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

‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 281 posts

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#181

Post by fullstop »

em-bee wrote: post #179
fullstop wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear what you're saying, but the legal aspects of being a parent likely outweigh that. With foster children the state retains legal custody. Adoption is not just finding suitable parent(s) for a child, it is transferring both legal rights and obligations. I'm saying this through a US centric lens, of course.

i understand why things are that way, but it is exactly the legal situation that makes me think it should be otherwise. when adopting you are giving parents the full responsibility to raise the children as they see fit. so obviously they should be capable, but that is all that is needed, just as if they had kids of their own. for foster children the state retains a continuous responsibility for these children, and fo…

Right, but the foster children can be taken away at any time the state sees fit to do so. The hurdles to do that with adopted children are much higher.

One action can easily be undone, but the other can not.

Edit: one other thing to consider is that there are a huge number of children in the foster system and they are desperate for foster parents.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#182

Post by em-bee »

fullstop wrote: post #181
em-bee wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i understand why things are that way, but it is exactly the legal situation that makes me think it should be otherwise. when adopting you are giving parents the full responsibility to raise the children as they see fit. so obviously they should be capable, but that is all that is needed, just as if they had kids of their own. for foster children the state retains a continuous responsibility for these children, and fo…

Right, but the foster children can be taken away at any time the state sees fit to do so. The hurdles to do that with adopted children are much higher. One action can easily be undone, but the other can not. Edit: one other thing to consider is that there are a huge number of children in the foster system and they are desperate for foster parents.

(i added more to my previous comment so you may have missed that)

the fact that foster kids can be taken away easily is the problem, because that should not happen. and that can only be avoided if foster parents are vetted more strongly.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#183

Post by dagw »

anon291 wrote: post #122
ant_li0n wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow yeah you really hit the nail on the head for me. My wife and I weren't trying to have kids but we weren't trying not to have kids either, if you get my drift. Looking back on it, if we had been "smart" about deciding when the right time would happen, we might never have had kids. Having kids is hands-down the best thing I've ever done but also the hardest. Not because of the amount of work, because it's really no…

The entire phrase 'trying for kids' is a neologism only enabled by birth control For most of history, people just did what you did and had the results you did

Trying for kids means making sure you have sex at the right times of the month, something humanity has known about for millennia. Equally people not 'trying for kids' made sure to only have sex at the 'wrong' time of the month, again something humans have been doing for millennia.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#184

Post by fullstop »

em-bee wrote: post #182
fullstop wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the foster children can be taken away at any time the state sees fit to do so. The hurdles to do that with adopted children are much higher. One action can easily be undone, but the other can not. Edit: one other thing to consider is that there are a huge number of children in the foster system and they are desperate for foster parents.

(i added more to my previous comment so you may have missed that) the fact that foster kids can be taken away easily is the problem, because that should not happen. and that can only be avoided if foster parents are vetted more strongly.

Right, I do agree with what you are saying but it's also an example of perfect being the enemy of good enough.

It's an unfortunate situation, but if the barriers are high enough there will be fewer people willing to foster. How many good-enough homes are out there, even if they are not perfect? At what point is the risk of being placed in a less than perfect home worth it?

I have just a few more years until all of my kids are out of the house and living on their own, and fostering children is definitely on my mind. We have already started by hosting foreign exchange students.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#185

Post by em-bee »

fullstop wrote: post #184
em-bee wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(i added more to my previous comment so you may have missed that) the fact that foster kids can be taken away easily is the problem, because that should not happen. and that can only be avoided if foster parents are vetted more strongly.

Right, I do agree with what you are saying but it's also an example of perfect being the enemy of good enough. It's an unfortunate situation, but if the barriers are high enough there will be fewer people willing to foster. How many good-enough homes are out there, even if they are not perfect? At what point is the risk of being placed in a less than perfect home worth it? I have just a few more years until all of my…

i don't know what the best solution is, for one i think the same is true for adoption, although i hear that in the US (and maybe in most western countries) there are not so many kids needing adoption for that to be a problem.

How many good-enough homes are out there, even if they are not perfect?

that's actually not what i am concerned about but foster parents that are outright abusive. so basically, i think that even foster kids should only be taken away if they are neglected or abused in such a way that you would even charge native parents with that.

the goal should not be to find perfect parents, but to find parents where the kids actually can stay as long as they need to. the barrier to take them away again is to low because it doesn't consider the hurt caused by being "taken away" itself.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#186

Post by bradlys »

WXLCKNO wrote: post #123
basisword wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> kids take a lot of work, you have to be in the right place to do it. I think it's a certain type of personality that believes this. I know somebody who gets worried for certain friends/family having children because they don't own their house or have high paid jobs. They have a laundry list of todo's (mostly financial) before they will even consider having children. It's almost condescending but I choose to see it…

I grew up poor and financial anxiety was real, I just couldn't fathom how people were living with it. I could barely tolerate it for myself, let alone bring kids into the world while being uncertain. It didn't feel like anything condescending, just a lack of understanding. Now I'm very well off and could retire (fat fire equivalent) at 34 and I do want kids.

I grew up similarly and am also well off financially now too at 33. Yet, I can’t find a woman who would want to have kids with me.

The market has changed. Looks is paramount - I worked so hard to be financially stable and didn’t realize that it wasn’t my parents financial situation that had fucked me over so badly in life - it was their dogshit genetics that made me ugly.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#187

Post by mlinhares »

birksherty wrote: post #170
xyzzy4747 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who just had a kid, I agree. You don’t have to overthink it. At the end of the day all they need is a calorie surplus and shelter. That’s it. Everything else is a bonus. As a parent you can put as much or as little work into it as you like. Time is going to pass and they’ll grow older regardless. It’s not like a tech startup where you have to put work in or it’ll crash and burn.

Completely disagree. You do whatever with your own life. But kid is a 3rd person that you bring. If the life they are coming to is already bad, financially, legged behind from others in many ways, or any other, that's selfish. Forcing someone to terrible start without their consent. Parent should first make sure they are good to bring someone else and not to give a disadvantage start, playing gamble with life who did…

It is insane to me that people think otherwise.

How callous can you be to bring a life into the world and think "i'm just gonna wing it" in this day and age. The kid didn't ask to be brought here, it is 100% under the responsibility and care of whoever decided to have it.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#188

Post by pavel_lishin »

wkat4242 wrote: post #101
pavel_lishin wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FTA: > Instead, he said: “There’s this mistaken belief that men are fertile across their lifespan, so there’s no imperative to get on with it.”

But it's true. Men don't have an expiration date on fertility like women do. As they get older, the chance of random infertility increases but this is something that's present at any age. The bigger impediment would be age difference though. I wouldn't want to have a child in my 50s as I'd be so out of sync with their life.

My friend has two children, and he's in his fifties. It presents certain challenges, but having children at any age presents challenges.

I'd wager most of these men who are sad they missed out would rather have a child at 50 than never at all.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#189

Post by deely3 »

em-bee wrote: post #71
basisword wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like most young men have always wanted to extend their youth and avoid the responsibility that family life would bring. However, until recently (with easy access to birth control, abortion, and proper education) this wasn't really possible. You would accidentally have a child and be forced into the lifestyle you were trying to avoid. And most of the time things worked out and you were forced into a situation t…

i think the smart thing to do is to have kids when you are 20 and then enjoy life when you are 40. at that time you are much better off financially (unless you live in a country where you have to pay for your kids education maybe) which gives you a lot more freedom to explore your interests.

Erm, no. Jobless, homeless student with few kids. I will be very very sorry for my kids.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#190

Post by cacois »

pnutjam wrote: post #35
cacois wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is theoretically possible as a single male, but there are many more restrictions - in practice its very very rare. For example, see these requirements for a very large international adoption agency: [1]. In my experience there is, as OP describes, a strong stigma against single males, not just that they are considered perverts, but also that they are considered incapable of taking on this responsibility alone, not…

Have you considered doing volunteer work with children. Something like Big Brothers?

I don't have the problem OP has, I just know something about the system. A better way to phrase this for a useful discussion (rather than unsolicited, assumed advice) would be to say "do you know if volunteer work with children would help alter this perception?".
Post reply on HN