Children and Polyamory: Merged Threads, General Discussion

AJ1 said:
I hesitate to add this for fear of straying off topic, but it an oft-repeated misconception that there are "plenty of kids waiting to be adopted." This was true decades ago, but not today. While technically true in the strictest sense, there are huge waiting lists for children under age 5 that are not disabled. Parenting a disabled child or an older child (who almost certainly has endured major trauma to be available for adoption) is not for the faint of heart - and is not something that should be encouraged to any woman simply because her baby-making parts don't function well.

Anyone, regardless of the state of their reproductive system, who has the desire and capacity to care for such children should absolutely pursue that path (and if you're not sure, try fostering. There is, quite unfortunately, a world of difference between "normal" children and those that have suffered abuse and neglect). But requiring IVF to reproduce and being such a gifted person are two unrelated features.
Click to expand...
I am a tossed-around adopted child and met my other brother, not lucky to have grown up with as a child, some oh, 25 yrs ago. since kept in touch only now growing closer. however the brother i did grow up with wasnt any more fortunate than I. forced to remain behind while i experienced privelege. and not knowing one in the middle, assumed for most our lives we were 6 yr apart. hmmm why? then found the other puzzle piece, as I said, my big bro not as fortunate. long story short, he was murdered in 95. i am not a firm believer in adoption. too many of us are fucked the hell up on some level. but each to their own. I.e., a child from another country, war-torn, etc., cool. but genetics kicks in at some point and can u say a white woman give an Asian child their roots? NOPE, as no one could. so your theory may hold water for some, on both end. not with me! no offence intended, but biology is our key. then if, as I said, it doesnt work out, I'll buy more show cats an dogs and move forward, as I am fortunate enuff to be restarting, not beginning. as said, I have three grown! so opinion noted, not accepted, as they know the score and it would end at our try. but the question was not to at all cost have but if we can, can we do this our way?
 
Last edited:
AJ1 said:
Parenting a disabled child or an older child (who almost certainly has endured major trauma to be available for adoption) is not for the faint of heart - and is not something that should be encouraged to any woman simply because her baby-making parts don't function well.
Click to expand...
THANKS, AJ1!!! I go a step beyond and say "don't have kids unless you REALLY mean it". Too many people slip into having kids because it's "the done thing"; because "it's now or never"; or just because they get pregnant and won't take the difficult decision to have an abortion. This is ONE reason why there are so many unwanted, fucked-over, difficult over-5s needing a GOOD family.

Having children should NOT be the default setting!!!

I spent a year at teacher training college because I WANTED to be a teacher, because children mean THE WORLD to me. Many - perhaps most - of my fellow student-teachers were there because it was an easy option. Because in the UK it's MUCH easier to get into a t.t.c. than into a university; because their own children were old enough / because they had just divorced and they wanted to get back into a PAYING job; because bosses want cute secretaries but children don't mind if you're not very sexy...

I dropped out of t.t.c. [where I was doing really well, where my tutor was delighted with me: a man who wanted to work with 3>6-year-olds... and did it well] because it became obvious to me that in 70s UK, what the system [NOT my tutor] wanted was childrenpolice. Mould them into compliant, unquestioning, trouble-free citizens [trouble-free for the powers-that-be]. And no way did I want to do THAT job!:mad::mad::mad:

But I weep for kids in classes where the teachers (dis)honestly couldn't care less.

And even more for those kids in FAMILIES where their parents ditto.:(:(:(
 
Last edited:
twoplus1 said:
Yes we discussed surrogates. but laws from US/UK/Canada all are little known to most. Say birth mother is legally and always mother even though oddly there is not one drop of DNA carried by that mother over to that child she gives birth to! Odd law, right? So that is a big NOPE too!
Click to expand...

And rightfully so. What's odd about the person who spends 10 months carrying a fetus, provides the vast amounts of nutrition and energy, and then goes through labour having the right to raise that being?

DNA is, frankly, the smallest contribution to the process. Ask any single mother with a dead-beat ex for a sperm donor.

That being said, I support your desire to go through that process yourself. Just saying that I agree with the law.
 
While I agree that carrying the child makes you more of a parent than providing DNA (both of which being negligible compared to doing the actual raising), I can understand frustration in this specific context: with surrogacy the people paying for everything are the people providing the DNA, and the person carrying the child is paid for their trouble. If then they have the right to just say they're keeping the child... at the very least they should be required to pay back everyone else.

Which might be the case, of course.

At any rate, it probably doesn't happen that often. It's like how a birth mother has the right to take a child back with adoption (for a period of time that varies from, I think, one month minimum to something like six months or a year), but in effect it very rarely happens.
 
Tonberry said:
While I agree that carrying the child makes you more of a parent than providing DNA (both of which being negligible compared to doing the actual raising), I can understand frustration in this specific context: with surrogacy the people paying for everything are the people providing the DNA, and the person carrying the child is paid for their trouble. If then they have the right to just say they're keeping the child... at the very least they should be required to pay back everyone else.
Click to expand...

I think that's part of the motivation behind the Canadian version of the law, where it's illegal to pay a surrogate for her services. The adoptive parents also don't have to pay for the costs upfront, but rather reimburse the mother for her out-of-pocket expenses after the adoption.

As a completely unrelated anecdote, my girlfriend has a very cool surrogacy/parenting arrangement. Her husband is FTM trans* and they wanted more kids. They had a gay male friend who also wanted kids. So, he provided sperm for the first child, which my girlfriend is raising, and she then provided surrogacy for the second child, which the friend is raising. Bonus: All the kids spend the weekend together, including her older daughter from a previous relationship. They spend every Friday night at the biological father's house, and Saturday night at my girlfriend's. All the parents get one free night off every week, and all the kids get a whole weekend to spend with their siblings.
 
SchrodingersCat said:
Her husband is FTM trans* and they wanted more kids.
Click to expand...

If her husband is FTM trans, how did they get the kids they already had? Adoption? Sperm donor? That information is not available?
 
Disiplining your Partners children

I have a question. What do you do when every time you are asked to watch or look after your partner's child, they come in and say "You are being a bit rough"? For example, I was watching their child and she got water and was pouring it into a box. I grabbed the box and water, cleaned up the mess and told her to leave the water alone. Yet I get told I am being too rough. WTH? Am I beating her? No. I was making an executive decision because I did not want to have a huge mess to clean up.

She doesn't listen to a thing I say and they wonder why I am irritated.
 
I am the Super-Id

So i have a question too. Are you for real?

Word-up.
 
Last edited:
My boyfriend has no children, but he is allowed to correct my children as if they were his own.
 
kittenkittykat said:
I was watching their child and she got water and was pouring it in a box. I grabbed the box and water cleaned up the mess and told her to leave the water alone. Yet I get told I am being too rough. WTH? Am I beating her? No. I was making an executive decision because I did not want to have a huge mess to clean up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you should definitely have words with the mother. Sounds like she wants you to treat her kids in a particular way and that is OUTRAGEOUS!

kittenkittykat said:
So I have a question. What do you do when every time you look after your partner's child, they come in and say you are being a bit rough?
Click to expand...

So, while watching this person's kid, you do something that they consider "a bit rough." And this is EVERY TIME you watch this person's kid? Something somewhere has gone terribly wrong. You do see that, right?

kittenkittykat said:
She doesn't listen to a thing I say, and they wonder why I am irritated.
Click to expand...

Who are we talking about? The mother or the kid?
 
You let someone else watch their child, or stop watching their child, if you can't agree on a philosophy.
 
Okay it sounds like you want strangers on the internet to tell you that you are a good babysitter, caregiver and this person, the parent of the child, is overreacting and should respect the way you discipline the child.

Here's my question. What difference does that make if we do? Are you going to show this thread to them and say, "See?! You're overreacting! Now you should just believe me!"

How about instead, you, I don't know, talk to THEM? Tell them that you aren't going to watch THEIR child, no matter how much you care about them, if there are such large disagreements about what is and isn't acceptable? Whether we believe you or not, or tell you that they are allowed to tell you not to discipline their child that way, and you need to just accept that and do things they like or not, doesn't really matter. Does it?
 
My house rule is, any kids in my home are expected to follow my rules. Parents should be warned in advance. If your kids aren't trained to follow my rules, that is YOUR problem. They will not be given leeway.

That doesn't even mean LIVING in my home. Visitors have the same rules. Parents are responsible for finding out my rules and expectations for children in my home, AND ensuring that their children follow them or consequences will be handed out. Period.

I don't babysit ANYONE's children who don't give me full authority to act as I see fit in regards to ANY situation that arises with the child while in my care. Period.

I do babysit. In fact, there are two girls (now ages 12, 9) who I have watched frequently since they were babies. One is allergic to peanuts. She is also bipolar and ADD. She struggles in MANY atmospheres because of not understanding rules (which are different than the ones she has at home), attention span and issues with anger management.

However, she is in my home regularly and I have NO problems with her, primarily because I educated myself about her needs and her realities. It's unreasonable to expect her to not get distracted when being spoken to in a room with other things going on. So, I ask her to come talk to me alone if I need her to pay attention to something I am going to say. It is unreasonable to expect her to manage her emotions the way a "normal" child her age would. So I don't allow her into scenarios with other children that are beyond what she is capable of managing, regardless of "age-appropriate norms."

I also watch my grandson. He's 2. He is expected to follow my rules, which do differ somewhat from his home. Again, not difficult for him to do, with age appropriate reminders such as "LP, we do not do XYZ in Grammy's house" and "LP, at Grammy's house, balls are yard toys, not in-the-house toys."

If you can't mesh with your partner's expectations, or vice versa, for the care of their child, don't watch their child. It's better for the child, better for you, and better for them, as well.
 
@BoringGuy If you don't think this user is genuine, surely you have better things to do than follow her around trying to derail her threads.
 
BoringGuy, I was simply asking a question to see if other people had ever had the same experience. I have been sick as a dog all day, yet they needed me to watch her while they needed to talk, so I said ok. It was just a question. lighten up, dude.
 
I treat my partners children as if they are my own and my partner can do the same. We have seven kids all together and run a tight ship. We talk about what we want for the children and how to meet everyone's needs.

All you can do is talk with your partners about what they want from you when you watch their kids. Are you a partner in parenting or just a babysitter? Kids can put a lot of strain on relationships. It's important to communicate.
 
Children & polyamory

My husband and I are newbies & currently not in any form of a poly relationship yet. We've been doing our research, discussing his jealousy & envy issues, falling in love again but realizing we both can love another just as passionately.

We know at some point we will most likely want to co-habitate with a partner. Aside from coming out to our outside families (an area still to be researched) we are unsure of how to tell our children (15F, 7M & 2F). The oldest has watched Big Love & was quite facsinated. She's my concern since the younger two are not set in teenage opinions of right & wrong.

If any of you have children (whether grown up or not) how did you bring your choice to be polyamorous into a discussion with them & how did the transition of having a third afult in the home go, was it peachy keen or a battlefield?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why tell them?

Growing up, I always understood my mother and father loved each other and only each other (so far as monogamy went). Why treat poly as something different? Why not just say, hey, kids, these are our friends, they'll watch you when Mommy or Daddy can't (assuming your kids are little), they'll come with us to the park, to family gatherings? As the kids grow older, they'll understand what those "friends" are, and if they don't, and they care, they'll ask questions, which should be easy enough to answer.

If they're older, well, you can just take them aside and explain the structure to them, simply, as in, Teresa is part of our family, we love her very much, etc. etc.

They won't care about your sex lives, just understanding the role they'll play in their lives (well, maybe they will care about the sex part too, but in that case, well, no advice ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top