentence you quoted. It suggests that there may and should be exceptions.

One has to look at the difference between the individual and the whole.

A single, exceptional, individual can have enormous positive contribution to society, without having children (the Tesla example).
A single individual can make a 'selfish' choice to live out their life in a way that maximizes only their personal satisfaction, without 'contributing' new members to the species, and it will not have any effect on the society.

But in general, yes, to survive long-term, a society must encourage procreation, otherwise it will simply die out. Encouraging something is a multifaceted thing: active encouragement contributes to it; active discouragement of the opposite ('assigning low social status', for example) contributes to it; creating favorable conditions for people to do what is good for the society as a whole (financial subsidies in various forms) also contributes.

To take some of your other examples:

People who cannot have children to due to medical reasons are merely 'sick' / 'defective'. There is no reason to treat them any better or any worse than people with any other medical abnormality that does not have an adverse effect on others.

People who choose not to have children because of financial/social reasons (e.g., not being able to give them proper education as you said) are the most difficult group to analyze. In some sense, it's good that they are responsible and do not add individuals that will be under-educated, under-cared for, and are likely to grow up as a drain on society. However, on another level - for the long term survival of the society - yes, it's probably better that they procreate. Not better for them, maybe not even better for their children (on average), but better for the society/species.

any updates on this OP? and feipoa too

I'm going to wager that the youngin (8088 Junkie?) is a bit taller, walking, and almost ready for kindergarten!

gdjacobs wrote:

(8088 Junkie?)

That would suggest the offspring is older than the parent.
Perhaps "Ryzen Junkie" would be more period correct?
Sounds kinda cool too.
.

Living wrote:

any updates on this OP? and feipoa too

Oh, same old shit; I'm still breathing in and out. Just trying to survive another day without my head exploding. It is extremely stressful and I have stress-induced heartburn lingers for weeks at a time. My second child is in kindergarten and he has an EA with him at all times. He has so many mental issues that he's hardly in class at all throughout the day. I get called by the principal all the time. He was sent home a few weeks back because he bit his EA and she needed stitches. I've never heard of a child getting sent home from kindergarten. We have meetings with his group of support workers in the school frequently for his inappropriate behaviour. I don't have the energy right now to write it all out. In case you haven't figured it out yet, he is file claims that he is "moderately autistic" - and I don't just mean Asperger's Syndrome. I think there's more to it, like GDD, ADHD, ADD, oppositional defiance disorder - which would get tested for later on. Just this one kid alone is about the same work load 2x my other 2 kids combined. And his therapy hasn't been a magic bullet. My wife and I are convinced that his previous life was that of a dog because he won't stop acting like an animal. He does things which remind me of wolf pack behaviour. I don't want to go into the details, as it would take the whole night to explain this case. And I want to get back to my K5 build now to help de-stress.

Like everyone else on this planet, I'm in line awaiting death. In my case, I hope life will be better the next time around. But it could very well be even worse, but I wouldn't know that it had gotten worse because I'll have forgotten everything from the previous life. What carries forward are your inclinations. But on the contrary, some ordinary folk, that is to say not deep meditators, have the ability to remember their past lives - passed life memories often resurface when the death was sudden and unexpected. I read the original 20 Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation by Dr. Ian Stevenson, who was a psychiatrist and also researched this subject in collaboration with some medical school, if I remember right. I'm sure there are now much more modern books from Dr. Stevenson's students who picked up his work.

Oh, never thought I'd see that r/childfree Reddit cult here on Vogons. They are mental.

This thread makes me feel like I am possibly one of the luckiest parents out there.. Not that this helps anybody who posted problems but, as a precaution to future mothers and fathers, I suppose it pays to stop at number one..

sometimes you gotta go #2 though

appiah4 wrote:

as a precaution to future mothers and fathers, I suppose it pays to stop at number one..

It pays even more to stop at number 0, though. Once you try to look at children from a perspective of economics and personal gain, there is only one correct decision - don't have kids at all. Thus, children must be justified through other means, and then you can find justification for having any number of them (though obviously the "magic" number is different for different people).

dr_st wrote:

It pays even more to stop at number 0, though. Once you try to look at children from a perspective of economics and personal gain, there is only one correct decision - don't have kids at all. Thus, children must be justified through other means, and then you can find justification for having any number of them (though obviously the "magic" number is different for different people).

If you stop at 0 then when you get old and you are the one that needs your meals fixed, helped to bed or the bathroom, or your butt wiped, there won't be anyone there.
.

PCBONEZ wrote:

If you stop at 0 then when you get old and you are the one that needs your meals fixed, helped to bed or the bathroom, or your butt wiped, there won't be anyone there.

See, that's like the oldest myth/fallacy in in the book.

First and foremost, the assumption that just because you have kids (and even if you are the world's best parent and take great care of them), then they will be there for you when you are old is far from guaranteed. It improves your chances, yes, but doesn't make it certain.

But more importantly - you will save tons of money by not having kids. Enough money to live at a higher standard when you are young, and to buy yourself proper care when you are older.

Well.. the biggest jumps in my pay grade and the fastest progression in my career happened after my lovely daughter was born. So yeah a kid is a great motivation to make more money and to signal your employers that your retention is dearer. In that sense a kid pressures you into balancing her expenses through harder work. To be honest I dont think I would have been saving half as much on my own instead of a double income family with a child. I would have a more relaxed life with more free time, no disputing that, but I wouldnt be more affluent. I would also in no way shape or form be even close to as happy as I currently am, but my own younger self wouldnt possibly comprehend why or how so I will not try to convince anyone here. When the time comes, you will understand.

dr_st wrote:

But more importantly - you will save tons of money by not having kids. Enough money to live at a higher standard when you are young, and to buy yourself proper care when you are older.

No, that's the oldest myth/fallacy in in the book.

There aren't any more certainties with that plan than there there are to the kids being there when you need them.
Economies and even whole governments can crash. Investments and health care plans can go poof.

Having money in the bank won't help you to the bathroom at 3 AM.
Full time paid assistance is not cheap (you are paying someones entire income) and is an invasion of your privacy.
For me, living in an old folks home isn't an attractive option either.

Things you don't plan on happen.
I myself am terminally ill (no cure) but so far I'm beating the odds and my expiration date has been changed back to "unknown".
When that is looking you right in the face you rethink everything.
.