I too wanted children. I never envisioned a life without children. But my husband had two already, from a marriage gone bad, and we suffered the effects of that marriage for many years prior to our own.

He's well aware that the only thing I've ever wanted that he has not given me is children. And I admit, Mother's Days are tough.

That said, however, I would much rather be with the man that I love, the man who loves me, without children of our own, sharing his (now adult) children with him as his wife and their stepmother, than without him, with someone else who I might or might never meet, and with or without those children I am not having with him.

Where's the guarantee that I could have children if I wasn't with him? There may be no other relationship in my life. It may have taken me so long to find someone that I couldn't have children anyway.

I don't agree with the response you gave Baby Hungry. She can indeed have a full and happy life with her "best friend." And personally, I could NEVER have "accidentally" gotten pregnant even though I know in my heart that my husband would have been the best father to that baby, as he is to his two.

Thanks for sharing your experience. You sound like a very loving (and ethical) person who has come to terms with the path her life and relationship was meant to follow.

I think too many women get overly crazed by the "baby desire" and let it guide them into unfortunate situations (i.e. a bad relationship.) What you describe is perfect...knowing that you may not have such a positive, loving relationship from any other man and you are not willing to take that risk on the OFF CHANCE you MAY find an equivalent love with a man who wants you to carry his children, all in time before you are too old. I've known women who've rushed into relationships in which they weren't even in love just to "get that baby" and it is a shame.

I also think the scare tactics used such as "you WILL regret it some day" by many, many people is wrong and uncalled for. No one knows who will or won't regret WHAT in THEIR OWN LIFE...I know of others who are well into their forties and childless and barely give it a second thought. If someone comes to terms with their "childless" fate and therefore leads a happy and fulfilled life, more power to them!

I'm a 34 year old single woman myself, who has absolutely no qualms at all about bypassing having my own child should the right man not come into my life in time. And even if he does, like you I won't let a disinterest in children on his part determine my future with him.

The letter writer never said anything about "accidentally" getting pregnant (which would be impossible anyways if her man had a vasectomy, which is implied in the letter). She also said that her man had agreed to try to have children with her. How is Prudie's response wrong in this situation?

Posty, she included the statements that illuded that no woman should ever give up a desire for a child and that the longing would damage her marriage. KFS was saying that's not necessarily true, and I was saying I agree. Sure, the LW is free to try with this guy as he's agreed to give it a go, but if he WASN'T, it sounds like Prudie is all for dumping the love of your life in the race to find a "willing" guy in time before your biological clock strikes midnight. If you don't, then what? You're menopausal with NO child OR husband. (I don't think all women would be willing to go with a donor and tackle single motherhood.) Those are big risks to take and the possibility of never having children should at least considered when a woman is making the decision to proceed with a relationship or not. Not getting the birth child you always thought you would does not have to be a devastating catastrophe. There are other things to value in life. That's all that's being said.

After rereading Prudie's response I see your and KFS's point now. I guess it's up to the individual woman in this sort of situation to decide whether love or the possibility of having her own children is more important to her. I think it was the comment that KFS would personally never have "accidentally" gotten pregnant threw me off, considering this wasn't something the LW was considering.

I also completely disagree with Prudie's comment that "all will be well" if the husband feels coerced into having more children.

My husband and I have 2 beautiful, smart, funny kids who were not only wanted, but planned for with military precision (pre-prenatal OB visits and all). I love them dearly - but they are a lot of work. My youngest didn't sleep through the night until she was two. At that point, I hadn't had a full night's sleep for over 4 years. One day, I actually thought I was having a breakdown. Turns out, I didn't need drugs - I needed 8 straight hours of sleep. There's a reason interrogators use sleep deprivation as torture.

There are no sick days from being a parent. It's constant and it's hard to do it well. Parents who haven't been corrupted by today's cult of reproduction know this. How would LW feel if her husband wasn't a perfect dad? What if he never let their kid forget she's nothing more than a favor the dad did for her mother? Could her own relationship handle the resentment? Would he still be her "best friend" if he sticks her with 24/7 parenting because she's the one who wanted the baby? What about his older kids? Is she prepared to watch them sit on their butts while she runs herself ragged? Will her husband force them to help with a child he himself doesn't want?

It may be that Prudie is right - things may work out perfectly. Or not. My suggestion to LW is to make sure she has enough family income to support a nanny - just in case.

So, using Prudie's advice, it would be OK for me to threaten to leave my wife unless she has another baby, whether she really wants to or not, despite the fact that for her to do so might involve surgery. Because, heck, once she sees that little bundle of joy, all the threats and coersion will be forgotten.

And heck, now that I know that it's OK to threaten to leave if I don't get what I want, why stop at one more kid?

You make an excellent point, buck-50, one that I've thought in many different versions myself. This society likes to put all the value of the decision for a couple to have a child on the woman, be it wanting them or not wanting them. Yes, I'm sure someone will chime in that it's because she carries the baby for nine months. But quite frankly, the existance of the baby will cause major alterations of BOTH the parents' lives...the REST of their lives at that--long beyond a mere 9 months of physical depency on the mother, and the man's desires should be given higher value in the decision making process, IMO.

The thing that bothers me is that He's had a vasectomy. It's not like he sprung this on her after years of dating- it sounds like he was pretty upfront about it. So he entered into the relationship, honest about his decision not to have kids. She cajoles him into changing his mind by threatening to leave. So, having a baby is more important to her than having a healthy relationship.

I can't think that this is the beginning of a healthy relationship.

I gotta think prudie should have defered this one to Dan Savage.

I am a 50 year old female, and I would have dumped a man that would not want children ... as is, I married my kids father and he did not want children at 20 ... I was 23 and all I wanted was children, 6 was my number. I ended up with 2 great boys, the 23 year old a Marine and the 21 year old a Dean's list student at Tampa U. Dad left when baby was 3 month old ... I do not regret for a minute my choices! Dad tuned out to be a great dad if an 'iffy' husband and he has gone on to have 2 more kids from 2 more marriages. I never had any more ... now I wait patiently for grandchildren! I am newly married now and even if technically I still 'could' I know I am too old ... my husband feels the same way. If I had only found him 10 years ago!

It is simply wrong to knowingly go ahead and marry someone that doesn't want children when you do. Period. On both sides of this, no one is likely to change their mind, and I consider lying about it deception and nothing to base a marriage on.

I know a couple of women who got pregnant "by accident" when they knew their husbands didn't want kids. One actually brags about punching holes in her diaphragm.

The other is divorced. Her ex has no problem paying child support, but he didn't want kids, period, and he felt that he had been betrayed by someone he should have been able to trust. I happen to agree with him. She lied, she got pregnant without his consent, and now the financial consequences, at least, are his.

Why oh why don't people have this discussion in detail before they get married? How naive and idiotic is it to just assume that "he'll love the baby when it comes?" He might indeed love the baby. Only an ogre would not. He's still been betrayed, though.

I thought the LW said that she ended the relationship b/c she fell in love but realized that a marriage wouldn't work if he didn't want children. But he came back and said that he'd consider having kids with her, if she would take him back. And I thought her concern was whether he was likely to regret that decision later on.

Seems like a loving father of two has a pretty good sense of the consequences of the decision he has made. And it sounds like she's been pretty honest with herself about her life's desires and was willing to end this relationship b/c she wanted children more than being in it without. So given that the LW has already assessed her wants/desires to decide that she'd rather have kids than her man, Prudie (who I often disagree with) seems pretty spot-on in indicating that she'd regret not having kids if she wants them so bad.

I think that having kids (even your third kid) is way too life-altering of an event to know for sure whether how you'll feel about it after the fact. Maybe he'll regret changing his mind, but maybe he won't. The important thing is that the decision be made in an atmosphere of honesty and frankness. Unless you think she's somehow obligated to stay in the relationship and accept that she wants something he doesn't want to give, then I fail to see how she's coercing him into anything. And I think that it shows a lot of strength to leave a relationship with a person you love b/c you are being honest about what you want.

What I remember about this situation is that Yoffe did not want to have children. She became involved with a man who wanted children, grudgingly agreed to do so, and is now hyper-embedded mom.

She is so hyper-embedded that her family makes fun of her.

As usual, Yoffe is judging the world based on her own experiences, her own wishes, and her own world outlook. The ability to understand that there are other people in the world with different experiences, different desires, and another way of looking at the world never occurs to her.

Anyone who would ask the advice of someone this self-absorbed and unable to think abstractly deserves the rotten advice that s/he gets.

I would like to ask Slate to take a pile of Yoffe's advice and run it by someone with a professional degree in counseling. If this person says--and I think s/he will--that Yoffe is doing genuine harm to others, then Slate should drop her.

But, they won't. Slate only cares about getting people riled up--and if you look at this thread, you can see that she's accomplished that. Maybe the editor should read the article they ran about Machiavellian journalism recently.

If Yoffe had a single gram of ethics, she would run her own columns by a counselor and then quit when she is told that she is harming people.

I have no intention of holding my breath until she does. I like living.

I didn't see anything that implied that she "cajoled him into changing his mind by threatening to leave." She wants very much to have children and they are not married, so she moved out to try to figure out what she really wanted. He obviously wanted her, so he changes his mind about what his priorities are. If he didn't change his mind, presumably, she might have continued searching for her 'perfect man' - someone she coud share her desire for children with.

If he didn't change his mind, presumably, she might have continued searching for her 'perfect man' - someone she coud share her desire for children with.

Good point, but I have to reiterate my point now as an open question: What if you break up with someone you love dearly over a disagreement about having children, and decide to search for someone who wants them with you...and you move on and find a "contender"...but you don't "magically" fall in love with that "perfect person" who just happens to only share that one desire.

It's all risks. You could still end up childless, AND alone, if another good relationship "fit" doesn't come alone.

Personally, I'd take the relationship first. But I'm also not the type who easily falls for every guy that comes by, even if I have a lot in common with them. To me, a truly strong desire of love, commitment and desire is harder to come by. It's worth a sacrifice or two in that case, if you ask me.

But like I said, I do know women who've found guys for the sake of having children, and they've got their kids...but can now barely stand looking at each other as spouses.

I guess in the end, it's all a risk, one way or another.