I Can't Afford Another Baby. Help!!

[disneysteve]

I just want to comment on one thing. A couple of posters have mentioned getting a carseat from craigslist or donation. Please do not do this. A carseat is one thing that should ALWAYS be purchased brand new. It is simply far too important an item to risk taking a chance on. A carseat could have been involved in an accident and look absolutely fine but not be safe to use and there is no way to know that. You should also replace any carseat after an accident whether it looks damaged or not. So please buy your carseat new. They aren't that expensive and the baby's life isn't where you want to skimp.

[johninsurance]

sorry man that sucks

[Taribor]

Originally Posted by disneysteve

My advice? Just say NO!

It isn't your responsibility to correct your adult son's mistakes. You shouldn't have to ruin your life because he has chosen to ruin his. I have a lot of patients who are raising grandchildren in similar circumstances and the toll it takes on them is terrible. Let the state worry about it. They can put the kid in foster care. Let the father know that you aren't going to bail him out this time.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but I've got zero patience for people like this.

Just my humble opinion.

That is a pathetic response, Steve.

Too bad if raising a grandchild "ruins your life"...it is family and this isn't about "bailing" out the stepson, it is about saving a life.

Just my personal opinion, but it is family and there is a baby involved; you do what you need to do to give this kid a chance at life.

This isn't t.v.; no middle class family is going to take this baby and raise some super star; more likely the kid will grow up in a bad environment and never have a chance.

Some of you are way to cheap on this forum when it comes to the important things.

[maat55]

Originally Posted by Taribor

That is a pathetic response, Steve.

Too bad if raising a grandchild "ruins your life"...it is family and this isn't about "bailing" out the stepson, it is about saving a life.

Just my personal opinion, but it is family and there is a baby involved; you do what you need to do to give this kid a chance at life.

This isn't t.v.; no middle class family is going to take this baby and raise some super star; more likely the kid will grow up in a bad environment and never have a chance.

Some of you are way to cheap on this forum when it comes to the important things.

You assume a lot, the child is young enough that he could likely be adopted to a loving couple that want and can afford him. Any further association with the bio parents is likely harmful to the child. Complete separation from the family would be ideal, IMO.

[cschin4]

In life we all arrive at a crossroad. You can go left or you can go right. The choice you make may be irretrievable and have long term consequences. The child technically is "not your problem". However, if you cannot commit to the welfare of this child and deal with the child in a loving way and not burdening the child even further with resentment, then perhaps the child needs to go elsewhere.
As I get older, I am beginning to see however that the really important things in life is to do the important things in life. That my job, career, how much money I have or don't have, etc really means very little. And, that all that matters is how much of myself I have invested in other human beings.
I really don't know where our generation got the notion that we deserve some problem free, uncomplicated life. People say "why me" but perhaps instead we should say "why not me"?
OP - Nobody can really advice you on what is best. You could raise this child for a time and then the parents could come back and not even mutter a "thank you" and move and you might never see the child again. Who knows?
And, when I was younger, my sister and and BIL put us down for guardians in case something would happen to them to care for their children. I remember thinking that would be an impossible situation if it were to happen. But, now I know that I would absolutely have to do so if the event arose. I think we have lost our sense of duty and moral obligation to one another and unfortunately I think we are worse off for having done so.

[raymond723]

　Obesity and smoking are important risk factors for many age-related diseases. Tim Spector (St. Thomas' Hospital, UK) and colleagues in the USA looked for evidence of ageing at a molecular level in smokers and obese individuals. They analysed telomeres, which cap the ends of the chromosomes in our cells and protect them from damage. Every time a cell divides, and as people age, their telomeres get shorter.

　　The investigators recruited 1122 women from the UK aged 18-76 years onto the study. 119 of the women were obese, with a body mass index (BMI) greater than 30, and 85 women had a BMI under 20. 531 women had never smoked, 369 were ex-smokers, and 203 were current smokers.

　　The participants were asked to complete a questionnaire on smoking history. Their exposure to smoking was measured as pack-years (number of cigarette packs smoked per day_number of years smoking).

　　The investigators measured the concentrations of a body fat regulator called leptin and telomere length in blood samples from the women. They found that telomere length decreased steadily with age and the telomeres of obese women and smokers were much shorter that those of lean women and never-smokers.

　　Lean individuals had significantly longer telomeres than women with midrange BMIs, who, in turn, had longer telomeres than obese individuals. Each pack-year smoked was equivalent to a loss of an additional 18% on top of the average annual shortening of telomeres.

　　Professor Spector states: “Our findings suggest that obesity and cigarette smoking accelerate human ageing. . . the difference in telomere length between being lean and being obese corresponds to 8??8 years of ageing; smoking (previous or current) corresponds on average to 4??6 years of ageing; and smoking a pack per day for 40 years corresponds to 7??4 years of ageing. Our results emphasise the potential wide-ranging effects of the two most important preventable exposures in developed countries- cigarettes and obesity.”

[kilcher]

Originally Posted by mdcrim

I would only do it if you could guarantee that neither of the parents would have any rights to him in the future.

I agree 100%.

[mom-from-missouri]

This is your wifes (and yours) grandchild. It is family. For that child to get bounced around in the system will increasee the chance he turns out like your stepson--no security, no constant love.

Friends of mine recently in the same situation got the wifes sisters children from Florida. Florida family services transferred them to Missouri family services. They had to take foster parenting classes, and are now "foster parents to their neice and nephew" for "25-life". As a result, they do get paid by the state to be foster parents. That will help offset some of the expenses.
Check into it.
Also, think how that child will feel when he is older--will he be grateful you took him in? Or angry that you did not and didn't love him enough.
The baby didn't create this situation. He is a victim of it.
I am speaking as a former foster parent myself.

[mom-from-missouri]

One more thing I want to add......I was 40 when my twins were born. I have 3 friends who had kids at 47 and 48.
Our kids range from 22 to 10. My ss from my first marriage is in his 30's and I still consider him to be one of mine--he is closer to me his former stepmom than he is to his dad or real mom.
I have 7 friends who have grandkids older than their youngest. If I had another baby now I would be delighted--I guess for me age isn't the factor. (unless were were Abraham and Sarahs age)

[financialnut]

Wow... great thread. You're truly in a tough position, my friend. Good luck with everything. You'll get plenty of help in these forums; I can guarantee it.