Annie's Mailbox® by Kathy Mitchell and Marcy Sugar

Oh no. Not poking! This marriage is doomed. If I caught my husband poking anyone else on FB, I'd probably have to kill him and the pokee. What is wrong with people? Random FB women just poking EVERYWHERE!!!!!

* * * * PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT * * * *

LW3 refers to the second letter on 22 January 2013.

I don't think you need to worry unless he starts poking her in person. I think you are overreacting. Just because the woman doesn't like you and may flirt with him doesn't mean he wants her. He seems to be keeping it open with you.

Why is it that a man is only valued for his wallet when it comes to kids?It would be less expensive to have daddy watch his own child anyway. He may be very good at it. If he is caring for the kid all day he doesn't need to pay child support. In fact, if she works 60 hours a week and he watches the baby she may have to pay him.
I remember my mom wanted to get child support from my dad. I pointed out that dad had twice as many kids with him and was paying for all of my brother's medical bills. A minimum of 4 weeks in the hospital per year wasn't cheap. Plus, dad paid for anything I asked for. (I didn't ask for much).

Wow, what good advice. And totally based on common sense too. Of course, if the visitors did that there wouldn't have been an issue to begin with.

LW3: Great advice, and it applies to anyone who thinks they're helping someone else: "Helping" means doing what a person asks you to do, not what you think they should want you to do. Respect their efforts and support their decisions.

LW1--You're taking all this way too personally. Facebook isn't like real life. Being "friends" on Facebook doesn't make you actual friends or create any obligation at all. That's the great thing about Facebook--you decide the boundaries of all your relationships there. So this woman has no obligation to respond to every friend request she receives (and it's possible that your original request expired or got lost, which is why she sent you a new one). Also, while some people are diligent about birthdays, others aren't. Are you even sure she had a notification it was your birthday? In any case, again, I wouldn't take it personally or read so much into it. The poking seems a little odd to me, but that's because I wasn't aware that anyone still used the poking feature on Facebook. I don't think any of my friends has poked me in about five years. However, when we were poking each other, it was just a playful way of saying, "Hi! Remember me?" It didn't signal any deeper relationship or intention--it was just a quicker way to say hi than actually typing out a message. So unless you're one of those people who thinks being married means giving up all interaction with people of the opposite sex who aren't your spouse, I don't really see what's so threatening here.

Bottom line: yes, "Clark" should consider your feelings; however, he's not doing anything thousands of other people don't do on Facebook to keep in touch with their friends, so your feelings aren't entirely justified, either.

Re: LW1, I agree with others BTL that she's taking something that's just quick and silly on FB and turning it into something more sinister. If her husband hasn't given her any reasons to be suspicious previously, it does look like she's overreacting and he's reacting to her overreaction -- which is a very bad cycle to get into. It would be nice if she could calmly talk to him and maybe get him to compromise a bit more than he has, but she might also try listening more carefully to his side of this as well and not keep jumping to conclusions.

LW1 - I, personally, think you're reading way too much into this. i don't use pokes on Facebook but I don't think they mean anything besides, "Hey, what's up?" without writing it on your wall or in a message. I wouldn't get too upset over it. As far as her not wishing you a happy birthday...first of all, she doesn't even know you and secondly, maybe she doesn't give birthday wishes on Facebook. I understand that your husband should consider your feelings but I think you're overreacting with the pokes. You didn't mention any sexual messages or secret phone calls so I highly doubt he's looking to poke her in real life.

LW2 - Give the guy a chance. Does he not have a job because he's in school? Or maybe he's looking but can't find one. It's not easy in this economy. Don't write him off just because he doesn't have a job right now. He could be an excellent father and you would be robbing your child of that if you write him off right now. Tell him and give him a chance.

LW2 - It's bad for the child to cut off contact with his/her father, and unless he is one of the things the Annies mention (drug addict, alcoholic, abuser, etc.), there's no reason to refuse him access to the child. However, I'm a little confused about the LW's comment that he lives "far away". "Far away" is relative -- does the LW mean across the country or just too far to see the child on a daily basis? And has she told him of the pregnancy yet? She may be doing him a disservice by assuming that he won't find a job as quickly as he can and be more than willing to support his child. Obviously, he must have been close enough to the LW at some point to get her pregnant, so he either lived near her at one time and moved recently, or he travels to her area. As far as I know, you still can't get pregnant over the Internet.

In any event, child support isn't a justification - morally OR legally - to deny visitation.

LW1 - I agree with the other posters who say the LW is over reacting. It seems as though her husband has been open and honest with her in his dealings with Toni, and that there doesn't seem to be anything sexual or sinister going on between them. Of course Clark should consider the LW's feelings, but I think she's being overly suspicious and sensitive about something that sounds totally innocent. Also, Toni is probably not as friendly with the LW as she could be simply because she doesn't KNOW her. Apparently, there is something in particular about Toni that bothers the LW, since she doesn't seem to mind Clark's other friends from his home town, so she needs to figure out what it is, relay her feelings to Clark, and see if they can compromise further on the situation.

Clark needs to be more sensitive to his wife. According to the letter, the boundaries he's set with Toni have only come at the behest of his sister and his wife, not himself. She is obviously aware of how Facebook works since she has taught him how to delete pokes. However, he continues this interaction even though it upsets her. He also seems to want to escalate the contact, expanding to Twitter and meeting Toni in real life, to see what she looks like, now. Does Toni not have a current photo of herself on FB for him to see instead?

I have many friends on FB who were just people in my graduating class or were friends of my siblings. I barely interact with them on FB anyway, so I get that FB friendships can be superficial. But none of these people are old flings. I have read too many letters about affairs that have started because of reconnecting with old loves on the internet to totally dismiss the LW's concerns.

LW1: I don't think you can put "pokes" and "messages" in the same catagory. Messages ARE personal, but I get pokes from people I don't even know, usually as a way to see if I am still thinking about them (as in "do you want me to delete you")

But the Annies are right here that the issue isn't that pokes aren't something to get upset about. The thing to get upset about is that the LW is uncomfortable with the contact with the exgirlfriend and that should be enough for Clark. It boils down to respecting the LW's feelings.

There are battles to fight, and then there are battles to let go. If I was the LW, I would ask myself, is this something to get riled up about? Is Clark a faithful kind husband in general and it's just this FB poke thing that's sticking in your craw? Or does he ignore you in other ways? If this is the ONLY way that he disrespects your wishes, I would let it go. If he is generally disrespectful, than you need to reassess your marriage.

LW1, is this a joke? How can poking be more personal than liking and sharing posts? You don't even have to be friends to poke someone, and there is no picture or message involved, just a dumb "so and so poked you". It's pretty dumb to keep doing it, but it sure isn't "personal".

LW2, please do the world and your baby a favor and give it up to a loving couple for adoption.

LW2: The LW writes "I want him involved with our child, but not if he can't help support the baby." She doesn't mention MONEY, she mentions support.

I hope the LW is reading here (it happens sometimes) because I have some home truths for you.

1. Once that baby comes, you will not be able to work 60 hours a week. You will be LUCKY if you can get in 40 and even then you will be exhausted.

2, The day care costs for infants is astronomical. You could well be working to pay day care costs. Friends of mine who made more than 50K a year have stayed home the first two years to care for their kids because even on THEIR salaries, the day care costs basically ate up any money they made. This is no exaggeration.

3. You will need EVERY BIT OF HELP YOU CAN GET. Help comes in many forms for single parents. My mother helped me out with CC when I moved back from Japan, my sister took her some nights and weekends and was able to pick her up from school if I couldn't get there, friends of mine donated clothes, my dad gave us bedroom furniture... the list goes on. I was never too proud to accept help and my dear, you can't be either.

However the father can help, should be accepted. Since he lives far away (how do you communicate and see each other?), money IS the obvious way he can help. However, I don't think you need to make it a condition of seeing the child.

I would suggest though, that since there doesn't appear to be any relationship here between the LW and the father (???? the mind boggles!) that the LW consult an attorney and have custody and support arrangements formalized IN WRITING before the child is born. In the event that the father does not honor his agreements to support the child in the future, visitation can be revisited at that point.

But, remember, your job now is to do what's best for the child. Don't be guided by your wallet.

LW1 -
The friend's request may have been lost in the ether... these things happen. She may not know of your birthday even though you think she should.... these things happen. Poke-poke... these things happen too.

However, for Clark to want to meet her in person, just "to see what she looks like now" raises a red flag. This is not just someone he went to school with. Why would he need to do that with an old flame, unless there are ulterior motives? The fact that he wants to meet with her in your presence is only to shut you up. There is nothing to say that he won't be meeting her on his own after that if he likes what he sees. And then there is the Twitter account he wants to set up. Why? So he can chat with her all day without you being able to keep track?

I don't think there has been anything untowards - yet. But I also think this is on very dangerous ground. Yeah, all these things happen indeed, but a lot of affairs also happen, after having started because of a reconnection with an old flame through the Internet and Facebook.

Clark will not want to curtail contact until it's too late, because the attention flatters him and makes him feel 50 years younger. Anything you say will be perceived as an attack on his precious freedom, and he will use the fact that nothing has happened yet to get all indignant, totally ignoring the fact that he's on a slippery slope. What you need to do is talk to his sister - he seems to listen to HER.

It's unlikely Toni doesn't have a picture somewhere in there. Ask for one yourself since you are such good "friends" with her. If there already is and that is not enough for Clark, then definitely there are unadmitted ulterior motives here.

Apart from enlisting the sister again, there isn't much you can do except watch like a hawk and monitor the situation very closely for developoments, because he is not going to listen to you - Toni belongs to the exciting fantasy, while YOU belong to the old, boring past and present. I just hope for everyone concerned that his shenanigans don't end up relegating you in his past also, because the risk for that is very real.

LW2 -
You are not being too harsh, you are being too money-minded. There is more to being a father than monetary support and men are not just wallets.

Someone poked me on Facebook, I had to ask an 18 year old what it was. He said it was like saying 'Hi.' I only look at it about once a week to add an event, that's when I check notifications and friend requests.

I think Twitter is way less personal than Facebook. Apparently 400 people and spambots care what I say half a dozen times a week. I really can't keep track of everything in my timeline most of the time, but i get an email if someone I follow sends me a direct message or mentions me in a tweet.

LW2: With or without financial support from the father, do you reallly think you're going to be able to work "at least 60 hours a week" with a new baby? And if you need to work that much to make ends meet, how do you think you're going to pay for day care? You're 19, without a college degree or a stable parenting partner. You're in no position to be a parent right now. Do yourself and your baby a favor and give it up for adoption.

Re: Jane

I had the same thought as you re: LW2. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

I agree with those BTL who recommended adoption for LW2. She really isn't in a position to financially or emotionally support an infant at this time in her life. Working 60 hours a week won't be an option after the baby is born, especially with the cost of daycare.

LW1: "Toni has been married at least twice, maybe three times. I've lost track."
Anyone who struggles between the numbers of 2 and 3 is a dimwit.

Re: LW2, she doesn't really elaborate on her personal situation... maybe she lives with her parents or other family members, and one of them is going to take care of the baby when she returns to work. So I don't think we want to jump too quickly to the conclusion that adoption (or what I don't think anyone has mentioned but is also obviously an option, termination of the pregnancy) is the right answer.

Hopefully she's already thought very carefully about all this, and if she hasn't, she will be.

She's only asking about whether or not to involve the father. For me, it seems clear when she says he can't be involved if he can't support the baby that she IS talking about financial support. And I think the Annies are right to point out that there are other forms of support. At the very least, he needs to be informed about the pregnancy and given his options.

LW should also make it clear to list him as the father when the child is born... so that if he does skip out on his responsibilities, and 5 years from now has a lucrative career, she can pursue child support. (Hopefully he's the kind of man who wouldn't need to be chased down to do the right, responsible thing... but you never can tell.)

Since she doesn't seem to have actually spoken with him about this yet, it's really unclear how he will react, and I think she needs to have that conversation, give him the time to absorb the news, and then talk about how they will both proceed from there. She may be pleasantly surprised to find that having a child lends new incentive to his getting a good job. She just doesn't know at this point, so I really don't think she should speculate about leaving him out of the child's life and decisions around the child without at least talking to him about it.

LW1 - You have been married for 47 years? That would make you at LEAST in your late 60s, but seeing as how your spouse was married twice before, probably mid to late 70s. You would think one would be more secure in their marriage by now.

I don't think the problem is with Toni because you mention that other women are also poking and messaging him, and that it is more "personal" than liking a post. It's probably time to get some friends and hobbies of your own. Way past time, actually.

LW2 - As long as you keep the baby, Dad will have rights and responsibilities. But, let's get serious, shall we? You are 19 years old, single and working 60 hours a week to support yourself. How are you going to provide for, much less have time for, a baby?

LW2: Please please please think about your child before yourself. Nanchan pretty much hit it on the head with what you and this child have to look forward too. I gather this child was not planned, I ask you to seriously consider giving this child up for adoption.

LW1 - Wow, this sounds like a joke! First of all, yes, Clark should be more considerate of your feelings. In a perfect world he would think "oh, this bothers my wife, I will stop". However, in the real world, Clark is his own person and is enjoying the back-and-forth with Toni. Quite possibly, they are flirting a bit, which is super fun! He is keeping it open - expressing a desire to meet her WITH YOU, asking her to accept your friend request, and so on. Frankly, I don't think you have anything to worry about. You might consider being more considerate of Clark's feelings, actually.

LW2 - First of all, how do you "find out" you're pregnant like it's a surprise? Let me guess, you were on the pill diligently and it just "stopped working"? Hah. ANYWAY. Does the father WANT to be part of the kid's life? If so, let him. If he doesn't want to be, don't make him be. Ultimately, do what it best for your kid. A father that loves it and sees it sometimes, helps would when possible, is far better than no father at all.

Re: Lise B

Left a response for you on yesterday's column.

Good lord, these people need to get off Facebook and get some kind of a life! I figure they are in their late 60s. Don't they have anything better to do?

Re LW#1---
Clark is playing the game of "Whee!!!! I'm young again!!!!!". Could be totally harmless and he's just enjoying reminiscing about the days when he WAS young.
.
But the fact that he said he'd stop, didn't, and then when you found out, said "It's no big deal" might ring a warning bell with me. Also the fact that she'd ignored your first 'friend' request and only did it when your husband asked her to-------and her ignoring your birthday. Each one by itself is nothing. All of them together------maybe nothing, maybe something. And his saying he'd like to see her again (even though he said he wanted you there)? One of these things by itself = nothing. All of them together? I'd at least wonder a bit.
.
The Facebook 'poking', I agree, is nothing in itself. I'd be worried about another kind of 'poking' eventually happening. Best way to avoid the appearance of anything wrong, I think, is that if you reconnect with an old girlfriend/boyfriend you make sure your spouse is invited to be a part of it. S/he may not want to be, but the fact that s/he got asked can go a long way toward trusting someone, and I don't see where either Clark or Toni did that (except for the "I'd like you to be there when I see her again", which is suspicious because it happened AFTER the LW said she didn't like what was going on). Had it been from the beginning-------well, maybe.
.
And I wonder, why the sudden urge to Twitter? Sorry, but I think the LW would be wise to keep a close eye on this one. You can get a pretty good sense of what's harmless and what's not just by the general demeanor of your spouse. Too defensive/secretive? Rings a LOT of bells.
.
(Yes, married people CAN have harmless friendships with the opposite sex. Just doesn't sound like this particular one fits that category.)

Re: Mike H

I agree that the LW doesn't go into her situation, but here's my opinion on some of the other things you mention in your post.

1. Even if the LW is LUCKY ENOUGH to have family support that will help with the daycare, it's not something to rely on for the long run, especially if the family member is not being paid or is paid minimally. I cannot TELL you how many times I've had people tell me "Oh, my mom and dad will take care of us" and then their lives become a hot mess. A VERY close friend of mine (she worked for me for years) is a good example. She got pregnant suddenly from a short term relationship with a guy in another state (kind of the same as the LW) and she decided to live with her mom and dad through the pregnancy and beyond. I supported her emotionally through her pregnancy (when she started working for me) and was the first call she made after her son was born (she went into labor in my office, now that was fun!). Her parents had been retired and were NOT ready to raise a baby, but she kind of forced it all on them, and they resent both my friend and her son and it shows. Nice way for that kid to grow up. Another friend's mom said "Oh, I'll take care of the baby" and my friend is now pretty much relegated to Aunt role: mom takes care of all the decisions. But far more common are the family members who, meaning well, agree to help, then when the reality of the scope of the job of taking care of a baby hits them, they say "I can't do this anymore." That happens a LOT. The reality is that the LW is going to be the primary responsible parent for this child, and should not rely on ANYONE other than herself and people she PAYS (well) to take care of that baby. Otherwise, she's setting herself up for some potential minefields.

2. There is nothing in the letter to suggest the father doesn't know. In fact I would reckon that the LW HAS told the father and that he is saying "But I don't have a job!" which is why she's at the point she's at now of threatening to cut him out of the baby's life if he doesn't support her and the child.

I know I'm not the only BTLer who has become a "single mother", not because of choice (like the LW) but because of circumstances. The realities of single parenthood are GRIM. Not fun. I still feel guilt and conversely proud of the fact that I had to deprive CC of many of the things her classmates had: guilty because I felt I FAILED her, pride in how she has continually rallied round our tiny family and learned lessons her classmates maybe didn't have to learn.

And my circumstances were very different than the LWs. For one, I had a college education and was working a high paying job when CC was born. I was also MARRIED so that meant her Dad was legally as responsible for her as I was.

The LW needs a wake up call here.

LW1 - Seriously...Facebook drama?? At your age?? That's nothing but teen relationship angst. Grow up, already!

LW2 - Dad's rights should be very low on your priority list right now. You need to think about how you plan to care for this kid and assume that dad is NOT going to be there to help. Even if he did agree to be part of the kid's life initially, he can decide at any time that it's too much work and split, and you'd only be left with whatever money you could legally garnish from him...which would not be much if he's out of work. And I agree with the others that you should seriously think about whether you're really ready to be a mom.

LW3 - Excellent.

Re LW#2------
It's actually not your decision as to whether or not your boyfriend is involved in his child's life. If he wants to be, he can go to court and force the involvement. (You can also force his financial support, or at least send him to jail if he doesn't help.) None of this is a good mix for bringing a child into the world. My sympathies to the baby-------sounds like it will be the one to suffer.
.
Sometimes it's a good thing to think of BEFORE getting pregnant----------stuff like 'How will I support my baby?' and 'How much help will my unemployed non-husband be?"
.
And everyone who said you probably won't be working any 60 hours a week after it's born is right. If you DO manage to continue with those hours, you'll spend everything you earn for child care, and I'm betting your baby will be confused about who 'mommy' is-------you or the babysitter.
.
I sure wish you'd thought about birth control--------or were you someone who was 'on the pill but it didn't work' for you? It amazes me how many pregnant women have that happen to them as opposed to 'No, we didn't use anything.' If we went strictly by the stories of women who find themselves pregnant, we'd be saying "What's the point of taking the pill? It doesn't seem to work."
.
Oh well, spilt milk. Now you get to decide--------abortion, adoption, or keep it? Please, try REALLY hard here to think of what kind of life your baby will have as a result of whatever you decide. I don't really see any "In spite of the circumstances, I am excited to be having this child."
.
Under circumstances like this, I have a hard time saying "Are you happy about this? If so, then I'm happy for you." What I want to say instead is, "How sad for the baby not to have TWO parents who are together, and are capable of providing for it."

LW1 -- agree with all those who said you made a mountain out of a molehill, and in the process, NOW you might actually have a problem on your hands, and one of your own creation. All of this "poking" probably WAS harmless fun and no big deal, but now that you have turned it into a federal case, you have also turned it into a litmus test for your husband's fidelity how seriously he takes his marriage. And he's failing miserably, not because he really is hoping for some real-life "poking" but because he hasn't taken your feelings (and, therefore, your marriage) seriously -- at least in your eyes. Basically, you've managed to paint him -- and your marriage -- into a corner. Sure, it would be nice if your hubby would be more considerate of your feelings, but as Zoe noted, it'd be nice if you'd return him that same favor.

And as a P.S. -- I always joke that if I'm going to be accused of having done something no matter what I do, then I may as well go out and do it and reap whatever pleasure is to be had from doing it. For me, that has always just been a joke. Let's hope your husband doesn't seriously feel that way.

Re: jennylee

LOL! Looks like we were thinking along the same lines about the pill. By my observations it's about 50% effective! Hah. It really baffles me how there can still be unplanned pregnancies outside of the very low number of pregnancy-by-rape and failed PROPER birth control.

LW2 -- as I understand it, you cannot limit/refuse contact between your child and the father simply because he isn't paying child support, even when there's a legal, court-ordered child support agreement in place. And as others have noted, there is more to being a father than being a wallet. On the other hand, depending on what you mean by "he lives far away" his ability to provide other support likely is extremely limited. And, for that matter, it doesn't sound like you've actually talked with the father, so this entire conversation may well be moot, as the father may not be even remotely interested in being involved in your child's life.

With all of that said, I do hope you will strongly consider adoption. While I am truly glad that much of the stigma related to being an unwed mother has been removed, I feel like the pendulum has now swung too far the other way -- glorifying keeping the baby at all costs and glamorizing unwed motherhood. Please take a very honest look at your life, your circumstances, your resources. If you really do have a strong support group of friends and family who you really can count on to step up to the plate to help you raise this child, then by all means keep the baby. But understand that most of your friends probably cannot help you to the degree that you really need help, and your family may not be willing or able to, either. It's all fine and good for people to say nebulous things like, "oh, of course we'll help you!" -- but you need to know exactly how much and what sort of help they are actually going to commit to offering. "Oh, of course we'll help you" could mean nothing more than, "we'll babysit once in a blue moon" or "we'll buy the occasional gift or two." You will need a whole lot more than that, and you need to be realistic about what you really are going to get in the way of help.

We've created such a cult of "keep the baby" that we have forgotten to put that baby's best interests first, always assuming that keeping the baby is what is best, when it isn't always. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it isn't. Please be brutally honest about what is best for this child.

@jennylee and Zoe -- count me among those who are continually amazed at the number of people who either don't use birth control or don't use it properly. Yes, yes, I know that abstinence is the only 100% effective form of birth control, but a number of different forms of birth control -- not even just the pill -- are EXTREMELY effective if used correctly. It's that "if used correctly" part that so frequently gets in the way. And, of course, there are people who use it correctly who aren't aware that certain antibiotics interfere with the pill who wind up surprised (though typically pharmacists are pretty good about warning you about that).

I didn't bother to mention it in my original post because, while I happen to completely agree with you that she should have been using birth control, it's a bit late to be giving her that lecture. But I share your frustration. I managed to successfully prevent unplanned pregnancy for nearly 20 years. It really wasn't all that hard.

As long as the poking's being done with a keyboard instead of a penis, I wouldn't worry.

@nanchan, I don't think it's at all clear that she's told the father, though -- she "recently" found out, the father lives "far away", and she hasn't decided if she wants him involved, because she isn't sure he could support the baby (financially, at least that's assumed what she meant).

So there's a very very good chance this means she's weighing this decision -- about whether to have him involved -- before telling him.

Of course, he might already know, but I would think he would have expressed some opinion that the LW would have included in her contemplation of this issue. As in, I think he would have been able to make it clear one way or the other what kind of support he could provide -- so that's why I think there's at least a reasonable chance the father doesn't know yet (or didn't know when she wrote this letter -- who knows how long it took to publish and what's LW has done in the interim).

As for the family not necessarily being sufficient help, I completely agree -- sometimes it doesn't work out, sometimes it does -- so I definitely think that "thinking carefully and fully about all options" is still fantastic advice. I just wanted to point out we shouldn't assume she hadn't already put a great deal of thought into it and might actually have a reasonable support system in place -- because those details are not in the letter one way or the other.

My extended family has an example of this, where a widowed grandfather who is a great uncle of mine, actually took care of several of his grandchildren's children during the day while their parents worked. It was a fabulous arrangement that actually almost certainly added years to his life, because taking care of these kids gave him a lot of joy and really revitalized him after his wife's death. (It helped that he lived in the same neighborhood as his grandchildren).

Of course, we have no idea if the LW has these arrangements or not; I just wanted people to be cautious about assuming too quickly she hadn't actually already been quite thoughtful about all this.

I hope LW2 is reading BTL, although it's doubtful. And I can't help feeling frutrated anger for YET ANOTHER baby born of a careless teenage girl and "the father" who is not even called her "boyfriend." Everyone who has ever raised a child knows the kind of mess she has created for herself - and an innocent child - so now what? Please! Adoption! I know a professional couple in their late thirties who have spent tens of thousands of dollars, gone down every avenue they can, had their hearts broken over and over simply because they want to adopt a baby. And how easily irresponsible kids can create one in the back seat of a car (or wherever) without even giving it a thought. File it under "Life's Not Fair!"

Additionally, I can't help remembering a girl I had when I taught high school who confided to me that she barely knew her father because she was the result of "a date." And it shouldn't be any surprise that she was incredibly emotionally needy - always, it seemed to me - trying to fill that empty space where a loving father should have been. I think as a society, the more promiscuous and careless society becomes with this kind of result, the more chickens are going to come home to roost.

LW1: Omg, is this letter for real?? It sounds like a 15 year old wrote it.. I'm speechless.

LW1--It's ironic that your husband spends his spare time "poking" an old high school flame considering the two of you are acting like a couple of high school morons. Tell your husband that if he pokes 'Toni' one more time or otherwise communicates with her, you're going to poke him in the balls so hard he'll be speaking soprano and you'll make sure he never pokes you anywhere until he agrees to counseling. Then cancel your Internet service provider and get off the Internet entirely; clearly neither you or your husband can handle it.

LW2--Yes. First of all honey, you need to accept responsibility for your part in your little predicament. It's called safe sex; obviously you could use a primer on the topic. Second, in what alien world are you living that a (presumably) teen aged boy has a full time job and is willing to move cross-country to support his love child? There are other ways of offering support that don't necessarily involve money. You don't have a right to cut the father of your child out because he can't write you a fat check every month. For the baby's sake, let's hope you've decided not to quit school and that intelligence skips a generation.

Another thought on adoption (although I've written about this here before)

My business partner and his wife (who are now expecting another child!!!) adopted a baby girl two years ago who's mother was a teenager with an unplanned pregnancy. They have have an open adoption and last weekend, the birth father stayed the weekend at their home to spend time with his little girl.

My business partner's take on this is: the birth parents deserve the chance to be a part of the girl's life AS LONG as they behave when they are in the house. No drugs/alcohol, no cursing, no disrespect for the family rules. They made a contract of behavior POST adoption a part of the adoption papers.

Adoption costs for this baby (as well as their other two adoptees) were completely returned to them at tax time. They did the adoption through our church: the churches around the country have stepped up and worked with other church members (usually attorneys) to draw up the paperwork. They have also worked to "match" adoptive families with pregnant women who would have had abortions as opposed to carrying the baby to term.

I am all for a woman's right to chose, and am NOT anti-abortion, but I think that giving these young women the CHOICE of open adoption (like my business partner did) can also be a GOOD choice. Unfortunately, our government doesnt' have the resources or the politican ability to step up like the churches have.

And as Maggie has said, there are MANY parents out there who will love these babies. What chaps my hide are the celebrities who go overseas to adopt, not realizing the issues we have here at HOME!!! Babies are not collectors items: "Oh, this one is from my trip to Africa, this one is from my trip to Romania" like post cards. It's so irritating. We do need to start stepping up and thinking of the impact of these choices to the BABIES!

Re: Lisa

"And, of course, there are people who use it correctly who aren't aware that certain antibiotics interfere with the pill who wind up surprised" - That's how I came to be! :D

Re: Chris (#37)
The only advice I agree with that you've given is to get counseling. I don't think that canceling service with the Internet service provider (ISP) is the solution ... he'll just go to the library to do his "poking" absent any counseling.

This seems to me to be another case of someone not over his high school love and trying to see if he "missed" anything by having gone with this woman instead. It just seems to me that in all that time, he'd make a conscious effort to try to focus on his current wife rather than what he "didn't get" (i.e., what he would have had).

I know that hindsight always is curious. In this case, what if I had married her (the "other woman") instead of *disgusted sigh* "her" (the current wife)? Would I have gotten a prettier woman who makes love better, doesn't "nag," ... and so on, instead of what I got, the old, doudy, conservative woman who only wears gingham dresses instead of that French negligee?

Counseling, my friends ... counseling here, to get everything out into the open. If all the LW has been all this time is a f-hole and a housemaid, then something needs to be brought into the open right now and this guy set straight.

had some trouble posting this, so if this is a double (or even a triple) post, my apologies...

LW3 -- Your advice is good, but I would also ask the caregivers to not expect absolutely everything to be done precisely, exactly the way s/he would do it. It's sort of like mothers who won't let fathers BE fathers because the mothers have a certain way of diapering, feeding, getting a baby down for a nap, etc., and if it's not done exactly their way, they complain, judge, nag -- and then decide, "well, clearly if I want it done right, then I will just have to do it myself" -- then complain that they have to do everything and get no help. Or wives who won't let husbands help with the housework because the husbands don't vacuum the exact same way they do -- and then complain that they have to do everything and get no help. (And yes, the genders can be reversed on these, though the example I've chosen are most typically with the genders as I have them). Yes, someone who is offering "respite care" so that the caregiver can take a break absolutely should ask "how can I best be of help to you?" And yes, someone who is offering respite care should ask the caregiver for guidance and direction about how certain tasks are to be performed. But caregivers should also recognize that, at least in SOME things, their way isn't the only way, and while their way may be what works best for THEM, it may not be the best way, period -- as long as the person in need of care is getting the care s/he needs, does it matter if it's done the exact same way? (And yes, I realize that there are certain medical things that DO need to be done in a certain way -- but not everything is like that).

Moreover, some of the stuff the original LW was upset about actually created a bit of a catch-22. On the one hand, the LW is upset that these other relatives aren't doing more to help and aren't more involved -- but on the other hand, the LW is upset when those other relatives show an interest in doing more and want to be more involved. You can't have it both ways. If my mother was sick and my brother was in charge of her care, I would trust that he would be doing his best to care for her -- but if I wanted to talk with the doctor, or if I had questions about how something was being handled, I would hope my brother would understand I wasn't questioning his authority or questioning his decisions or questioning his motives or anything like that. Rather, I would simply be wanting information because I care -- and I SHOULD care. Might I ask questions that my brother had already asked and answered? Of course -- if I wasn't there to hear those questions asked and answered and/or if my brother didn't tell me about them.

I know it's frustrating to have someone asking the same questions you've already addressed (it's actually why my husband and I try to always BOTH be present for our son's doctor's visits). It's easy to get defensive and annoyed, a la "don't you think I asked that? Don't you think I thought of that? What kind of an idiot do you take me for?" But if you're not there to hear it for yourself, you're not allowed to ask about it? Seems like you're a "bad person" if you do and a "bad person" if you don't.

I feel for caregivers in these situations. My mother was my grandmother's caregiver, and even when my grandmother eventually had to be institutionalized, it was my mother who visited her several times a week, sometimes every day, and it was my mother who dealt with the bills and deal with the doctors and dealt with the creditors, the bank, etc. Her only sibling lived more than 1,000 miles away at the start of my grandmother's decline, and wasn't really in a position to help, and then sadly he passed away before my grandmother, so then he REALLY wasn't in a position to help. My grandmother's younger brother is still alive and lives nearby, but he never offered to help in any way and only visited his sister very rarely (usually at the behest of my mother). Having seen my mother deal with this basically on her own, I really do have an immense respect for the people who take this on. But I also know that my mother would have WELCOMED a few questions from her brother or her uncle -- at least it would have shown they cared.

OK, I just have to say it...... What the H E Double Hockeysticks is wrong with today's young people??????

I was 19 and my worst fear was getting pregnant. I was away from home, supporting myself, and living with my now husband of 20 years. I used my head, not my hormones. I was no different than any other 19 year old except I did not party, get plastered, do drugs, or "hook up". I guess intelligence is something not taught anymore.

Now, girls just sleep with "some guy" and never consider the consequences of those actions. Heck, they don't always know the guys name..... sad sad sad commentary on the future of our world.

Now, a 60+ hour work week is not going to happen after baby is born. And since the LW is on her own, one would think she would have been more careful. And what qualifies as "far away", very little info on the situation really.

Honey, if you're smart, you should consider adoption. You don't sound ready for this and I guarantee that you will have a disaster on your hands when (I say when, not if) this gets over your head...... Good luck, and Blessed Be.

JPP for the win!

Count me in as one of those who is surprised by how often birth control “fails.” I've been on it for almost 9 years now and have never, ever had an issue. I think some women claim that they diligently took it, but still got pregnant, because either they're too embarrassed to admit they messed up, or they were (secretly) trying to get pregnant. I'm even more amazed by how many women just choose to bypass birth control completely. It just doesn't make sense to me. If you want to sleep around with random people, fine, but at least be smart about it.

Before we go too much further down the rabbit-hole of the "irresponsibility of *today's* youth", I feel compelled to point out that I myself am the product of two irresponsible 18 year olds having unprotected sex... in the 1960s.

And a genealogist friend has pointed out that in historical records you can find tons of births that happened 6-8 months after their parents married... and it's doubtful that all of these were legitimately "premature", especially given the lack of medical technology in previous centuries.

Re: Mike H

Why this is about today's youth is that they have access to SO MUCH info on sex, birth control, and so on. I wasn't around in the 60s but I have to think it is easier to today for girls to get on the pill and for couple to keep a stock of condoms readily available, than it was back then. And no one, not a single American pre-teen today that isn't brought up in a cult or a crazy religious household or something, doesn't know that unprotected sex = pregnancy, and doesn't know how to obtain protection. There is just no excuse. I don't think the teens "back then" were actually smarter or anything. Teenage birth rates are down actually. It just shocks me that anyone could just "find out" they are pregnant! How can you have unsafe sex and not know it, and not be expecting to be pregnant. Crazy!

Regarding the pregnancy, I just don't get how the father who lives far away and is unemployed could possibly be there to babysit unless he moves in with the mom and that would BE A MAJOR MISTAKE. I'm hoping she has extended family around her to help. If he knows about the pregnancy, he will have the opportunity to help if he wants to. I guess I don't understand her question since the ball is really in his court.

Re: Zoe

Let's refresh your OWN memory, shall we?

A couple of months ago, you posted that you yourself, Mrs. "Children are STUPID (from yesterday's thread)" had NEGELCTED TO TAKE YOUR BIRTH CONTROL FOR THREE WEEKS! We've also asked you multiple times "If you hate kids so much and don't want to have them, why don't YOU have YOUR TUBES TIED!" You never answer that question well.

Things happen... I'm willing to give the LW the benefit of the doubt, but YOU? You are such a fricken hypocrit. YOU, YOU who have said "I hate kids, kids are stupid, blah blah blah" also "forget" to take your pills.

I really hope you are currently taking your pills.... birth control, Ridlin, Prozac, etc etc.

@Zoe, it's not true that teens across the USA are *consistently* provided with BETTER info on sex, pregnancy, contraception, etc. Sure, they have the internet -- but do you know how much confusing misinformation is out there? What if they stumble on the wrong sites?

And schools? Plenty of schools teach only "abstinence only" programs, which recent studies have shown actually produce MORE teen pregnancies than more comprehensive "sex ed" programs. So you might be overstating the number of teens who "know" about the consequences of unprotected sex here.

More information about sex != better information about sex.

Lots of first-time posters today. Welcome to all!

@Zoe
While there have been advances on many things, sex ed is not one of them. Mike is correct that religious zealots, mistakingly believing that putting the correct information out will "give kids ideas", have managed to force a lot of schools to teach only abstinence, which is a step back.

A lot of kids are back into the kind of abysmal ignorance we of the older generation sported in the fifties.

Re: nanchan #48
Was that REALLY necessary...

Re: nanchan

Oh, haha, sorry! I didn't realize I hadn't answered an internet stranger's questions about my reproductive health satisfactorily! The reason I have not yet had my tubes tied is because doctors do not grant tubal ligations to healthy 27 year old women with no children. My husband, now 30, has just been granted his vasectomy a week ago (it hasn't been done yet, but is in the works -- funnily, I actually contemplated updating you on that, but I didn't think you *actually* cared as much as you now evidently do). My GP asked me why I would want a tubal if my husband had a vasectomy, and my response that I would want to earn a salary if my husband's job paid the bills was apparently not sufficient. I neglected to get into the whole "open relationship" bidness. If that's not "well" enough for ya, you'll have to take it up with my doc! Well, not really, because she might think I'm crazy by association, but you get my point.

Indeed, pills are easy to forget, and girls can get pregnant after fewer than three weeks of forgotten pills. But, my dear, that is why god invented Plan B pills, pregnancy tests and ultimately abortions. Because I was away from my husband for a good portion of the time I was off the pill, the Plan B pill was sufficient and the pregnancy test confirmed it. And since now, many months later, no baby has come out of my vajayjay, I have to assume that the system works! MAGIC!

I don't know why you are so convinced I secretly want kids or something. I have nothing to gain by pretending to dislike the idea of pregnancy, babies and kids. The only good reason to have kids that I can see is so that some day I could tell them "I was alive before the internet!" but I don't think that's really worth the 20+ years of toil and financial/temporal destitution. I mean, clearly you think I'm a wonderful/insane person worthy of your frequent and frenzied attention but not fit for rearing children - one would think you'd be happy about my choice! Instead of looking for some kind of hypocrisy, some evidence that actually I super do want to support a thing that will transition from noisy, dirty baby, to stupid child, to terrible teenager, over 20 years. Actually, older kids are not so bad, but I'd rather interact with my friend's mentally handicapped roommate because she's cool and I can swear around her.

And girl, given the choice, I'd choose Oxycontin.

There, did I feed your Zoe-obsession for a while? I must admit, it's kind of flattering, and lord knows I love to talk about my crotch. Seriously. Whose got two thumbs and no shame? THIS GIRL!

Re: Mike H

Eh, I am sure you are right that there are some kids are raised and educated in a way that leaves them unsure, but the vast majority of teens who wind up pregnant or impregnating another teen knew perfectly well that unprotected sex = pregnancy. I have never met one who said "well I actually thought that I couldn't get pregnant if we were standing up". I am sure they are out there, but every girl I've known was "on the pill but it just didn't work" or "didn't feel like using a condom".

Re: Lise B

I think sex ed is getting a bit better, no? I assumed that was part of the cause of the fall of teen birth rates? That and the increased availability of birth control. I dunno, I could be way off, but I'm going by each pregnant teen I've known and none of them didn't know that having sex with a boy could get your pregnant, especially if you weren't on the pill or at the very least, didn't use a condom. I am sure you and Mike are right for plenty of cases but I have to think that vast, vast majority is just willful ignorance.

And shhh... don't discourage nanchan! I like to foster obsessive relationships that crazy people have with me. Makes me feel smart and important! ;)

Ferretgirl is right. What I wouldn't have given for chicks to have been like that 30 years ago.

@Mike H -- Unplanned pregnancies have been happening since time immemorial, of course. And it is certainly true that not all teens have access to good information about sex, preventing pregnancy, spread of disease, etc. But honestly, I think there are very few teens today who are not aware of all of the following:

1) Pregnancy is one of the possible outcomes of sex
2) Condoms, the Pill and myriad other contraceptives exist to prevent pregnancy

My boyfriend in college was "a good Catholic boy" who had gone to Catholic school from pre-school all the way up through high school. As you might imagine, what passed for sex ed in his school was "don't do it until you are married." And yet guess who had a condom ready at a moment's notice? While I am sure that there are teens out there who truly don't know how to prevent pregnancy and/or who do not easy access to birth control and/or are to embarrassed to buy condoms, etc., I really do believe that the vast majority of teens are, at the very least, AWARE of at least a couple of forms of birth control (even if they can't spell "contraceptive" correctly).

Years ago, when I was writing a series of newspaper articles about teen pregnancy (this would have been early 90s), I met a woman who was a founding member of her local League of Women Voters chapter, volunteered at Planned Parenthood, and I'm pretty sure she burned a few bras back in the day. When I interviewed her for the articles I was writing, one of the things she said to me was:

"I remember when the Pill first came out, and we shouted 'hallelujah!' because at last we women could take control of our reproductive destiny. We could have sex with whomever we wanted whenever we wanted without facing the risk of getting pregnant. And every time I see a girl walk in here (PP) because she's afraid she might be pregnant, I just die a little bit inside. We who fought in the vanguard for sexual equality cannot understand why today's young women and girls are still getting pregnant. We fought to put the tools in their hands. We fought to give them control over their own bodies and their own destinies, and yet every day, I see another one walk in, holding back tears because she thinks she might be pregnant. I don't get it. I will never get it."

And again, that was in the early 90s. Because one of the other things that has been happening since time immemorial: the older generation asking "what's wrong with kids today?"

@nanchan -- yes, I realize things happen. But let's just say these things really shouldn't happen quite as often as they seem to. Back when I was on the pill, I was so paranoid about getting pregnant that I was extremely good about taking it. And if I realized I had forgotten to take it, we used something else. The reality is, with most pills (this is not true of "mini" pills that have much lower doses) missing one pill isn't a problem. Now, miss two or three, and now you're running a greater risk. And, of course, there are other ways that "these things happen." I am pregnant right now "by accident." I am 42, and I had been told I wouldn't be able to have another baby -- and I was really OK with that. Imagine my surprise when I discovered I was pregnant? In my case, it's a pleasant surprise and one my husband and I are well able to deal with, but it was still quite the shocker to us. There is no doubt in my mind that even the most responsible of adults can have something go wrong with their contraceptive of choice. There is also no doubt in my mind that the MAJORITY of unplanned pregnancies do not happen to people who are responsibly, consistently using their contraceptive of choice. They can't ALL be because the pharmacist forgot to tell them that the antibiotic they just got will interfere with the pill. Heck I knew about the problem with antibiotics and oral contraception even BEFORE I had to go on amoxicillin for an upper respiratory infection -- but both my doctor and my pharmacist made a point of telling me face to face about it, and there was a warning label right on the bottle in neon pink that was awfully hard to miss.

There is one other widget in the works concerning girls who have no business being mothers getting pregnant by guys who have no business being fathers. And that is the social shrug-of-shoulders attitude toward girls who get pregnant ON PURPOSE so that can have a "tie" to the "baby Daddy.' The more girls who do this, the more acceptable it becomes to like-minded, ignorant young people. And society ends up paying the price.

@Zoe -- if you've read my previous posts, you know we are in agreement on this topic. But I will say that even the most well-informed of teens out there occasionally engages in "magical thinking" -- heck, adults do it, too -- believing that this stuff only happens to other people, it can't/won't happen to me, etc. And actually, since there really are only a few days of every month that a woman can get pregnant, it's not actually all that astonishing that someone could have unprotected sex "just that one time" and legitimately be surprised to learn she is pregnant. I mean, unless you're having unprotected sex about every other day, of course. Of course, one of nature's little jokes on us is that women tend to be even more in the mood when they're fertile than when they aren't, so there's that.

@Mike H -- forgot to include my (typically overlong) post that my good Catholic BF from college -- all that happened BEFORE the Internet, and yet he STILL managed to somehow know about condoms. Moreover, it's not just the Internet that kids can find some of this basic information out -- have you ever watched "Glee," for example? Look, I'm not suggesting that movies, TV or the Internet are a reliable method of teaching kids about sex and contraception -- I'm just saying that unless a kid attends a school that teaches abstinence only AND has parents who won't talk with her about it AND has only friends who also have no clue about any of this AND isn't allowed to watch TV, see movies or go on the Internet (or whose TV, movie and Internet consumption is extremely closely monitored and controlled by the parents), the likelihood of that teen literally having NO CLUE that pregnancy is a potential result of sex and that there are ways to prevent pregnancy. Again, I do realize there are kids out there for whom all of those things are true -- I just seriously doubt that the number of such teens is all that high.

Zoe, I don't think you "secretly" want children. I think you are NOT taking control of your decisions and are a hyocrit because you judge others for things YOU are openly admitting to doing yourself!

I don't give a rats ass if you can or cannot get your tubes tied at your age.... you ARE NOT owning up to your own decisions because anybody who "forgets" for three weeks to take their birth control has MANY OTHER OPTIONS other than tubal ligation at this point to make sure preganancy doesn't happen.

Last I checked, Canada isn't a third world country, haven''t you heard of other methods than pills? Children aren't stupid, ZOE, YOU ARE!

Re: Lisa

"But I will say that even the most well-informed of teens out there occasionally engages in "magical thinking" -- heck, adults do it, too"

True that. But! Isn't it at least 5-6 days a cycle that a girl can get pregnant, plus a few more because sperm can live in there for a while? I've seen as many as 11 "potentially fertile" days on a fertility cycle graphic thingy.

Re: nanchan

"You judge others for things YOU are openly admitting to doing yourself!"
I judge others for people who don't use birth control, have sex, are shocked when they get pregnant and choose to raise a child they are unable to raise properly. If that ever happens to me, I'll mail you a coke.

"I don't give a rats ass if you can or cannot get your tubes tied at your age"
I dunno, you sure seemed to care a LOT in post #48. See: "[I]'ve also asked you multiple times: why don't YOU have YOUR TUBES TIED! You never answer that question well."

"you ARE NOT owning up to your own decisions because anybody who "forgets" for three weeks"
Why did you put "forget" in quotation marks? Do you think I purposely decided not to take them? Because you just said you didn't think that.

"MANY OTHER OPTIONS other than tubal ligation at this point to make sure preganancy doesn't happen... haven''t you heard of other methods than pills?"
Girl, are you so blinded by your obsession with me that you can't read? I've mentioned Plan B pills and vasectomies for sure (in the post you are replying to, no less), and I know I've also mentioned barrier methods although perhaps not specifically by name (condoms and spermicide go together like popcorn and diet coke). Frankly, nanchan, I'm a little disappointed that you remember so many specific details and yet forget or ignore others! And also, I fail to see the problem. "Preganancy" has not happened to me, so whatever I'm doing, it's working perfectly, wouldn't you agree?

"Children aren't stupid, ZOE, YOU ARE!"

Sure, if by "stupid" you mean "AWESOME"! And I once helped my friend's kid with her homework once and it was super easy so yeah clearly I've got the leg up on a five year old.



On a more serious note, do you regret having your daughter, nanchan? You've often spoken about how much you sacrificed for her and how difficult it was. You went without, and didn't date throughout her entire childhood. Do you see yourself in me, a lifetime ago, and wish you could go back in time and make a different choice? When you are screeching at me about various methods of birth control like you actually have any business or right to do so, are you, on some level, talking to YOURSELF before you got pregnant?

Poor nanchan. I've never seen you in this light before. Poor, poor nanchan.

@ Zoe Re: #57

All I have to say my dear is that you are AWESOME! Thanks for a great series of posts today!!!!!! Now for a word of advice. Stop feeding the egomaniacal narcissist that is our perennial nanchan. She can't seem to see anything beyond her own small world, which is kind of ironic considering that she's apparently six degrees of separation from everyone. In any case, you go girl!

Re: Zoe
Your posts today are a masterclass on how to handle this kind of yurunda. I am taking good note (scribble, scribble) and learning. ;-D

@Zoe, the problem is, 30 states still offer abstinence-only sex education. Now, some of those states may offer comprehensive sex education as well, but there's no guarantee, because in most cases the parents decide which education their kids are offered. And in some school districts there may not be a choice, it's only the abstinence-only education.

So these so-called "savvy" kids may be hearing one thing from the schools, something else from their possibly-awkward and stammering parents, a third thing from the internet, and a 4th thing from their friends. All while being *teenagers* with all the drama and hormones and inexperience.

So you get them saying things like "well, of course I knew about condoms, but we did it in a hot tub, and everyone knows you can't get pregnant in a hot tub".

Or "everyone knows you can't get pregnant if you do it standing up".

Or "I was told you can't get pregnant if he pulls out in time"

Or "he said you can't get pregnant if its your first time"

Yes, there's tons of information out there, and yes, teens today have access to all the wonders of the internet... but which sites are they reading? And who else in their life is giving them information, and how do they reconcile any discrepancies?

They don't always put the facts together completely right... even today. In fact, sometimes the information overload can make it even worse, if they aren't paying the most attention to the right sources.

So... I'm not really sure that we should expect a huge percentage of these teens to be that much more savvy than previous generations. Adult society needs to get a bit less schizo about how we deal with sexuality and sex education before that happens, I think.

@Lisa, as in my previous post, I don't mean to say that I think a lot of teens are completely UNinformed. But that, because they are getting info from sources that may be inaccurate or contradictory, they may end up being more MISinformed more often that we are crediting here.

Sex ed should be an app on cell phones. There's not a teen out there who doesn't know everything about using one.

@Zoe -- you are right that some fertility calendars will count as many as 11 days of potential fertility. And you are right that sperm can live inside the woman for a good 24 hours or more -- which is why you see such wide variance among fertility calculators, calendars, etc.

Because I miscarried three times, I was using the "fertility sticks," as I liked to call them. Every morning, you get out a new stick and pee on it, and then you wait to see which lines come up which colors, etc., which indicates whether you are ovulating or not. If you get the right set of markers, you are ovulating, which means if you have sex within 24-48 hours of the positive test, you are extremely likely to get pregnant (barring other fertility factors, such as problem with sperm count, etc.). Of course, that 24-48 hours is really on either side of the test. If you had sex the night before you had the positive test results, you may already be well on your way to getting pregnant. For the majority of women, ovulation occurs over just a couple of days, add in the sperm life cycle, and you get maybe two more days of fertility. When you see the calendars and calculators with the wider variances of 6-11 days -- they are erring on the side of caution (since the original reason for most of those calendars and calculators was to help anyone practicing the "rhythm method" of contraception, ergo women were originally using these tools to AVOID getting pregnant), and they are assuming that most women using these calendars and calculators are NOT peeing on sticks (or taking basal temps, etc.) to detect when they ovulating. In other words, the calendars/calculators are assuming that the woman using them does not know exactly when she is ovulating.

Then add in the variance based on the fact that not every woman's cycle is the same. Some are 28 days like clockwork, some are 32 days like clockwork, some are erratic and are 28 days one moth, 30 days the next, etc. There's no way for a calculator/calendar to know the exact time/dates of ovulation, so they go with the law of averages -- most cycles are about 28 days, and most women ovulate somewhere in the middle of the cycle, around day 14. Ovulation usually lasts about two days. Add a couple of days on either side, because there are no guarantees the woman in question really does have a 28-day cycle like clockwork, now add a couple more days on either side because of how long sperm can live inside the body, and now you're up to 10 days of potential fertility -- even though the reality is, it's really only about 3-4 days.

That's probably way more than you wanted to know about fertility calendars/calculators. Funny thing about me spending all that time and money peeing on sticks -- my fertility "problem" had nothing to do with conception. I conceived with no trouble at all. Indeed, I have conceived five times with no trouble at all -- I am perfectly fertile from a conception point of view. My problem was carrying to term -- all three of my miscarriages occurred relatively early in the first trimester. We never heard a heartbeat for any of those fetuses. In other words, those fetuses simply weren't viable. It's a totally different problem from having trouble conceiving. I was peeing on sticks not because I had trouble conceiving (clearly), but because given my age, waiting around to just "get lucky" (ha, ha) didn't seem terribly prudent. While we'd have been happy to just have lots of sex as often as possible, at that time, both of us were traveling a lot for work, so we knew we might need to be a tad more strategic than that. Hence my research into fertility calendars, etc.

Re: Chris

Please do not give me 6 degrees of separation from nanchan, though we probably are more like two since we both know a lot of interesting and unlikely people... I will need at least 12 degrees of separation to feel safe, heaven forbid we should meet some day IRL!

After perusing this thread and the way nanchan blew up I can only come to one conclusion...drinking before 5 p.m.

So why is this 19 year old who has to work 60 hours a week pregnant? How stupid can you get? NAnd what does the working 60 hours a week have to do with her question anyway?
Even working all those hours, she couldn't manage to afford a condom? And she can afford a child?

Oh man, Zoe. You are awesome.

My boyfriend met this lady at a night club. She has a mental illness. He told me that he loves me, he does not know what happened to him, and he felt lost without me. He does not love or want to be with this woman but for some reason he said to me he Could not leave her house. Someone told me that she had put something on him to keep him away from me. That was how i search and found Priestessifaa@yahoo.com, she did a spell that reverse the whole thing back, and my boyfriend Showed the door to escape out of her house. Our relationship is stronger than ever. He is here with me, and she moved to Palemo, Sicily. Thanks priestess.