help me steel my resolve

We've been married 10 years, I'm 37 years old, he's 41. We've never really wanted kids. But sometimes I see kids who I think are pretty cool and wonder "what if?" Help me steel my resolve. I know I would regret motherhood.

just remember thats for every nice kids there are 10,000 bad ones.

remember the cost, not just financial, but ecological, theres also the medical costs.

what if... this potential kid is gacy, dahmer, sutcliffe.

take a look around your house, all your fragile things, and the nice thinbgs you have. and imagine them being destroyed. imagine not sleeping for months.

*********************************************************************************************************************************
I just post the stories, for interest.. for everyone

Lord, what fools these mortals be!
- A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Act III, Scene ii

Voltaire said: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

H.L.Mencken wrote:"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. Albert Einstein

OK, Maybe, just MAYBE it would turn out cool, but the odds are severely against it. Even though you are good person, and would instill values, the world the way it is now, would be against you. Even if the kid turned out decent, the journey would still be hell with the normal kid miseries: noise, filth, repugnancy, constant illnesses brought in from school, monetary woes, sacrifices of time. You would still have to put this little stranger ahead of you in every way. And if it happened like it does in the majority of cases, and the kid turned out bad... It's just not worth the risk.

What if your kid doesn't turn out to be cool? I'm not talking about having a child that ends up being a murderer -- I'm talking about having a child with severe mental or physical disabilities. At your age (no offense), that's a very real possibility.

Married for 10 years? That’s 10 years of uninterrupted sleep, 10 years of undisturbed “couple time”, 10 years of a smooth-running household routine – all of that would be irrevocably changed, even with a perfectly healthy child. You’d have to rearrange your entire lives around first a baby who doesn’t sleep through the night, needs to be changed, wants to be held/walked for hours, needs to be fed every few hours; then a toddler who gets into EVERYTHING – forcing you to “baby-proof” your home and box up your breakable collectibles, knick-knacks and valuables to keep them out of the kid’s reach (which usually means completely out of sight); next you’d go through the pre-school stage – the constant asking of “why?”, kiddie cartoons, whining for toys; then there are the grade-school years – costumes, recitals, plays, bake sales, play dates, room mothers, little league… After that, you might get to have a couple of years with your very own “pretty cool” kid -- but shortly after, you’ll have to deal with a “tween” and then a full-fledged teenager.

Would it be worth it?

Do you honestly think that your 10 years of marriage would make you and your husband better able to deal with parenthood and all it entails? Or would looking back on those 10 years of child-free bliss add that much more bitterness and resentment to the strained mess your newly destroyed marriage will become?

Don’t be fooled by the Kodak Moments. Too many people buy into that lie and end up with a lifetime of regret.

These are all great responses so far. I also think data on what repugnancy and birth does to a woman would be helpful.

I know I don't have the time or patience for kids. Plus, we can retire early.

Imagine your body painfully expanding with a hefty 14 pound loaf. Think about the hemmorhoids, stretchmarks and swollen ankles, to say nothing of the hormonal changes that might make you a cranky and mean-spirited wreck. Your husband might work long hours or spend evenings at his favorite bar to avoid your cruel outbursts.

Imagine getting to the hospital without enough time for a c-section ot even an epidural. Think about how it would feel for your nether regions to rip as your enormous squalling pwecious makes his or her way into this overpopulated world.

Imagine the sleepless nights spent breastfeeding your screaming newborn and trying to comfort him or her. Some women experience cracked, bleeding nipples and excruciatingly painful engorged breasts. Would you smile through those bleary, tear-filled nights and say, "It's all worth it?" And if you said this to someone, would you mean it?

Imagine the surgeries to correct the internal tears that your loaf made as you pushed him or her out of your now permanently stretched hoo-ha.

Imagine wearing diapers the rest of your life because the surgeries didn't work and now you shit without meaning to and piss each time you sneeze, cough or laugh. Damn, you're sexy.

Imagine being your child's slave until he or she is of legal adult age. Spontaneous trips, get-togethers and lovemaking would largely be a thing of the past for you and your husband. Everything would have to be planned around the needs and demands of this manipulative little tyrant who knows damn well what the score is.

Imagine the massive pressure to be a "mommy" (read some of those horrid "mommy blogs" to gain a better understanding of all that it entails). You'd be expected to excitedly share the stories of your baby's first word, steps, and bowel movement on the toilet. Is this what you went to law school for?

Imagine being sued for your child's terrible behavior and choices. Depending on what the charges are, your legal skills may be useless here.

Imagine your child becoming a drug addict and thief who opens credit accounts in your name and drains you dry.

Imagine your long and happy marriage breaking up due to all the strains that the fruit of your loins has heaped on the two of you. You may believe that this would never happen to your relationship. You certainly wouldn't be the first one who made this assumption, nor would you be the last to suffer through it.
*
*
*
Now imagine your life continuing the way it is now, only better and more secure as you add to your savings account and just enjoy life with your husband. Do you really want to risk losing it all on the off chance that "it's different when it's your own"?

Check out my posts in "Patio" section of this forum:

For the fencesitters

http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/read.php?7,22897

and also:

Just in case you are thinking about having kids... (Long)

http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/read.php?7,22898


Those are kind of long, so set aside some time to read them. It's tough to think straight in breeder centered world, but we all cannot be doing "what everyone else is" can we? Life would suck then!

If after reading my posts you still want to have a kid, go borrow one somewhere. It may cost a little bit of money (food, time, supplies, etc.), but it's like paying for education - it pays off in the end. Give your self about a year to think about it. If you still feel kids are what you want after that - more power to you. I've borrowed kids before and I tell ya, it sucked ass!

Thing of "It's different when it's your own" is true. Your own are much harder mentally and physically - they accuse you of creating them and want you to suffer with them because YOU gave them life that sucks! I do not want to list too many details here, but, Childfree Chicago Lawyer, PM to me if you want details. I cannot guarantee I will not make you vomit and remind you of a sad misery.

WHAT IF. Hmmmm. Here's some what if's to think of:

What if the kid is born with severe mental/physical handicaps?
What if the kid never sleeps through the night until it is 3 years old?
What if the kid turns out to be the next Jeffrey Dahmer?
What if the kid is the most horrible toddler on the face of the earth?
What if the kid is born with severe medical problems?
What if the kid is the most horrible teenager on the face of the earth and ends up costing you thousands in lawyer fees?
What if my body freaks out and I develop an auto-immune disease during the pregnancy?
What if this kid ends up destroying my marriage?

There is NO DOUBT, however, that having a kid will destroy the life you know now. Is it worth the what if?

Childfree Chicago Lawyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We've been married 10 years, I'm 37 years old,
> he's 41. We've never really wanted kids. But
> sometimes I see kids who I think are pretty cool
> and wonder "what if?" Help me steel my resolve.
> I know I would regret motherhood.



Based on the fact that you came here to Bratfree and that you wrote, "I know I would regret motherhood," sounds to me you already know that you should not have a kyd and don't want one! Please don't make the mistake of having one and then resenting the kyd later.

Stephanie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What if your kid doesn't turn out to be cool? I'm
> not talking about having a child that ends up
> being a murderer -- I'm talking about having a
> child with severe mental or physical disabilities.
> At your age (no offense), that's a very real
> possibility.
>
> Married for 10 years? That’s 10 years of
> uninterrupted sleep, 10 years of undisturbed
> “couple time”, 10 years of a smooth-running
> household routine – all of that would be
> irrevocably changed, even with a perfectly healthy
> child. You’d have to rearrange your entire lives
> around first a baby who doesn’t sleep through the
> night, needs to be changed, wants to be
> held/walked for hours, needs to be fed every few
> hours; then a toddler who gets into EVERYTHING –
> forcing you to “baby-proof” your home and box up
> your breakable collectibles, knick-knacks and
> valuables to keep them out of the kid’s reach
> (which usually means completely out of sight);
> next you’d go through the pre-school stage – the
> constant asking of “why?”, kiddie cartoons,
> whining for toys; then there are the grade-school
> years – costumes, recitals, plays, bake sales,
> play dates, room mothers, little league… After
> that, you might get to have a couple of years with
> your very own “pretty cool” kid -- but shortly
> after, you’ll have to deal with a “tween” and then
> a full-fledged teenager.
>
> Would it be worth it?
>
> Do you honestly think that your 10 years of
> marriage would make you and your husband better
> able to deal with parenthood and all it entails?
> Or would looking back on those 10 years of
> child-free bliss add that much more bitterness and
> resentment to the strained mess your newly
> destroyed marriage will become?
>
> Don’t be fooled by the Kodak Moments. Too many
> people buy into that lie and end up with a
> lifetime of regret.


I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THIS POST! I especially agree with the part in bold. Television and the movies that come out these days tout having a baby as a wonderful, beautiful spayshul thing, but the reality is that IT'S NOT!

Far too many women want babies, but not the responsibility of raising a child. Then get knocked up with or without protection, but don't believe in abortion and end up with multiple kids and multiple baby-daddies and a lifetime of heartache. Good grief. Having a baby is so fucking NOT worth it!!!!

CF Chicago Lawyer,

Me & my husband are also your age and have been married 10 years.

I also come across some kids that seem very cool & interesting, and I get along with them well. I also used to have that "what if" thought myself.

I don't anymore though, since I know if they were my own kid I would be so busy & stressed in trying to raise them that I wouldn't find them as interesting & cool. I notice that many of the cool kids I meet have parents who don't even realize how unique their kid really is.

I've been thinking of mentoring, and maybe it's something you can consider. Having the objectivity of a CF person, I can see those things that make a kid cool. And I also notice kids respond to me differently. I seem to have more interesting things to share with them, and vice-versa. Besides, you're not adding to the allready overpopulated planet, and giving a kid a good CF role model. And we can't have too many of those!

Thanks everybody for the responses.

I find that I get along well with a certain age range of kids, but all other ranges either disgust me or irritate me. That, and pregnancy and birth would be nightmarish. Childfree life is too much fun.

ok cf chicago lawyer, you ask for "I also think data on what repugnancy and birth does to a woman would be helpful."


http://www.babycentre.co.uk/baby/youafterthebirth/youafterthebirth/
How will I feel immediately after the birth?


You may feel alert and happy -- even exhilarated -- physically, mentally, and emotionally satisfied. You may feel bruised and battered, dazed and exhausted, disappointed and even depressed, with an episiotomy or a tear (or both) and the stitches that have repaired it. Or you may feel anything between these two extremes.

• You will have a discharge called lochia (postnatal bleeding). At first it's mixed with blood, then it becomes brownish and, finally, yellowish white. For about 10 days it will be like a heavy period, and it can continue for up to six weeks in dribs and drabs. The more you rest, the lighter the lochia will be.

• Your uterus (womb) will rapidly get smaller and contract back to its normal size and position. Breastfeeding will help speed up this process and, within six weeks of delivery, your uterus should be back to its pre-pregnancy weight. You may experience afterpains as it contracts, especially with second and later babies. Afterpains feel rather like labour contractions and often happen while you are breastfeeding your baby, as hormones released while you're feeding encourage the uterus to contract.

Minor grazes and tears to the neck of the womb, the vagina and the perineum (the area between the vaginal opening and the anus) usually heal quickly; an episiotomy may take longer. Stitches may be painful for a few days or even weeks. Ask your midwife for advice on caring for your perineum, and don't forget your pelvic floor exercises as they help to reduce swelling and speed up healing.

• After delivery your breasts will be soft, as they only contain a little colostrum (the nutritious golden fluid that nourishes and protects your newborn) at this point. After three or four days your milk will arrive, making your breasts feel hot, swollen and tender. At first your nipples may feel very sensitive, and the first 10-20 seconds of each feed may be uncomfortable. This usually begins to ease off after about the fifth day.

Your tummy may be flabby and wrinkly, and your waistline will still be non-existent. You won't have lost all the weight you gained in pregnancy.

• You may still suffer from backache and piles.

• You might have stretchmarks on your breasts, tummy and thighs, especially if you gained a lot of weight quickly during pregnancy.

• Your ankles may be swollen for a week or so.

• If you have had a caesarean birth, you will probably be in pain and might find it difficult to sit up, get out of bed, stand up straight and walk around.
As the level of progesterone in your body drops, the tone of smooth muscle throughout your body improves, heartburn is swiftly relieved, and constipation and varicose veins improve, although piles generally take a little longer.


http://www.babycentre.co.uk/baby/youafterthebirth/firstpooexquestion/

Going to the loo for the first time after giving birth can be a source of anxiety for many new mums, especially when your midwife keeps asking, "Have you been yet?". In fact, it's usual not to go to the loo for the first two days so, if you're a "daily lady", don’t worry - you are not constipated (yet!).

One reason why we tend to get anxious about having our first poo after birth is lack of information. Talking about going to the loo is difficult for many of us, and we tend to feel embarrassed when discussing "the bowels". Other aspects of your body after the birth - bleeding (lochia), the baby blues and engorged breasts - are all discussed at antenatal classes, but no one talks about going to the toilet.
******** there you go

http://www.babycentre.co.uk/baby/youafterthebirth/perinealpain/

*********************************************************************************************************************************
I just post the stories, for interest.. for everyone

Lord, what fools these mortals be!
- A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Act III, Scene ii

Voltaire said: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

H.L.Mencken wrote:"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. Albert Einstein

There's nothing wrong with playing around with "what if" scenarios in your mind. But if you really want to take it further, try mentoring like grizzlycat mentioned. You may even have nieces and nephews who are craving a little attention from someone who will actually listen to them.
Also, I think it's good to have people around you who support your CFness. Not just your husband. I wouldn't let the idea that you have played out the what-if-I-had-a kid fantasy freak you out. Good luck and hugs.

Chicago Lawyer, only you can make the decision. We cannot strengthen your resolve. Either you want a kid...or you don't. I or anyone else can tell you how fucked moohood is and that your marriage would be deep-sixed once you shat our a baby...yet many people will think it will be different for them. It is like drinking and my program. It is not for people who want it or need it...but for people who are willing to work at being sober. No one else can do it for us. Same for the willingness to remain childfree-by-choice. Sorry to sound harsh but this is something that another person cannot convince someone to do.

amethusos* Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chicago Lawyer, only you can make the decision. We
> cannot strengthen your resolve. Either you want a
> kid...or you don't. I or anyone else can tell you
> how fucked moohood is and that your marriage would
> be deep-sixed once you shat our a baby...yet many
> people will think it will be different for them.

amethusos,

You actually helped 2 of us!

I'm not trying to hijack this thread, but on another one I said my 38 year old single sister just had a busted condom episode & got preggo & may keep it. I can try all I can to inform her & support her in that she has other options & doesn't have to go thru with it (gawd knows our famblee or her friends won't) but in the end- as you said- she'll either keep it or she won't.

It's just harder to accept when you know what a person that close to you is in for, but I'll still support her as I don't want to loose a sister.

While I believe Amethusos is correct, I think this is a good article for anyone who is contemplating children:

http://enlightenment.supersaturated.com/essays/text/carolynray/shame_children.html

Babies and toddlers leave me cold. I can't imagine why anyone would think they are fascinating. Like the article says, I find the natural behavior of children (especially young ones) annoying in the extreme. I've always known that about myself and that's why I fought unbelievably hard for a tubal ligation at age 36. (It shouldn't have been as hard as it was, but that's another story.) I also wanted a decision that wasn't easily reversible. I didn't want anyone to try an oops me or for me to bow under pressure in a weak moment. I can't recommend it enough ESPECIALLY to single people--it really makes things clear and the baby rabid breeders will move on. (Although I do know some women who have pestered their DHs to get reversed. It seems to be more common among women. Men, OTOH, will just go and find someone else to breed with. Maybe this is because of the numbers, I dunno.)

All of you all brought up great points. Two that really resonate with me are:

1. The coolness factor. Parents delude themselves about how cool their kid will be when most likely he/she will be just a normal, annoying kid. If you do manage to avoid Down's or autism (no test for autism and it's very common among older parents, 1 in 150) and you do have a cool kid, if you are a PNB, you won't be able to enjoy it much. You would be constantly obsessed with making sure they are clothed, fed, behaving properly, not screwing up, etc.

2. What Amethusos wrote: "I or anyone else can tell you how fucked moohood is and that your marriage would be deep-sixed once you shat our a baby...yet many people will think it will be different for them."

A-freakin' men, Sister. See, here's the thing: You can show a WannaBreeder all the statistics about how breeding diminishes martial satisfaction, etc and he/she immediately thinks, oh, but my kids won't be like that, or my spouse and I will become closer, not farther apart because we are spayshul. I look at those statistics and I BELIEVE THEM. Especially when I hear my MIL talk about her marriage as being equal, but 51/49 man to woman. That's not equality in stock shares and it's not equality in a marriage. Yuck and no thanks.

That's something that nobody wants to talk about: balance of power in a marriage, cuntwork and chore wars. Even if your husband is exceptional, once that kid is born, you will get more of the work. This is borne out in all of the surveys where women report their marriages were more egalitarian before children entered the picture.

In my own marriage, if my husband throws his clothes on the floor, they stay there until he picks them up. I won't do that for him because he's a functioning adult. (He's actually very good, cooks, does laundry and housework, etc. I'm using this as an example.) The problem with kids is that their needs are IMMEDIATE. If your husband slacks off, somebody has to do something and they have to do it NOW.

I think this is one of the reasons couples fight so much after they have kids. I know a childed woman who blathers on about how having a man's baybee is a way for a woman to "show her love for him." I want to laugh out loud and ask her husband what he thinks of that. Since their kid was born, she's ratcheted up the nagging to the 10th power and she doesn't have as much time for him because she's tending her whiny brat, aka the Love Object.

Nora Ephron made the observation that having a baybee is like throwing a hand grenade into your marriage. And I would want to do that, why?

My, I'm chatty today. Good topic, even if you can't change someone's mind, it's fun to discuss.

This one here should be able to somewhat describe the financial picture of child bearing:

http://www.businessweek.com/print/investor/content/nov2007/pi2007119_694057.htm

Here is the actual article:

The Cost of Kids November 12, 2007, 12:10AM EST text size: TT
Is Raising Kids a Fool's Game?
Parenting is fulfilling, but the financial burden can be overwhelming—and then there's the crimp it puts in your leisure time

by Karyn McCormack

Like many parents, I'm suffering from sticker shock. It's not just the $375 monthly tuition for preschool. (And that's for just three hours, two days a week; five full days would cost me $1,000.) Little things add up, like the school's solicitation to donate to their school in Africa and monthly dues for Scholastic Book Club (how could you say no?). The school even put a price tag on potty training: If my daughter, who will turn 3 in December, was not able to use the toilet by herself by the end of September, I'd be charged $100 a month until she achieved this milestone. (She did it, whew!)

I know preschool is paying off when I hear her spell her name and see her progress in other skills (she has become quite the negotiator). And you can't put a price tag on the appreciation for life that I've gained from her. In the end, all of the sweat and tears (and dwindling cash flow) must be worth it, right?

In her 1994 book Pricing the Priceless Child (Princeton University Press), Princeton University sociology professor Viviana Zelizer describes how in the 19th century, children were "economic assets" that contributed to farm work and other important tasks. Then, during the early 20th century, the U.S. established laws removing many children from hard labor, sparking the "rise of the economically useless and emotionally priceless child," Zelizer says.

"As children have become less of an economic issue and people have fewer children and wait longer to have them, children have become precious, not in a economic sense but in an emotional sense," says Ellen Galinsky, president of the Families & Work Institute, a nonprofit research organization in New York and author of Ask the Children (William Morrow, 1999). "Having children is a meaningful thing to do in life—it's not just passing on a legacy."
A Future Investment?

Parents are invested in children emotionally by being more involved in their lives, Galinsky says. There's also hope that children will return the care when their parents are older and need assistance. "There's much more interdependence now," she says. "You're investing in your own future relationship."

All of that sounds nice, but what's it going to cost me? The Agriculture Dept.'s latest survey found that households in the top-third income bracket (with average pretax income of $118,200) will spend $289,380 by their child's 18th birthday—or about $17,000 a year (in 2006 dollars).

Parents' largest expense is housing, which makes up roughly a third of expenditures, given that it costs more for a larger home in a town with good schools. In terms of growth, the outlays for child care and education have climbed from just 1% of overall expenses in 1960 (when the USDA started tracking these costs) to 10% in 2006. In 1960 education costs averaged around $362 per year (out of total expenses of $25,229 for middle income families). Health care is also sucking up more of parents' hard-earned cash given that premiums and co-payments have been rising, says USDA economist Mark Fino.

Indeed, the USDA survey is probably understating the cost of raising kids. Considering extras like sports equipment, summer camps, private school, Disney vacations, and a full-time nanny, raising a child through age 17 could cost $1 million or more. Some parents throw extravagant birthday parties and won't hesitate to buy their kids the latest video games and cell phones and splurge on Spanish and painting lessons.
The College Killer

Perhaps these big spenders aren't worried about the soaring cost of college—usually the biggest expense of all and one that's left out of the USDA's price tag (along with all other expenses after age 17). According to reports from the College Board, a private four-year college runs an average of $23,712 per year (up 6.3% from the 2006/07 school year), while a public four-year college costs $6,185 (up 6.6% from last year). The "good news," says the College Board, "is more than $130 billion in financial aid is available."

Then, after college, many parents are welcoming their children back home until they find a job. In fact, 25% of employed parents have kids aged 18 to 29 living in their home at least half the time. Parents contribute $2,200 annually (on average, in 2001 dollars) to children aged 18 to 34, according to a 2003 University of Pennsylvania study. This transition to adulthood "is a very risky period," says Arlene Skolnick, a visiting scholar at New York University and research scholar at Counsel on Contemporary Families.

"It's a period when people can fall into the cracks," Skolnick says, especially if they don't acquire high-level skills to earn at least a middle-class salary to survive on their own. (Whereas after World War II, high school graduates could usually find a decent job and achieve a middle-class life.) Children that earn a bachelor's degree stand to earn over 60% more than those with only a high school diploma, the College Board says. Over a lifetime, the gap in earning potential between a high school diploma and a B.A. is more than $800,000, it says.

Along with college, the USDA report doesn't count "indirect" costs such as leaving the workforce to care for a child. "Studies have estimated that indirect costs, such as foregone earnings, oftentimes exceed direct costs, especially if one parent has to drop out of the workforce," says Fino at the USDA. "Many parents forgo promotions to spend more time with their children."

On top of all that, growth in wages for U.S. workers has been minuscule or stagnant, while inflation has crept higher. Average hourly earnings rose just 0.7% last year after declining in 2005 and 2004, versus the peak annual growth rate of 4.1% for 1972, according to the Labor Dept. Meanwhile, prices for food, energy, and other goods keep rising, as measured by the 3.2% rise in the consumer price index last year.
A Lifestyle Choice

It's costs such as these that make 28-year-old Bahar Zaker in Syracuse, N.Y., want to put off having kids, maybe forever. "We can't imagine how we would manage the costs of kids," says Zaker, who has been married for three years to a philosophy professor and is finishing her thesis on French surrealist art at the University of California. One big hurdle for her is the price of education, and she questions whether it pays off. "The costs of education are going up, and you're not always sure the value of the education is going up with them," she says. But she also admits that not having kids is a lifestyle choice. "We both like to travel," she says.

As more young folks like Zaker delay or don't have children, birth rates in Japan, Russia, South Korea, all of Europe, and parts of Asia have fallen below the 2.1 children per woman needed for population growth. Many industrialized countries such as France have introduced or increased economic incentives such as tax breaks, longer maternity leaves, and cash bonuses to get women to have children.

These programs have had mixed results. One reason they may not work comes from Phillip Longman in his book The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity and What to Do About It (Perseus Books Group, 2004). Now that "children no longer provide any economic benefit to their parents, but are rather costly impediments to material success, people well adapted to this new environment will tend not to reproduce," Longman writes. "And many others who are not so successful will imitate them, and for good reason." Families might choose to have only one child so they can afford to splurge on one while maintaining their own comforts of living (um, that would be me).

The U.S., on the other hand, still has a birth rate of 2 and a growing population, thanks to immigrants, who on average have higher birth rates (particularly among Hispanics). Still, a great portion of the U.S. population is aging. A low birth rate along with an aging population means there are fewer people of working age and more retirees, making the financing of Social Security and Medicare tougher because these funds for the elderly are raised through taxes on the working population, as in most nations, says Gary Becker, professor of economics at the University of Chicago and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

The problem, experts say, is that U.S. lawmakers and corporations aren't addressing many of the challenges facing families. Longman points to the continuing culture wars between work and family: "Everyone who wants to may join the paid labor force, but almost no one gets a family wage or enough help from government to defray the costs of raising children." He figures the critical moment will emerge during the next decade, "as millions of Baby Boomers start crashing past the boundaries of old age, and as today's teenagers find themselves saddled with massive student loans, rising taxes, and growing frustration over the difficulty of forming or affording a family."

The hope is that some savior will invent policies to ease parents' financial pain. "We need somebody somewhere to think of a new vision of what families can be," Skolnick says."People want to get past the family value wars."

Until then, as Longman puts it bluntly: "Child rearing is fast becoming a sucker's game. Though the psychic rewards remain, the economic returns to individual parents have largely disappeared, while the cost of parenthood is soaring."

Here is one more article about what a money dump kids can be:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/HomeMortgageSavings/ChildcareCrisis.aspx?page=all

This is the article:

The child-care crisis
When both parents work, families need someone to mind the kids. But with costs as high as $14,650 a year, day care can swallow most of one parent's wages.
By Lauren Barack, MSN Money
Wendy Brauner's rent clocks in at $1,800 a month -- what some might consider a great deal in San Francisco. But don't think Brauner is living the high life. With a son, 3, and another almost 6, she was spending $2,750 a month on child care until her oldest started kindergarten last fall -- nearly 20% of her household income.

"I was writing a check for $17,000 to the preschool and wondered why it sounded so familiar," she says. "Then I realized it was a few hundred off what I paid for my first semester of college at Wellesley. It's just an enormous outlay."

I get that. Even with just one child, child-care costs were a major chunk of my own family's monthly expenses until our daughter, Harper, started kindergarten. The tab never came close to the $3,200 a month we spend for shelter, but that was mostly because, as a freelance writer, I can shuffle my work hours as needed. And that saves money -- a lot of money. In part-time day care, Harper never cost us more than $900 a month. Video: Should one parent just stay at home?

Still, it's a serious budget item. And we're among the lucky ones. The cost of child care in this country is one of those little secrets -- like leaky diapers and colic -- that parents just don't share with friends who are expecting.

Forget about the angst and expense of finding shelter that is safe and warm for your new arrival. I'm talking about the sticker shock of handing over a significant chunk of your paycheck every month just so you are free to work. That $2,750 a month for Brauner? That was after taxes, of course. Map: Average cost of child care

Yes, the federal government grants a tax credit of up to $1,050 per child for up to two children in child care. But that's annual: Brauner ran through it in less than a month.

Talk back: Do child-care costs worsen the middle-class squeeze?

"We're not even thinking of buying a house," Brauner says of her family's current outlook. "We're targeting 2009, when the youngest finally starts kindergarten."

With child care for infants running as high as $14,650 a year and care for a 4-year-old in a licensed center as high as $10,920, child-care costs have outpaced what the average family spends on food, according to the National Association of Child Care Resources and Referral Agencies. The association keeps tabs on how these costs are affecting working families nationwide. Video: Hear the nanny's perspective

Presidential candidate John Edwards has proposed increasing the federal tax credit to $2,500 per child, according to his campaign, and he wants to launch a


program that would provide affordable preschool for children the year before kindergarten -- a year when most families pay for care. But, in most states, that's not the reality in front of parents now.

Some may say the easy choice would be to have one parent stay home. But experts say it's not that simple.

A generation or two ago, Mom -- and it was usually a mom -- could stay home with the kids while Dad put in the hours at the office. His income was enough to let them own a home and a car, and put a pot-roast dinner on the table once a week.

It's just not possible to go back to that scenario, says Elizabeth Warren, one of the authors of "The Two-Income Trap."

"It's not as if parents can roll back the clock and live on one income," explains Warren, a professor at Harvard Law School. "A generation ago, a single-income family would be solidly middle class. Today a single-income family is at the bottom edge of the middle class."

Warren believes the two-income family is stretched, too, however. Child-care costs are rising at twice the rate of inflation, she says. After paying the mortgage, health insurance premiums, transportation costs and child-care fees, today's two-income families have less money left over than the one-income family did a generation ago.

"In order to go back to one income, families would have to make significant changes, possibly losing health insurance and their home," Warren says.

That sounds right to me. My family might be able to squeak by for the short term on one income, but if either Michael or I decided to give up a paycheck permanently, our family's security would deteriorate rapidly.

I remember sharing some facts about the cost of child care with a colleague when Harper was first born. The reaction: "Why even work, then?" Part of it was that I knew that my income -- beyond paying for my daughter's care -- would cover other basics, from food and diapers to the electric bill.

Beyond that, though, I want a career just as much as Michael does. I adore my daughter, but I crave a balance between playing with dolls and having work that's my own. I sputtered over a lame explanation of all this but finished feeling uncomfortable.

"Parents do feel guilty about complaining about the costs," says Warren. "There's a fear that grandparents and others will say, 'You've made this bed.'"

Trouble is, I'm still lying in it -- even now that Harper is in kindergarten.

Because I freelance, I end up as the fallback for child care when school vacations hit. Video: At work with Mommy

It's possible to find a baby sitter during work hours if you are offering regular work, but few caregivers are willing to come in for a day here or there.

There are days, Harper understands, when she has to be quiet while I conduct an interview -- and some when she actually joins me on a day of reporting. Luckily, she's charming. But it's still a struggle.

Between his job as a commercial-real-estate broker and her work at an investment firm, Barry and Annie Wright of Washington, D.C., do a lot of schedule shuffling just to get their 7-month-old son, Max, to day care each day.

"It's a lot of rock-paper-scissors (to determine) who's going to drop him off and pick him up every day," Barry says.

The couple now pays about $1,100 a month. With plans to eventually add two more children to the family, the Wrights know that at some point child-care costs may outweigh the benefits of having two salaries. With that in mind, they were careful to buy a house they could afford on one alone.

"We're both career-minded," Barry says. "But we do wonder -- at what point does it make sense for one of us not to work?"

Chicago,
I am also 37, and I just wanna say, please don't take your health for granted. At our age, a pignancy would very likely ruin everything. For starters, you get to grow disgustingly huge and deformed, followed by intense pain with a side of health risks. If the pignancy f's up your body, you don't get a do-over, you get stuck living in a wrecked body for the rest of your life.
Don't take your career and marriage for granted. Not much time for that when its all about Bratleigh. Also,you would be inflicting parenthood on your husband as well.

Sweetheart, even if you adopted an angelic orphan at age 6, think of all the money you will have to spend on him or her and of course NOT, it's not gonna be an easy road no matter how sweet and obedient he or she is...there's the school, doctor, sports, homework, chores, and all the horrors you will have to reveal to him or her about real life, like the story of bees and birds, of course! Plus, this could mean less time for yourself and your husband and more planning around your child.

Plus, the adopted kid may come with allergies or some kind of medical condition, so no more chocolate or peanut butter for your pantry.:'( Not to mention worrying, worrying, worrying and keeping your kid out of any kind of danger, too.

And, if the adopted kid already has a parent(s) somewhere out there, the kid would either want him or her back or the said parent may suddenly appear out of nowhere and want the kid back!

You won't even have to worry about producing the kid out of your own body because it is simply not pretty at all, period. Just read all the gory horror stories about pregnancy, childbirthing, and of course...(urk, choke, vomit!) breastfeeding! Keep your body as pure as possible.^_^

A little bit of jealousy may help some, especially when the kid gets to have or do things you may not ever experience in your lifetime, like becoming a ravishing beauty, an award-winning poet, or a star sports player as well as developing a fabulous body, having a dream lifestyle that puts your own childhood to shame, and even becoming a rich princess long after you're gone. Or, YOU become a greedy stage mother!

Not to mention the fact a lovable kid may not always remain lovable forever. In fact, he may even become a thug or keep dark secrets in his own bedroom. Heck, he may even be secretly plotting to BLOW UP his school!

However, if everything is just plain PERFECT, you will look worse than a Disney moo anyway!^_^

After all, every parent want their kid to be PERFECT anyway.(shrug)

You got that one right, Banshee. I wonder how many women on these sites actually stay childfree. I've had two tubals and one abortion after the 1st one failed. I got the 2nd one about a year-and-a-half after the abortion. I believe many women think this is a "fun & cool" bandwagon to jump on only to rethink things and have those babies later on. Marriage is still going to change even with the perfect adopted child. The wife becomes Mommy even in adoption where she did not ruin her body via pregnancy...and the husband is looking around elsewhere for a woman who is not called, "Mommy."

"I believe many women think this is a "fun & cool" bandwagon to jump on only to rethink things and have those babies later on. "

I've seen this firsthand more than once. In fact, my husband's sister decided, at age 40, to go ahead and breed with a man who was 50 years old and living with his parents. Maybe she decided it was now or never or something. Predictably, the kid is a little monster, the father refuses to have anything to do with it, etc. She even asked us to take him once, and it didn't sound like she was kidding!

Childfree Chicago Lawyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> my husband's sister decided, at age 40, to go
> ahead and breed with a man who was 50 years old
> and living with his parents.!

FIFTY YEARS OLD AND STILL LIVING AT HOME?!!

BETTER RUN FAR, FAR, FAR AWAY FROM A NERD LIKE THAT!!!!!