pregnant 17 year old

Chris wrote:
"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...

Chris wrote:


Yielding to spousal blackmail does not strengthen a marriage.

Agreed. You are engaging in spousal blackmail.


How so?

You're telling your spouse it's your way or
the highway. If she doesn't give in to your demands,
you will not support her. Seems pretty clear cut to
me.

Best wishes,
Ericka

agent99 wrote:

Okay - I guess I just feel that except in highly unusual cases, what's
best for the family as a whole is generally not at odds with what's
best for individuals within the family. I think it would be a rare
situation where I had to do something to benefit my husband that was to
the detriment of my children's wellbeing. Often when dh gets home from
work, if I don't have dinner ready, he takes the kids to the playground
for an hour or so. I get a break from the kids, so it benefits me, and
he and the kids get some fresh air and some fun time together, so it
benefits them, and dinner gets made, which benefits everyone. And, on
days that have been really rough for us all, he might take the kids out
to pick up takeout while I have a glass of wine and a hot bath

Ahh, but you're approaching this from a family-centered
perspective. When you approach it from a *self* centered
perspective, it looks quite different. What if your husband
came home from a long day at work, was ****ed off that you
didn't have dinner on the table, and decided that what was
best *for him* was to grab a nice little siesta while you
kept the kids out of his hair and got dinner on the table?
And even from a family-centered perspective, it is
often the case that what is best for the family is, at least
in the short run, difficult for some individuals in the
family. When there is a family crisis, the hard work
involved in getting through it often falls heavily on
those who were not so complicit in creating the crisis.
It often requires significant stress and effort to get
through--much more so than giving up on folks and booting
them out of the family. Those who love their family
members may feel a great deal of stress resulting from
shutting out a family member, but Chris has made it
clear that he is not emotionally connected to his
step-daughter, so for him, it's no skin off his nose
if she's booted out and fails in her life. Of course,
one might think he'd feel some concern for the pain this
would cause his wife, but obviously her pain pales in
comparison with *his* pain in having to step up to the
plate and deal with this situation in some way other than
just booting the girl out.

I'm sure he supported her when she was younger.

Hope so!

Seems highly unlikely to me, based on his comment:

Chris:
Perhaps, but there is no emotional connection between her child and me.

Best wishes,
Ericka

wrote in message
oups.com...

Chris wrote:
My stepdaughter decided to get pregnant again. The first pregnancy did
not
come to term. She will be 18 next month. Her mother prefers to have her
continue to live in our home even though I informed both of them the
first
time around that I refused to allow a second family to live here. Mother
claims that she will not be able to make it financially if she moves
out.

She should have thought about that before getting pregnant. If she's
old enough to make adult decisions, then she will need to live with the
consequences of those decisions. Trust me, it will make her grow up
faster if you kick her out and let her stand on her own two feet.

The father claims that he will help out and that they will live
together. He
was dead against the first pregnancy, but now agrees to help with this
one.
(change of heart?)

He is an idiot. Kick her out next month when she turns 18.

Although she carries a part time job, her daughter is basically lazy and
has
no concern for personal/financial responsibility. The reason why I will
not
allow a second family to live here is because my marriage (first family)
is
already hanging on a thread. Another family will only add to our
troubles,
not to mention that we cannot afford to support another family.

Any suggestions?

Drop some balls and tell your wife that she needs to decide who she
wants to be married to.

Good luck.

Regards...

Thank you for the input. I don't see how anybody can disagree that one who
is old enough to make a decision is old enough to live with the consequences
of such decision. Especially when they are made aware of the consequences
BEFORE the decision is made. Seems to me (as you mentioned) that allowing
one to escape the consequences is tantamount to leaving the training wheels
on the bicycle. Also, my wife did not like me bringing up the "marriage"
decision. Short of her abandoning both of us, there is no way out; she MUST
make her choice.

I laid down a few simple rules that her daughter must follow in order to
reside under my roof. Her voluntary choice to disrespect my home equates to
her voluntary choice to leave. Am I wrong? If I allow her to stay and
violate the rules, then I am allowing her to call the shots in my home!

My wife, to her credit, just recently started to help her get on the public
doles and she made a couple suggestions. One is for her to leave 3 months
after baby is born (end of March) and the other is for her to leave at end
of year (when baby is born). My wife claims this is so she can more easily
help daughter with newborn and daughter gets back to work so that she IS
able to support herself (but guess who supports her in the meantime). End of
year is (reluctantly) acceptable so long as she follows house rules (which I
doubt), but after that she would be in violation. My concern is that if I
give her a finger she will try for the hand, and if I give her the hand she
will push for the arm...........

I am not too thrilled about bending the rules since it will probably send
the message that rules are worthless. But on the other hand, it may be what
it takes to lay this thing to bed and afford the best protection
(considering circumstances) for my family. In other words, no matter which
way it goes I will end up with either a harmed family or no family. Unless,
of course, my wife decides to be what a wife ought to be.

By the way, if I am doling out the welfare to provide her room & board, am I
out of line by demanding information regarding her entire financial
situation; income, bank account, personal assets, etc.?

alath wrote:
As did I; and I am ever so grateful that my mother did NOT interfere with
the natural consequences of my choices which resulted in my learning the
concept of accountability

You're not showing any accountability at all. You married a woman with
a teenage daughter, which means accepting certain responsibilities.

Responsibilities to the wife and any underage children. Also, don't
forget, the wife has responsibilities to the husband as well. It's not
a one way street here.

Now
you are acting all suprised that a teenager is behaving immaturely, and
you're shirking the responsibilities you took on. Some
"accountability."

The pregnant woman is 18 and has chosen a life that the parents
disapprove of. Chris is no longer accountable of the decisions that his
adult children make.

This entire discussion is pointless. You have already decided to
respond to a crisis in your family with nothing put self-centered
petulance. You came to this board asking for people to support your bad
attitude and bad behavior. Unfortunately for you, there are a number of
people on this board who have had some success and and attained some
maturity as spouses and parents, and we can all see that you're not
responding to this situation appropriately as an adult, as a spouse, or
as a (step)father.

Of course, this is your opinion. I agree with Chris on this.

There's no need for our advice. You've already decided that you're not
going to grow up and you're not going to accept your responsibilities
and you're not going to step up and be a man here.

Chris, please note that being a man (according to this person) is to be
a walking wallet with no say in the matters of the home.

That's fine, it's
your life, and your family will be better off without you. Just don't
ask us to pat you on the back and tell you what a great guy you are,
and how terribly you've been misused, and how your wife should abandon
her daughter in favor of you.

Actually, let me pat you on the back.

In her shoes, I'd certainly side with the daugher. She's a teenager,
and there's a good chance she'll grow up some day. You're demonstrating
no such potential.

The irony of that statement speaks wonders for the logic of this
individual.

Regards...

Sue wrote:
wrote in message
I feel sorry for your husband. He married the wrong woman.

I think you are wrong about that agsf. Most women who are mothers will fight
to their death for their kids. Ask your wife who she would choose, you may
be surprised at her answer.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

Well, hopefully men will not marry such women.

As for me, I know my wife will put me before our son because we
discussed this prior to getting married and having kids. Her mother did
the same and so did her grandmother. And of course, I put my wife above
my son as well. All religions teach this, it's not a new concept.

Regards...

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:39:31 -0700, "Chris" wrote:

Unless,
of course, my wife decides to be what a wife ought to be.

*laughs*

No wonder asgf likes you. He's not well thought of in this group,
btw. Birds of a feather and all that....

Nan

"Chris" wrote in message
news:AJu1f.649$UF4.281@fed1read02...

"V." wrote in message
oups.com...

Just curious, the father was a legal adult at the time of BOTH
conceptions.
Are there statutory rape laws or is that just my imagination?


Just your imagination. Seriously, age of consent in most states is
16y.o., and even those with an 18y.o. age of consent won't prosecute for
minors over 16 unless there is a significant age difference between the
parties (usually defined as more than 5 years) or some form of
coercion/abuse of power is used (sex in return for grades, etc).
Here's a list of ages of consent by state:
http://www.webistry.net/jan/consent.html

You're right that if your wife feels your step-daughter can't care for
herself that she should not be responsible for an infant. Chances are if
she is so impaired, some health professional is going to make a report to
human services. If your wife's perception is more based in her feeling that
her baby is too young to have a baby, but the daughter actually is capable,
human services won't do much of anything. If they agree that she is not
able to care for an infant alone, they will probably start out with
conditions like she participate in a teen mother's program and live with
family or a family member be appointed guardian of the child so the teenager
can't just take off with the infant. That might be a surprise to your wife.
Even though her daughter is legally a minor, in issues concerning her own
child she is considered an emancipated adult and can make any decision she
chooses, including moving in the boyfriend, leaving the house after a fight
with your wife and not letting your wife see the baby, etc, etc.

Good luck,
Amy

"agent99" wrote in message
ups.com...

wrote:
agent99 wrote:
wrote:
Chris wrote:
"Nikki" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:

Not me. My comittment is to my wife FIRST and foremost!

As it should be.

That depends.

Ideally, the parents of the child put everyone in the family's
wellbeing at a premium, and recognise that for parents to care well
for
kids, they themselves must be well taken care of.

I agree with the above.

And her commitment to you should be above the
children. The order that should follow is:

1. God or some moral belief. For example, if your spouse told you to
kill another human, you should not do so.

2. Your spouse. You put the needs of your spouse before the needs of
your children. Your children will grow and start their own lives,
but
in the end, it's just the two of you.

So, lemme get this straight: if you're short on food, the spouse gets
food, but the kids don't?
What if there's a fire, or a capsized boat,
and only one person can be saved? Kid or parent? I hope my spouse
chooses kid - I certainly would.

It all depends on the age of the children and the parents. You will
have to question the ability of the parents on producing any further
children and/or the ability for the entire family to survive with the
loss of the spouse.

Absolutely.


Oh, and the scenario where it's just the two of you, and your children
have fled the nest and have their own lives? That's the middle, not
the
end. In the end, most likely one of you has outlived the other, and
has
medical and physical needs which your children are more likely to take
care of than the state is, so you'd better be sure you fostered a good
relationship with them and helped them to be successful as best you
could when you had the chance, because they are going to either be
caring for you, or choosing the facility that does it in their stead.

Hopefully you raised children of high moral value and have taken the
necessary steps during your life to compensate for this.

Right. In my opinion, this means considering the family as a whole, not
placing the needs of parents or children above the needs of the whole
family - basically, not contributing to spoiling or selfishness on
either side. In the case of this guy, I question his commitment to his
wife, because he comments that the marriage is hanging by a thread, and
because his commitment obviously doesn't extend to his stepdaughter,
her daughter.

It's hanging by a thread because of my wife. Marriage does NOT hinge on
one's commitment to a stepchild; it hinges on their commitment to their
SPOUSE.

That said, though, it sounds as though the girl doesn't
respect him very much, and I think somewhere he says that she claimed
she wanted nothing to do with him. Obviously, "I don't like you and
want nothing to do with you, but oh, can I still live in your house and
have my mom take care of my and my baby," is a terrible attitude. But
then, I think "I'll marry you and be your spouse and honour and respect
you, but not consider your children my children, or their children my
grandchildren," a bad attitude, too.

In your opinion. The child already has a father! I vowed to NEVER interfere
between my stepdaughter and her father; and have kept my pledge. In fact, I
have tried to encourage their relationship and offered to be instrumental in
having it come about. That she has virtually nothing to do with her father
is in no way caused by me.




3. Your children. Your children's birthdays and/or sporting events
or
any other needs surpass those of family and friends.

Ohhhh. Birthday parties and sporting events are the "needs" of which
we
speak. I see.

Those were just simplified examples...

Not, you know, the reproductive autonomy of a sexually mature young
woman who lives with her mother and stepfather, and the wellbeing of
her unborn child. My mistake.

She is no longer a child. She is an adult of legal age and has made
life decisions that she needs to take responsibility for.

That's what I just said. "Sexually mature young woman", "reproductive
autonomy", these are terms implying that the girl is not a child.



4. Family and Friends.

So does my wife make the "unilateral pronouncements" on family
decisions, or am I living in a democracy where the votes of my
wife
and her child outnumber mine?

It seems that you are the one wanting to make the unilateral
pronouncement.
The person you are not considering is the baby.

That's correct. Depending on which court you choose, legally no
baby exists;
and she will be a legal adult before such baby exists.

Also, his step-daughter is not taking the baby into consideration.
Why
should he and his wife be burdened by the lack of responsibility of
his
step-child?

For someone who believes in a moral code, you got no notion of
compassion, have you?

Apparently, you have no idea on what compassion means. Compassion is
empowering people to make correct decisions in their lives and holding
them responsible for these decisions without depending on other people
for support. You talk like a liberal who rather raise taxes for welfare
programs instead of forcing these people to educate and find jobs and
become independant. You rather see them dependant on the system and
continue their way of life than to stand on their own two feet. You are
the one that lacks compassion.

Well, being burdened by the poor choices our family members make is
part of family. Empowering people and holding them responsible is a
great idea, and absolutely necessary. My own parents made it clear that
after the age of 18, we would have to pay rent to live with them,
unless we were furthering our education. Often, however, shoving people
off the end of the dock and expecting them to learn to swim just
results in them drowning, if you take my meaning. Your assumptions
about me wanting people to be dependent on "the system" are misguided.
I assure you I am a very compassionate person, but I'm not a bleeding
heart and I don't take in strays.

This guy obviously has some pretty big issues at home, and I don't know
what he and his wife can do to solve those issues. In my culture,
however, my parents and my children are part of the same (extended)
family. They are not a second family. My grandmother lives with my
parents, and she is not considered a member of a second family who
lives under their roof. In his frustration, which is clearly justified,
I worry that Chris is trying to say that his wife's daughter isn't
really a part of his family.

She's not because she CHOOSES so. Bear in mind that I may very well be
considered a third wheel here. But like it or not, my wife has a covenantal
relationship to me as do I to her.

I would not want to be married to a man
who considered me his family, but not my children. Again, that's an
issue that he and his wife need to work out.



It's like you're channelling Dr. Laura.

I was never a fan of hers. Did she die?

You're not a fan of hers? By some of your posts, I'd have pegged you
for her acolyte. She may not have died, but I don't think a warm heart
beats inside her chest.


99

Cool name by the way, it was one of my favorite shows.

Hey, thanks, mine too.

99

In article ,
Nan wrote:

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:39:31 -0700, "Chris" wrote:

Unless,
of course, my wife decides to be what a wife ought to be.

*laughs*

No wonder asgf likes you. He's not well thought of in this group,
btw. Birds of a feather and all that....


"Chris" seems to be a poster to talk.abortion, alt.politics.*,
alt.child-support, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh... We should be thankful this
conversation has remained as civil as it has so far.
--
accompanied by TK, number two, due in April of 2006

"Nan" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 21:34:02 -0700, "Chris" wrote:

You must be posting from Zimbabwe. Afterall, there is an abundance of
"tiny,
helpless" babies there for you to be taking care of.

This is a strawman. The discussion was about spouse and child.

My family consists of me and my wife. Her daughter has now left the
family
to yoke with another man. The only connection that I have with her is the
fact that she is residing in my home off of my dime.

Uhm, she's "legally" your stepdaughter.

And?

It's a sad statement about
you that you have no connection with her.

Why is it a sad statement about me that she refuses to have anything to do
with me?


When push comes to shove, it is "legality" that will prevail.

Mores the pity for your wife.

Sorry, too many women's shelters or other escapes for ANY woman to be
homeless. Not to mention, I have never seen a single homeless woman in my
neck of the woods; and it's a big city. Whether or not her daughter
chooses
to be homeless with a baby has what to do with me?

A shelter is not a home.

HOME: a house, apartment, or other shelter that is the usual residence of a
person, family, or household. (Webster's College Dictionary).


It wasn't me who initiated the "legality" thing into this discussion. But
let me guess, you believe that legality has no effect in this situation?

No, I'm quite sure you'll go to great lengths to make sure it has an
effect.

I don't create law.

Whether your marriage survives that is anyone's guess.

We don't have children so that we can boot them out the door at
the magic age of 18. Did you marry your wife thinking you'd be rid of
the daughter when she reached 18?

YES. That's what my wife told me that she and her daughter desired BEFORE
we
got married. In fact, her daughter expressed her wishes years ago and has
already left for days at a time.

Uhm, people, situations, things change. I am with my dh, thinking
he's always going to be able to work and support us. I'm not foolish
enough to think that may change tomorrow.

Even though people, situations, things change?


I can appreciate the unable aspect of not borrowing money. I wouldn't
be able to do that either. But good grief, emotional support can go a
long way.

Perhaps, but there is no emotional connection between her child and me.
Just
yesterday, she again told me to take a hike.

The emotional connection should be there through your wife. She is
your wife's child, and you are disrespecting that relationship.

How so?


I see. So you too have no problem with some man molesting your child and
getting her knocked up not once but TWICE!

No, our marriage would be in peril because of your attitude against my
daughter receiving my help. She would come BEFORE you.

Argh! Here again, emotional support is necessary.

Maybe so, but not my obligation.

To your wife.

Wow, you're some piece of work.

Thank you.

It wasn't a compliment.

I know, it was an opinion. And for that I thank you.


Nan