Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Having Kids

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 902 posts

Re: Having Kids

#451

Post by simonh »

codingdave wrote: post #210
triangleman wrote: post #131

Hey guys. Anyone else have the experience of having kids, getting a burst of energy, but of course all that energy goes directly back into the kids and house, and you have absolutely no life for 3-5 years or more? Because my kids are 2 and 4 and so far it's been 4 years of no life, no freelance clients, almost no learning/hobbies, just 35-40 hours a week of working as much as I can at the office and then everything i…

It gets better - My kids range from 14 to 9.The 14 year old is hanging out with friends and making jewelry. The 12 year old is sitting in my bedroom, reading. The 9 year old is playing games. I'm coding on personal projects, and my wife is in the basement making blankets. We have an entire day of just all doing whatever we want. Weekdays are busier with school and work, but you the point is that you do get your time…

Mine are 15 and 16, they’ve been going out on trips with their friends for a couple of years. I will say though, the first years until they are in school full time are absolutely crucial. We reap what we sow in those few years for the rest of our lives, and they are crucial developmental time for the children. I never really knew how to deal with other people’s children much younger than myself, but having my own kids has been wonderful. Hard work, frustrating at times and yes it has to take priority over almost everything else for a long while, but it’s so worth it.

Re: Having Kids

#452

Post by gobins »

triangleman wrote: post #131

Hey guys. Anyone else have the experience of having kids, getting a burst of energy, but of course all that energy goes directly back into the kids and house, and you have absolutely no life for 3-5 years or more? Because my kids are 2 and 4 and so far it's been 4 years of no life, no freelance clients, almost no learning/hobbies, just 35-40 hours a week of working as much as I can at the office and then everything i…

Dad of a newborn here. I had to adapt. I had to make time for things that I want to learn. When I am on the train, now I take a book or even get work done on my laptop. I had to also cut down my netflix time to zero. I almost have no time left for physical exercise. Planning to fix that by getting a treadmill at home.

Re: Having Kids

#453

Post by papito »

gobins wrote: post #452
triangleman wrote: post #131

Hey guys. Anyone else have the experience of having kids, getting a burst of energy, but of course all that energy goes directly back into the kids and house, and you have absolutely no life for 3-5 years or more? Because my kids are 2 and 4 and so far it's been 4 years of no life, no freelance clients, almost no learning/hobbies, just 35-40 hours a week of working as much as I can at the office and then everything i…

Dad of a newborn here. I had to adapt. I had to make time for things that I want to learn. When I am on the train, now I take a book or even get work done on my laptop. I had to also cut down my netflix time to zero. I almost have no time left for physical exercise. Planning to fix that by getting a treadmill at home.

I have a NordicTrack foldable rowing machine. Fits very nice in an NYC apartment even. Haven't used it for a couple of months.... No kids, though.

Re: Having Kids

#454

Post by jumelles »

ARandomerDude wrote: post #379

Paradoxically, I think the hard part about having kid is having too few of them. My wife and I have 7 kids. People stare at us like we're crazy all the time. But it's way easier to have 7 kids than 2. Older kids help with the younger kids. When the 2 or 3 playing together get bored, they mix it up. They have daily big games that would ordinarily take a lot of effort arranging playdates. Many hands make light work, so…

Well that's the total opposite of what the planet needs.

Re: Having Kids

#455

Post by dang »

rbavocadotree wrote: post #403
daxfohl wrote: post #258

So my experience was the opposite. I came in expecting this great "chemical change" where suddenly the world revolved around my kids and their future. Well the latter part is true: my world now revolves around them and their futures. But chemical change? No. It's just the responsibility I have now. There's never a break. It's all-encompassing. I mean, it's survivable, I can deal with it, and I do the best I can, but,…

My good friend, as well as my Mom are family/young child psychologists, and they talk about people like you a lot. How's your mental health? People with negative self images, underdeveloped personalities, unresolved trauma, anxiety, depression, etc, are all very likely to have those same feelings. They may be telling you something.

Please don't cross into internet psychiatric diagnosis on HN. Even though your intentions are good, comments like this are more likely to land as personal attacks than anything supportive.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re: Having Kids

#456

Post by yks »

anon9001 wrote: post #440
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you consider your life so far has been only pain, nothing of worth or fulfillment because you've not had a nest of millions-of-dollars to lie in? You'd rather not have lived? Do you resent your parents having you? [Questions, not rhetorical statements, genuine curiosity.] It's certainly an issue for many when considering parenthood - is it fair to raise a child in this situation - but I've not seen it expressed so…

Honestly? No, yes, and somewhat. > So you consider your life so far has been only pain, nothing of worth or fulfillment because you've not had a nest of millions-of-dollars to lie in? Not only pain, but definitely not actualized either. My life to date is a gamble that I'll maybe be able to achieve autonomy before death. If I was born into wealth, I would have started with autonomy. Not everyone is cut out for work,…

(Maybe unlike you, maybe not) I enjoy my work, and I even enjoy life and the beauty of the world yet I support your view, you better understand the true reality of human condition than the majority of people.

Re: Having Kids

#457

Post by sergefaguet »

This is how I feel about taking paychedelics.

Hard to explain to those who haven’t done it. Sounds like a cult. More enjoyable moments than any conceivable moments before. Magic hard to put into words. Changes you forever. People who haven’t done it simply don’t get it. And it is pretty much profound deep and fundamental happiness on tap.

I don’t intend to have kids but I am curious how it compares. At present I am dubious having a child can compare to the profound depth of a peak psychedelic experience.

Re: Having Kids

#458

Post by randomsearch »

daxfohl wrote: post #258

So my experience was the opposite. I came in expecting this great "chemical change" where suddenly the world revolved around my kids and their future. Well the latter part is true: my world now revolves around them and their futures. But chemical change? No. It's just the responsibility I have now. There's never a break. It's all-encompassing. I mean, it's survivable, I can deal with it, and I do the best I can, but,…

Thanks for the perspective. I know many others who have said the same thing as you, if that’s any comfort.

Re: Having Kids

#459

Post by bryanmgreen »

throwaway2519 wrote: post #405
lordnacho wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your kids are at the age before school where they are the hardest to deal with. Once a kid gets to school, magic happens. I mean it. - They get tired from learning stuff. And the teachers know how to deal with them. - They learn how to behave in a group. They start having actual friends. - You get a bunch of friends who are in the same situation as you, and you can use their kids to cancel out yours. (AKA playdates)…

> my kids started school at 4. I've put them in full time after school care as well, ending at 6pm > you get them asleep before 8pm > you can give them a book and that will keep them quiet And then people wonder why kids don't listen to and respect their parents when they grow up. You're basically just giving school teachers full control to raise your kids at age of 4, and they only interact with you for 1-2 hours du…

No clue why you're being downvoted.

I too wonder why anyone would want children if they don't actively want to spend time and raise them.

Re: Having Kids

#460

Post by PKop »

Klinky wrote: post #167
PKop wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and you're getting downvoted, but the whole framework of individualism and enlightenment principles prioritizing individual autonomy above all else often locks people's views in such a way they cannot conceive of having children as a fundamental responsibility/obligation to continue legacy of their ancestors. There is this enlightenment western philosophy that everyone is an atomized, isolated blank slate acting…

There is no responsibility or obligation to one's ancestors to have children. This is a construct you are creating to justify your choice, or rather "lack of choice". You're playing the logic games you're saying others play to justify not having children.

>There is no responsibility or obligation to one's ancestors to have children

I think it's probably a philosophical, maybe even a spiritual argument. Enlightenment individualism has ingrained in western cultures the idea they have no connection or ties to the past, or their ancestors, and shouldn't even conceive of themselves in terms of these other people. Blank slate, complete autonomy, etc. I think it's just a fundamental philosophical disagreement to start from a different premise that isn't self interest per se.

"Lack of choice", I like that. It removes the consideration to construct arguments about self-interested "choice".

I'll make a logical one though:

Every single person's existence is the sum total of all previous generations of ancestors action of making the choice that led to you. Not just one or a few of your ancestor's, but all of them are owed this choice. Maybe even this choice is owed to the universe (~God) itself?

The evolutionary "winners" will be the ones that consistently take this action. You can simply say, are you evolutionarily a winner, or a loser? Will you continue the propagation of your genes, or won't you? This is the "forest for the trees" way to frame it, I believe, as it steps back to avoid endless lower-level convenience rationales for opting out (if the choice is available to you of course).

Post reply on HN