Thinking Out Loud: Should ill people have babies?

[AnditheBee]

Note: Please read this all the way through before you get mad at me...honestly, I'm more reasonable than I initially seem.

So I have a close friend who is in love with a woman who has a ton of health problems (at 27 years old). He wants to marry her; however, she is determined to have a baby before she is 30 (because of her health problems), and he simply isn't ready for kids yet. Now, whether or not he marries her, I'm horrified that a woman with an ongoing heart condition, numerous tumors throughout her body, and anxiety so bad she has to take daily medication, would consider having children. She can't hold a job...heck, she even needs help going up stairs! What makes her think she can raise a child? Not to mention the fact that some of her problems (if not all of them) may be hereditary...and that she may not survive to see her child(ren) grow up.

I'm trying to be supportive and listen to him, but it's hard not to scream, "What business does she have, thinking about having kids???" Am I being too judgemental, to think that this woman is being monumentally selfish? It seems like the situation can only end up with my friend having to take care not only of his sick wife but a baby she can't handle as well as hold down a job that supports them all...now, I don't doubt that he loves her, and that he'd take that burden on, but if you love someone, why do you want to try to saddle them with that? And if you love your potential future children, why subject them to the possibility of growing up without their mother??

Okay, so I'm not objective and I've gone on a total rant, here, but seriously: Have any of you moms BTDT? Have you raised children while dealing with serious health issues? I'd like to have an insider's perspective, to know before I judge, or before I try to give him any serious advice. So far I'm just listening and trying to be supportive...but he really wants my view.

Thanks in advance, and I hope I haven't made anyone feel too defensive...it's not something I would do, but then again, I have never felt that Undeniable Urge To Have Children No Matter What, so I can't really relate to the feeling. Help sorting things out would be greatly appreciated.

[Belle]

I think that if its something that both partners agree on then its only their business and not anyone elses place to judge. If having children is what makes the two of them happy with the time that they have together, whay is that a bad thing? If your friend feels that he is not ready for children at this time, he should discuss what his feelings are with her.

I can't speak for all of her health problems, but I once took medication for anxiety. I took them for two years before I gradually weaned myself from them so that we could ttc. They did their job when it was needed and then I outgrew the need for them. I wish that my doctor had recommended non-phamacological treatments first, but I digress. That in itself is certainly not a reason to not have children.

[kerikadi]

To quote Julia Roberts character Shelby from Steel Magnolias "I'd rather have 5 minutes of WONDERFUL than a life time of just ok."
That is paraphrased of course - I'm not going to watch the movie to get it 100% correct.

I agree with the previous poster.
I am also a cancer survivor and have suffered depression in my life.
I am now cured and happier than I have ever been and am hoping to conceive #5 this year.

Keri

[NaomiLorelie]

I just don't know. I can completely see both sides. There are no simple answers.

[BelgianSheepDog]

I just say thank heavens it's a personal choice we're free to make and if it ever becomes otherwise, I'll be scared for all of us, "ill" or not.

[maxmama]

Limiting who is "good enough" genetic material to breed (whether officially or through disapproval) sounds to me an awful lot like both the eugenics movement of the early 20th century and the eugenics of Nazism.

[TurboClaudia]

one of the most hurtful and alienating things a friend's father said to her when she got engaged to her husband, who had already exhibited signs of multiple sclerosis: "But are you sure you want to be with a man who is just going to get more sick?"

it's for the two parents-to-be to decide, and no else's business. i'm sure they both have entertained all the possibilities and it's just hurtful to point it out to them.

~claudia

[AnditheBee]

Of course it's their choice--and if my friend weren't involved I'd probably still feel the same way, but wouldn't care what she did with her life. He wants help deciding whether to marry her or walk away. I just don't want to say, "I think you should walk away because she's being selfish" if this is an unfair assessment. I wanted to see other sides before I give him advice.

I hate giving advice, but he keeps asking...my husband thinks he just wants someone else to agree he should dump her because he will feel less guilty that way. And I think my husband is probably right.

Belle, thanks for relating your experiences. I get no indication she can or will cut down the meds before TTC. It scares me, but I don't know enough about these meds to really know what it could do to her baby...

[BelgianSheepDog]

I think your husband is right, the guy is trying to offload his guilt onto someone else. Don't let him. Just say "you know, I can't advise you, this is your call."

As for her meds and the baby, I'm sure that's something she'll talk to her doctors about or research. If she has been ill so frequently I'm sure she's used to that drill.

[AnditheBee]

Originally Posted by maxmama

Limiting who is "good enough" genetic material to breed (whether officially or through disapproval) sounds to me an awful lot like both the eugenics movement of the early 20th century and the eugenics of Nazism.

Of course I don't mean they shouldn't be allowed to reproduce!!! But I still see it as a wholly selfish act to have babies in some circumstances. My father died when I was a year old...I was an "accidental baby," but I'm sure if he knew he was likely to die in his 50s (as all his brothers did after him) he would have been more careful not to have anymore kids. I think 80-year-old men who have babies are being selfish, too...but they do--and should--have a right to do it.

Please also note that I am here to hear the views of those who have chosen the "selfish" path...I am open to adjusting my opinion. That's why I posted this!

[MaryJaneLouise]

Well, this one was hard for me. As a 40+ cancer survivor, I thought long and hard about having kids. I decided that my prognosis was good enough, my current health was good enough, my DH would be good enough to be a single dad should anything happen, and to just finally do it.

I decided that none of us are guaranteed tomorrow. Although I am very aware of statistics and what "might" happen, I ultimately put my life and my future children's lives in the hands of God or fate or what have you.

[mrzmeg]

Limiting who is "good enough" genetic material to breed (whether officially or through disapproval) sounds to me an awful lot like both the eugenics movement of the early 20th century and the eugenics of Nazism.

Nobody was talking about laws or outside enforcement, just whether we personally think it's moral or not. And if one thinks it is immoral, it does not automatically lead to systemic eugenics.

I can see both sides too. My SIL has multiple sclerosis and two children under 4; the MS showed up shortly after her second was born. I do think she probably would not have had children if she knew what was coming, but the children are wonderfully adaptive, bright kids.

I personally wouldn't have children if I were very ill, had genetic disorders, had existing children with genetic disorders, or if I were likely to die when they were young, etc.

[cottonwood]

The health problems, in my mind, are not really the issue here, because other considerations (like love) can trump them. And under certain circumstances I would say that they would be morally irrelevant to their choice to procreate. For instance if your friend were not just doing this for her, but was doing it for both her and him, if he felt that if she died in the next year he would have regretted not making a child with her, if he was fully committed to how much would be necessary for him to take on as both her caretaker and possibly primary parent.

So I think this is really an issue with whether your friend is ready to have children and whether he feels comfortable doing so in this particular situation. We know the answer to the first question is 'no', and can assume that if he has to ask advice about it, he is at least conflicted about the second. Neither is a good place to be in when starting a family, so my advice to him would be, "don't do it."

[Charles Baudelaire]

Originally Posted by kerikadi

To quote Julia Roberts character Shelby from Steel Magnolias "I'd rather have 5 minutes of WONDERFUL than a life time of just ok."

With all due respect to anyone who is suffering from or has recovered from a terminal or serious illness, I find the attitude expressed by Julia Roberts' character to be unbearably narcissistic -- it's all about whether she will have a wonderful five minutes regardless of the impact on her child or her partner or her family.

Each case is so different I find it impossible to pass a blank judgment on the totality and say, "Yes" or "No," even generally. However, I would generally say that if the nature of one's illness is serious enough so that the following conditions apply, it might be better to choose childlessness than indulge one's desire for five minutes of happiness.

Here are some conditions under which I think it would generally be wiser and more considerate not to have a child:

1. If the mother's health prognosis limits her lifespan significantly, particularly if she would die when her child was a baby or young kid,

2. If the mother's health makes it impossible to provide a reasonable standard of reasonable care for a child,

3. If the child would suffer as a result of the mother's illness,

4. If the illness and childbirth would put an undue burden on the other parent or on their families, or both.

Again, though, each case is so different that no one single answer will suffice to deal with every contingency. I just don't think that one's own happiness is or should be the sole consideration here and find that attitude enormously selfish.

[AnditheBee]

Originally Posted by TurboClaudia

i'm sure they both have entertained all the possibilities and it's just hurtful to point it out to them.

Well, as I say, I've been asked--otherwise I'd just bitch to my husband about it and go on with life!

But no--knowing my friend as I do, I suspect he hasn't considered all the possibilities. The only fear he has shared with me is of her dying. I don't think it's occurred to him that he may be put in the position of taking full-time care of her.

FWIW, I'm thinking more about these prospective babies' welfare than my friend's. I guess I feel that I would never have had kids if I had seriously life-shortening disorders that I might pass on to them, or if I would just have to hand them off to someone stronger to raise, or if there was a good chance I'd die when they were still small. But...they are not me. I guess my challenge is to avoid influencing my friend's views with my own. Difficult to do when you love someone and they're asking for your opinion!

[wednesday]

Well...there are times in any person's life when it is not a good idea to conceive, because of health reasons or finances or circumstances or whatever. Just because this woman is staring down a deadline doesn't make NOW a good time, kwim? So I guess I would have to say that for anyone to choose to turn a blind eye to their circumstances and just throw fate to the winds in TTC in a scenario such as this one is something I would personally not be comfortable with.

That doesn't mean I think there should be a law against it, just like I don't think there should be a law that you have to earn x amount of dollars or own your home or any other kind of financial test before starting a family. Nor would I even dream of suggesting that someone with health problems or financial issues should terminate if they found themselves unexpectedly pregnant. But PLANNING to conceive when circumstances are such that it would be extremely difficult to care for a child strikes me as very poor judgment. I couldn't see marrying a person who prioritizes their own personal desires over being rational and realistic about their circumstances.

[AnditheBee]

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds

The health problems, in my mind, are not really the issue here, because other considerations (like love) can trump them. And under certain circumstances I would say that they would be morally irrelevant to their choice to procreate. For instance if your friend were not just doing this for her, but was doing it for both her and him, if he felt that if she died in the next year he would have regretted not making a child with her, if he was fully committed to how much would be necessary for him to take on as both her caretaker and possibly primary parent.

Thanks so much for this marvelously clear-headed post. That helps tremendously. I had been feeling that subconsciously but couldn't articulate it. Thank you.

[craftymom]

Well, she could get hit by a bus tomorrow. I think this os for her and her partner to decide--and she should have a pretty big say! If I were them, I would also go to a good perinatologist and put together a team of doctors just to discuss this. Not knowing her exact diagnosis (and I'd probably know nothing about it anyway), who knows? But should a child not exist just because mom might not be there? Or, of course, should a child know his/her existence contributed to the demise of mom? That's a horrible thing to think about.

That said, I have a genetic clotting disorder. Not a horrible thing in the scheme of lupus and cancer and fibromyalgia, etc etc, but it is significant. My ggf died at 58 of stroke complications, probably as a result of it. My gf died at 56 of a heart attack, possibly related. I have had a 2nd trimester m/c because of it, but not had a DVT/PE myself. I know, which is good, but I doubt I will live to 80 (assuming I don't get hit by a bus...).

And one of my neighbors told me I should not have more kids because it's too dangerous for me, and I can pass it on to my kids, and why in the world would I risk that now that I know?

My advice--sure ask your friend how he feels about it, but _don't_ suggest she/he are nuts to even consider it.

[EStreetMama]

What's that quote about walking in someone else's shoes? What is the value of speculating about these things when it's not you or your life? In my experience, this is a wild and messy world, and what is ideal is not always what becomes real.

Peace, mamas...

[maxmama]

Originally Posted by mrzmeg

I personally wouldn't have children if I were very ill, had genetic disorders, had existing children with genetic disorders, or if I were likely to die when they were young, etc.

We're all likely to die at some point, and no one can say when that will be. I could get hit by a bus tomorrow (very likely, given our crappy drivers). And who doesn't have a genetic disorder, if you include a family history of cancer/heart disease/depression?