07-19-2010, 03:38 AM
Deal-breakers are obviously different for different people. Whether or not to have kids is a deal-breaker for us but some people are more ambivalent and wouldn't bring it up on a first date.
I agree with CFS, Koi, and Bittercat - I don't think that people should lie if the question is brought up, but I wouldn't start off with a list of the potential deal-breakers on my first date. Perhaps the fact that I'm agnostic would be a deal-breaker for someone... should I really bring it up just in case? In which case it wouldn't be a very relaxed meeting if I was going through a list of things that could be potential problems. If it is really important for the other person then I expect them to bring it up in conversation and I won't lie, but neither would I hold it against them if they waited a few dates to mention something 'important'. Similarly, I try to bring up children in conversation when I first meet someone who might be interesting, so that I can gauge their reaction. It's usually pretty easy to get a gut feeling even without saying "I don't plan on having children - how about you?"
And going back to the original post... Part of giving good advice is interpreting how something is written. The way the woman phrased it "Is it okay for me to bail...?" suggests that she really wanted to get out of the relationship but needed approval first.
In the last letter the woman couldn't make up her mind about anything so the columnist was trying to force her into making a decision, because the problem was her indecision rather than her not having children.
People writing to advice columnists often want to be told something, so it's up to the columnist to figure out what that is. The answer is already there within the person, it's just a matter of how to phrase the response. I do that with people all the time - "This is what you want to hear, with a bit of my own opinion thrown in for good measure if the two don't agree".
I agree with CFS, Koi, and Bittercat - I don't think that people should lie if the question is brought up, but I wouldn't start off with a list of the potential deal-breakers on my first date. Perhaps the fact that I'm agnostic would be a deal-breaker for someone... should I really bring it up just in case? In which case it wouldn't be a very relaxed meeting if I was going through a list of things that could be potential problems. If it is really important for the other person then I expect them to bring it up in conversation and I won't lie, but neither would I hold it against them if they waited a few dates to mention something 'important'. Similarly, I try to bring up children in conversation when I first meet someone who might be interesting, so that I can gauge their reaction. It's usually pretty easy to get a gut feeling even without saying "I don't plan on having children - how about you?"
And going back to the original post... Part of giving good advice is interpreting how something is written. The way the woman phrased it "Is it okay for me to bail...?" suggests that she really wanted to get out of the relationship but needed approval first.
In the last letter the woman couldn't make up her mind about anything so the columnist was trying to force her into making a decision, because the problem was her indecision rather than her not having children.
People writing to advice columnists often want to be told something, so it's up to the columnist to figure out what that is. The answer is already there within the person, it's just a matter of how to phrase the response. I do that with people all the time - "This is what you want to hear, with a bit of my own opinion thrown in for good measure if the two don't agree".