pregnant 17 year old

"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?


Best wishes,
Ericka

Cuddlefish wrote:
Chris wrote:

Since when does a grandmother have any commitment to the wellbeing of her
unborn grandchild?

Well it has been hypothesised that female menopause in humans evolved so
as to 'free up' older women to assist younger women with childrearing
since they were no longer fertile themselves. Apparently no other
species experiences female menopause.

Jacqueline

Hmmm . . . frequent night wakings with newborn, frequent night wakings
due to hot flashes . . . when my mother came to stay after my first was
born, she did remark that she might as well be up with him, since she
wasn't getting any sleep anyway! Interesting hypothesis!

99

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.

I have to somewhat disagree with you. Although the family as a whole
should be taken into consideration, the order that I listed should be
followed.

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


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.

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

Hope so!


... 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.

It all depends on the situation. In this situation I have to side with
Chris.

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.

I also suspect that in your culture, young women don't sleep around and
get pregnant either. It's easy to confuse westernized points of views
with your own, but you will have to acknowledge the differences and
understand that these differences is what makes your culture thrive
while the westerners decline.

Ah, but my culture is western. And lots of young women do "sleep
around" (or at least have sex in their teens) and get pregnant,
including my aunt. Her parents helped her get on her feet - gently, but
without turning her into a charity case - and she and her son did very
well.


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. 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.


I'm sure he supported her and accepted her when she was a child.
However, at this point, she is an adult who shares different moral
views than his. He should not be expected to take on the responsibility
and burden that she has created.

You're not a fan of hers? By some of your posts, I'd have pegged you
for her acolyte.

I've been called a lot of insulting things online, but this remark tops
all of them.

I have to admit I'm relieved to hear you say that.

99

99

Regards...

"agent99" wrote in message
oups.com...

Chris wrote:
"agent99" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
Chris wrote:
"Nikki" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
For starters, thank you very much for your response! Now, I
will
respond, with all due respect, to your post below.

"alath" wrote in message
ups.com...

If you ask your wife to choose between her daughter and her
"marriage
hanging by a thread" husband, her daughter will win, and
rightly
so.

To understand you correctly, are you saying that a woman's
commitment
to her daughter ought to trump her commitment to her husband?

Can't speak for Alath but I would pick my children over my
husband,
who is
their actual bio father. I'm not saying her decision to support
her
daughter by giving her a place to live is right or wrong but
that
many
parents would pick their children over anyone else. I suspect
my
husband
would pick the kids over me if an issue arose where he felt he
had
to
pick.
I hope he would.

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.

That's why my wife comes first.

Fair enough.



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?

SPOUSE. Last I checked, my marriage covenant was with my wife.........
not
her child.

Well, I hope she's okay with that. If it was me, I wouldn't be, but
then if I were in a position where I might marry someone who was not
the biological father of my children, I would not do it if he wasn't
wholly committed to being their de facto father. I wouldn't want to be
married to a man who felt that his commitment only extended to me, and
who didn't consider my children his family. But that's my personal
feeling only, and if you and your wife have a different arrangement,
that's your business.

We do; it's called a covenantal marriage. Her child has started a brand new
family.






I hope my spouse
chooses kid - I certainly would. And if you think this argument is
spurious, consider that most families in the world do have to consider
the food issue, and most parents throughout history have gone without
in order that their children might have the best chance at survival.

You're the one with the psych 101 understanding of natural selection,
agsf, surely you recognise that adult animals strive to ensure the
survival of their young, so that they too might procreate?

What do animals have to do with this discussion?

I'm merely remarking on agsf's frequent references to human sexual
preferences from a "survival of the species" perspective. The same sort
of argument would support the notion that parents generally put their
offspring's wellbeing above their own.

I am not privy to such reference. But even so, I am unsure how you conclude
that one implies the other.




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.


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.

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.

Since when does a grandmother have any commitment to the wellbeing of
her
unborn grandchild?

Wow. I can't believe you asked that. Ummm, since always? Regardless of
the circumstances of the pregnancy, most women concern themselves when
their daughters get pregnant. Otherwise, words like "grandmother" and
"grandchild" wouldn't exist. Grandmothers are often present at the
births of grandchildren, and all over the world are traditionally the
ones who help nurse their daughters and daughters-in-law, and
grandchildren, through the later stages of pregnancy and the newborn
phase. In some Asian cultures, the unborn child's grandmother will move
in with the parents to assist both before and after the baby is born.

That's some pretty serious commitment to the "wellbeing of her unborn
grandchild," and it's almost universal.

It is apparent that my use of the word "commitment" is different than your
use of the word. I am using it in the sense of having a choiceless
duty/obligation as opposed to your use regarding the action.


I understand your disapproval of your stepdaughter's choices - she has
been very irresponsible. What I don't get is your apparent belief that
your wife shouldn't feel any need, borne of love, to care for her child
and grandchild.

I made no mention about my wife feeling any such need.



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?

"Compassion" and "morality" are not codependent terms.

Indeed they are not. Cruel acts are frequently committed under the
guise of morality.

"Cruel" is a matter of opinion, and "guise of morality" may indeed be moral.


99

"Mum of Two" wrote in message
...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:7gI1f.695$UF4.55@fed1read02...

What is your source for such morality? You seem to have lost sight of
the
fact that I am referring to the "woman" (according to law) that her
daughter
will soon be, not a dependent child.

Possibly, but that does not negate the effect of having a molester on
the
prowl. Most likely, the odds would be reduced from slim to none. No
great
loss.

Ok, back up a minute here. Your step-daughter consented to sex with this
man, right? (FWIW, the legal age of consent is 16 here in NZ, so where I
live it would not be considered statutory rape).

It is 18 here.

Legalities aside for a moment, in your mind, is your step-daughter a child
or a woman? If she's a child and the victim of a 'molester on the prowl',
she deserves and needs the full support and protection of your wife and
yourself. If she's a woman, then she's capable of making her own decisions
and you can hardly consider making statutory rape claims against the
father.

I am using the term "molester" in the legal sense, thus I cannot put
legality aside and still talk about molestation.


In my opinion, she's neither, regardless of what the law says. She's a
teenager, capable of making her own life changing decisions, but
ill-equipped to forsee the long term consequences of those choices.

Indeed, however I am unwilling to be burdened by the consequences of her
actions. I am already burdened with enough consequences of my OWN actions
and those of my wife!

If your
wife does not give her any kind of support now, she risks losing her
daughter forever.

She lost her long ago.

Your wife is handling a crisis situation the only way she
knows how right now.

No she isn't.

I'm sure the thought of losing her daughter is a much
scarier prospect than the thought of losing a husband who is not helping
the
immediate situation (no offence intended).

If you want to save your marriage, I suspect you're going to have to start
biting your tongue a little more.

Precisely what is it that I am saying that must not be said, and how will
not saying it save my marriage?

Your step-daughter is young and naive,
your wife is panicking for the well-being of her daughter and grandchild,
the baby's father is not up to the task, and your family is relying on you
to show some maturity and accept what has happened, even if you don't like
the short term changes it might involve.

I HAVE accepted it.

Saying that it isn't fair, isn't
your responsibility, etc etc may be true to an extent, but with a marriage
hanging by a thread, statements based on selfish thinking such as that are
not going to benefit your situation!

You knew your wife had a daughter when you married her, presumably, and in
marrying your wife you accepted her daughter as your own. She doesn't like
you? Get over it. Plenty of teenagers 'don't like' their parents, and it's
down to the parents to show more maturity and ride it out. I don't think
you're thinking of the long-term outcome any more than your step-daughter
is, to be honest. What is the worst that can happen, by standing by your
step-daughter and helping her to get ahead, albeit reluctantly?

She defies my ANY effort (what little my wife allows) to help her get ahead.

Possibly 5-6
years of hardship and a disorganised family environment, which with the
right support your step-daughter will emerge from with greater maturity
and
sense of personal responsibility. The child will be in school, she can get
training, get a job, and the spin-off from that is a happy wife, a secure
marriage, and someone who will look after you in the same way when you're
old.

If you are referring to financial support, please review my original post.

Chances are, this girl could be picking out your rest home in 30-40
years, so you might want to make the effort.

Uhuh. All the more reason to not assist her in continuing to be
irresponsible, lazy, disrespectful.........

I speak from some experience here, because I remember being 17, and I had
a
mother who stood by me even though she didn't like the situation.

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.



--
Amy
Mum to Carlos born sleeping 20/11/02,
& Ana born screaming 30/06/04
http://www.freewebs.com/carlos2002/
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/ana%5Fj%5F2004/
My blog: http://spaces.msn.com/members/querer-hijo-querer-hija/

"Chris" wrote in message
news:7j32f.771$UF4.17@fed1read02...

In my opinion, she's neither, regardless of what the law says. She's a
teenager, capable of making her own life changing decisions, but
ill-equipped to forsee the long term consequences of those choices.

Indeed, however I am unwilling to be burdened by the consequences of her
actions. I am already burdened with enough consequences of my OWN actions
and those of my wife!

She's inevitably going to be burdened by her actions regardless of what you
do, and she'll find that out once the baby is born. You have it in your
power to make that burden bearable, but a learning experience for her, but
it sounds as though you're giving ultimatums.

If your
wife does not give her any kind of support now, she risks losing her
daughter forever.

She lost her long ago.

See, it's that kind of attitude which is holding you back. I don't believe
it is possible to pronounce a 17 year old a lost cause. She may be lazy,
irresponsible and disrespectful now, but I don't think you can predict the
rest of her life based on that. She's going through adolescence _and_
pregnancy - I wouldn't expect normal behaviour from her right now. I'm not
surprised that there is no love lost between the two of you, it sounds as
though you have given up on her entirely.

Your wife is handling a crisis situation the only way she
knows how right now.

No she isn't.

I'm sure the thought of losing her daughter is a much
scarier prospect than the thought of losing a husband who is not helping
the
immediate situation (no offence intended).

If you want to save your marriage, I suspect you're going to have to
start
biting your tongue a little more.

Precisely what is it that I am saying that must not be said, and how will
not saying it save my marriage?

You're giving ultimatums, you're giving your opinion on how you think her
wife should raise her child, yet you don't want to accept responsibility for
her daughter's welfare. Either she's your daughter, by marriage if not
blood, and you should be treating her as such - or she's not your
responsibility at all, and you should stay out of it entirely.

Saying that it isn't fair, isn't
your responsibility, etc etc may be true to an extent, but with a
marriage
hanging by a thread, statements based on selfish thinking such as that
are
not going to benefit your situation!

You knew your wife had a daughter when you married her, presumably, and
in
marrying your wife you accepted her daughter as your own. She doesn't
like
you? Get over it. Plenty of teenagers 'don't like' their parents, and
it's
down to the parents to show more maturity and ride it out. I don't think
you're thinking of the long-term outcome any more than your step-daughter
is, to be honest. What is the worst that can happen, by standing by your
step-daughter and helping her to get ahead, albeit reluctantly?

She defies my ANY effort (what little my wife allows) to help her get
ahead.

You've given up on her, so again, I'm not surprised.

Possibly 5-6
years of hardship and a disorganised family environment, which with the
right support your step-daughter will emerge from with greater maturity
and
sense of personal responsibility. The child will be in school, she can
get
training, get a job, and the spin-off from that is a happy wife, a secure
marriage, and someone who will look after you in the same way when you're
old.

If you are referring to financial support, please review my original post.

Chances are, this girl could be picking out your rest home in 30-40
years, so you might want to make the effort.

Uhuh. All the more reason to not assist her in continuing to be
irresponsible, lazy, disrespectful.........

Some things just need time, to allow people to mature, to diffuse the
situation. I'd be interested to know exactly what you're doing/saying to try
to help, because I have an idea in my head...

I speak from some experience here, because I remember being 17, and I had
a
mother who stood by me even though she didn't like the situation.

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.

Yet you don't sound accountable. You can choose your friends, but not your
relatives - but in this case, you did choose your relatives. I'll say again,
your step-daughter was part of your wife's life when you married her. Don't
make your wife choose, because you will lose every time.
You asked for suggestions here, and I think you received some good advice.
You came into this group, I believe, looking for people to tell you that you
are right. Instead of getting antsy with the regular posters here, perhaps
re-read your OP. You could have better phrased it, that you were looking for
support for the decision that you had already made. I can't stand it when
people ask for 'advice' or 'suggestions' when they really are just looking
for moral support. Either is fine - but be honest about what you hope to
achieve by asking your question.


--
Amy
Mum to Carlos born sleeping 20/11/02,
& Ana born screaming 30/06/04
http://www.freewebs.com/carlos2002/
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/ana%5Fj%5F2004/
My blog: http://spaces.msn.com/members/querer-hijo-querer-hija/

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)

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

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.

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. 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.

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.

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:48:15 -0400, "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.

Exactly. When I was a single mom, my ds was the Most Important Person
in my life. One or two guys I dated wanted me to choose between them
and him. Guess who lost each time.

Nan

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?


Why ask? As you can tell, she is incapable of holding a conversation.

Regards...