Pregnant GF

[VoraciousReader]

[ QUOTE ]
This sounds like substituting rolling over and playing dead for figuring out how to lead a happier life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope.

All of us will have things happen to us that are unfair.

We can rail against the universe or we can accept life as it is, and devote our energies to figuring out how we can make the best of our situation and still get what we want.

I'm certainly not unsympathetic to any young man or young woman that finds him/herself in this situation. That said, life isn't fair. At least this problem is partly self-inflicted. Many circumstances that people find themselves in are not.

I find the line of thinking that this is somehow something that the girl is doing to the OP repugnant, narrow-minded, and completely lacking in compassion and empathy.

Regardless of what one feels about abortion, it is still true that a woman can not get pregnant by herself. It is also true that whatever she chooses, her life will change more than the man in the equation.

Here's a question for those of you contending that she is evil for violating her sacred "promise": if you promise the woman in your life that you will love her and stay with her forever, are you bound by that promise as much as she is bound by the "abort the baby" promise? Regardless of what may happen in the future? Regardless of how feelings may change?

I think this is an analogous promise, because it involves the same factors:

1. It is based on what you are feeling at that moment.
2. It is easy to promise and difficult to do.
3. It is something that you may feel very very differently about at some point, much as you may not think so at the time.
4. It is very clear which answer your significant other wants to hear.
5. Keeping it will impact you for the rest of your life.

If there is any circumstance under which you would not consider yourself bound by this promise , how is the promise that she made different?

[Blarg]

It isn't true that "the universe" and not living in it is being discussed. It's choices.

I think much of your post is fine, but:

[ QUOTE ]
I find the line of thinking that this is somehow something that the girl is doing to the OP repugnant, narrow-minded, and completely lacking in compassion and empathy.


[/ QUOTE ]

...I can't see how you can only see this from one side. I find the line of thinking that this is something the OP is doing to the girl is repugnant, narrow-minded, and completely lacking in compassion and empathy.

Give both sides of that equation -- there are, after all, two people involved -- and I think you have a reasonable discussion. Give only one side the last word one what is moral and what isn't, and take it for granted that either everyone agrees or everyone who doesn't is some type or level of awful person, and I think it's engaging in blinkered thinking, and probably some degree of venting and self-praise for one's own standards, which luckily enough are not having their toes held to the fire in real life at the time. I'm not sure if I would really put it above mere reacting, honestly. It doesn't pass for open, fair discussion to me.

I agree that people make promises they likely will not keep. That's why I said "welcome to the real world" to the OP in one of my first posts. The idea that you should always trust your partner to the Nth degree, no matter how much you love them, is one everyone would like so very much to believe. But life goes on. You still have to use common sense and protect yourself. And expect little "surprises" like these, especially if there is so much cultural approval for springing them, and probably so much genetic likelihood that they'll find one way or another to happen.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

If there is any circumstance under which you would not consider yourself bound by this promise , how is the promise that she made different?

[/ QUOTE ]

Among other things, breaking the "together forever" promise is reversible, and can be discussed over a long period of time without a committal action.

I have tons of empathy for the woman. This is a hard situation, there are no easy answers, and all solutions have obvious, glaring problems. However, the potential outcome where she is raising the kid alone is a situation that she has put herself in largely by her own actions, is sort of what I'm getting at. I'm not sure that it's "right" for the guy to leave in those circumstances, but based on their agreement it's a hell of a lot more right than in other circumstances.

[VoraciousReader]

Blarg,

To be clear, I have a lot of empathy for OP too. I don't think that this is something he "did to her" either. (Note my postscript to him earlier.)

I specifically referenced the girl in this case because the recent posts in the thread seem to be of the "look what she's doing to him" variety.

In an ideal world, OP's girlfriend would graduate, they would marry, and when they are both ready, they'll decide to have babies. It's an unfortunate situation for everyone concerned. I don't think the answer is: "He doesn't owe her anything because she won't have an abortion."

And I disagree that there is cultural approval for the girl's situation. Whatever she chooses, a lot of people are going to look down on her. If she aborts, for some (including people she is fairly close to), she will be a killer. If she has the baby, for some, she will be a statistic: "another unwed young mother". And either way, some people that are apparently key members of her support system (OP or her family) are going to be very angry with her.

It is unfortunate, but there can still be lots of joy for both of them in the future if they are open to it. Still, the way to get there is to assess their lives given what has happened to them, not given what they WISH had happened.

[Blarg]

I agree, but one of the choices remains not having the baby. There is no way that can be found that this is not a choice. It is simply one that people may like, or else not like.

As far as cultural disapproval goes, I used to work in a very big office and virtually every one of the women were unwed mothers. Some of the unwed mothers had their own kids, who also became unwed mothers, get a job there too. There are plenty of environments where being an unwed mother is perhaps a little unacceptable in theory, but in practice is the norm.

Tellingly, it is often the case that those exact same situations would be the ones where the potential mother is called a murderer, immature, whatever negatives could possibly be brought up, if she didn't have the baby. Cultural disapproval of not having the baby can be so strong as to be de facto cultural approval to have it. The pregnant woman will face FAR more pressure to have the kid than not. So socially, her path is blindingly clear.

[TripleH68]

[ QUOTE ]
Update...

After another conversation with her, she's even more against an abortion than I originally thought.

But apparently she was up all night praying for a miscarriage.

...

If I get any more confused I may pass out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Get counselling immediately. And try to feel a little positive about it. I know people who have had casual sex with girls they couldn't care less about and plant a seed. Now that is a true disaster.

Counselling. Fast.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
kerowo,

Holla for calling me an idiot. When you can't respond to reasonable points, ad hominem is generally the best way to go.

[ QUOTE ]
So the guy wasn't even there? That's what your saying? He has no responsibility at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guy has as much responsibility as a sperm donor does to a woman who patronizes a sperm bank and has "his" child. Which is to say, yeah, none.

I would change my mind if, say, there were specific health issues with the woman getting an abortion, such that she had no choice but to have the child. But she does have a choice. And with choice comes responsibility.

edit: minor typo

[/ QUOTE ]

Worst. Post. Ever.

I will clarify:

Are you seriously comparing the act of sexual intercourse, sans condom and resulting in a child, to nothing more than a woman patronizing a sperm bank? I'm just making sure we're clear on this, as I'm pretty sure if you thought about it, even you would realize how terrible your comparison is.

In the sperm bank situation there is no contact. No relationship. Nothing. A woman who is incapable of getting pregnant for whatever reason (likely her husband is sterile or she is lesbian) goes to the sperm bank for in vitro fertilization. Simple business and the man never had any thoughts otherwise.

In this situation, however, you have a boy who claimed to love this woman before she got pregnant. He willingly engaged in sexual intercourse with her and has created a child. His level of responsibility in this situation was more than just a test tube of semen. It was a woman he claimed to love. To absolve OP of his responsibility is to really say "its ok for me to accept the consequences of my actions when I feel like it", and that is the sign of brutal immaturity.

[WillMagic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find it sad that you would break a friendship over not getting a car for free.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not about the car. It's about the principle. A man's word is his bond. And a person who doesn't value his word is someone I don't want to be associated with.

[/ QUOTE ]
So nothing could occur between the time you talked about winning the lottery and him actually winning it that would make you understand his decision not to give you car? For instance, his mom gets cancer and needs expensive treatement?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are exceptional circumstances, and under exceptional circumstances I can forgive people for breaking their word - they don't really have a choice. Remember that I mentioned that if, for example, the girl could not get an abortion for medical reasons, then the guy should stay. This is fairly standard.

But a simple "change of heart" is not enough.

[kerowo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find it sad that you would break a friendship over not getting a car for free.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not about the car. It's about the principle. A man's word is his bond. And a person who doesn't value his word is someone I don't want to be associated with.

[/ QUOTE ]
So nothing could occur between the time you talked about winning the lottery and him actually winning it that would make you understand his decision not to give you car? For instance, his mom gets cancer and needs expensive treatement?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are exceptional circumstances, and under exceptional circumstances I can forgive people for breaking their word - they don't really have a choice. Remember that I mentioned that if, for example, the girl could not get an abortion for medical reasons, then the guy should stay. This is fairly standard.

But a simple "change of heart" is not enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your position is still ridiculous. You can't ignore context. Or I guess you can, but it should only take a couple of weeks until you are alone because no one can live up to your impossible standards and you've dumped anyone in your life because it turned out they really wouldn't come over to your place for dinner.

[Blarg]

I agree that pregnancy is hardly an extraordinary occurrence, and as such it should be thought about rationally. I even have faith that it's quite possible to do so, despite some protests to the contrary that it is not.

However, because there is so much endorsement of the idea that being pregnant destroys rationality(and some of this by women yet - so much for "women's lib"), I'm starting to drift toward those who are usually my polar opposites in these discussions, the "just say no" folks. If you're not really in control of yourself, you're not really ready for sex yet anyway. We don't expect minors to behave like adults, but we might be better off not expecting adult behavior out of a whole lot of adults, either. Apparently lots of them are not ready for it and might never be. And heck, they flat out know it themselves. So since forced and, ideally, terrifically painful sterilization is out, maybe some people should just abstain until their head clears up a bit. Or a lot.