I'm never sure which is the real Carolyn Hax anymore.
***
Dear Carolyn:
How wrong of me is it to bail on a woman I'm dating when I just found out she has a child? If it matters, I am also female, and we are both 32.
Pennsylvania
Your face won't wind up on a dollar coin for your heroics, but it is actually better to heed the impulse to bail than it is to ignore it. In this particular case, at least: People who already have the responsibility for a child have to shoulder that responsibility, whether they want to or not, even if it means they force themselves to want to.
But people who don't have children counting on them yet, and who don't foresee ever wanting to be in that spot, owe it to everyone involved -- child, parent and themselves, in order of priority -- to bail, ideally before even the flimsiest bonds start to form.
"How wrong of me is it to bail on a woman I'm dating when I just found out she has a child?"
Not that it matters much, but how long did they date before she found out about the baby? Was it kept secret because the mother was afraid of scaring off any potential partners or was it revealed on the first date? It was pretty stupid of the mother not to reveal that she is a mother before going on any dates.
At least the advice was good: bail out before things go any further.
Well, the writer says "Just found out." To me, that "just" implies it was kept back for a while. Having a child or not is the sort of thing you usually tell right away.
Yeah, but they could have been dating just a few days or a week. Sometimes, there's a period when you're not sure if you're going to become an item or not, and you are just maybe meeting for coffee or lunch to get to know one another.
Jen M.
I'll give a guy's perspective on this even though I don't date. It's a lot more difficult for a single mother to get a date than a single father. Guys do not want to raise someone else's children and the single moms know this so they keep mum so to speak. A guy who has kids is considered more desirable since they have paternal feelings.
To me it's very deceitful and if I were to date a woman and "just" learn about the fact that she has kids then I'd seriously question what else she might be hiding from me. It would be much easier if she said she had kids up front instead of leading me on, especially give my CF status.
(06-10-2010 04:32 PM)Bittercat Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, but they could have been dating just a few days or a week. Sometimes, there's a period when you're not sure if you're going to become an item or not, and you are just maybe meeting for coffee or lunch to get to know one another.
That's fine-not spilling your guts about every little detail of your life when you first meet someone, but this isn't a minor detail. For many people, it's a deal breaker. It's best to be upfront about major issues/deal breakers right off the bat and not to lead someone on. If you were dating someone and the guy didn't tell you right away that he was recently released from prison for murder, or he's an alcoholic or hard core drug user, or a pedophile, would that be OK to not tell you right away until you get to know each other better?
Oh, I totally agree with you. I was just pointing out that maybe they hadn't had that conversation yet.
I put it right out front that I won't date guys who have or want children, but a lot of people aren't so forthcoming (and then they wonder why their lives suck and they can't maintain relationships.)
Jen
(06-11-2010 12:16 AM)Dog Holliday Wrote: [ -> ]That's fine-not spilling your guts about every little detail of your life when you first meet someone, but this isn't a minor detail. For many people, it's a deal breaker. It's best to be upfront about major issues/deal breakers right off the bat and not to lead someone on.
Seriously. Having kids is a hell of a lot different than saying you hate a certain movie. If a person has children it's not exactly something you can compromise. Even issues like politics or religion can be dealt with by saying "let's agree to disagree" but kids are not negotiable. They are part of the package.
I've said it before but again I'd say that lying about having kids or even just a sin by omission says a lot about a person.
(06-11-2010 12:16 AM)Dog Holliday Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2010 04:32 PM)Bittercat Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, but they could have been dating just a few days or a week. Sometimes, there's a period when you're not sure if you're going to become an item or not, and you are just maybe meeting for coffee or lunch to get to know one another.
That's fine-not spilling your guts about every little detail of your life when you first meet someone, but this isn't a minor detail. For many people, it's a deal breaker. It's best to be upfront about major issues/deal breakers right off the bat and not to lead someone on. If you were dating someone and the guy didn't tell you right away that he was recently released from prison for murder, or he's an alcoholic or hard core drug user, or a pedophile, would that be OK to not tell you right away until you get to know each other better?
As an STD counselor and patient advocate, we advise people with STDs like herpes or HPV **not** to disclose that info on a first date. And no, an alcoholic or ex-con should not disclose that info on a first date either. First dates are not for those types of topics.
Interesting CFS.
During our fist date, DH and I discussed the kid issue right away and upfront. Neither of us wanted them! Yay!!
But by this point, I already knew I was going to marry him. Love at first sight, you know
I sort out the childfree issue in the first few minutes of meeting an interesting person.
It is a dealbreaker for me.
(06-13-2010 03:17 AM)CF Scorpio Wrote: [ -> ]As an STD counselor and patient advocate, we advise people with STDs like herpes or HPV **not** to disclose that info on a first date. And no, an alcoholic or ex-con should not disclose that info on a first date either. First dates are not for those types of topics.
No. Just plain no.
Those are the sort of things I would sure as hell want to know about if I were dating someone for the first time. To be honest I'd run like hell from someone with an STD or drug/alcohol issues or criminal conduct. I'd appreciate the honesty though at the very least and wish her the best of luck finding someone to go with.
If someone had a criminal record and lied to me, even by a sin of omission, it would make me immediately wonder what else she were lying about and I'd break the relationship off immediately. Part of dating is about not lying to your partner.
In fact, I think not disclosing an STD is criminal at worst and irresponsible at best. If a disease can be passed through sex which is a part of dating it's horrible to realize you encourage people not to mention that fact.
While I'm at it, there are many other deal-breakers and to be honest it seems like a waste of everyone's time to hide the facts. If a woman approached me and asked me out for coffee I would accept simply because she had the guts to ask me. If she told me she were a single mom, the date would be over but I'd at least say it was nice spending time with her. If she hid that, but I found out then I wouldn't even respond to her ever again. Lying about major issues is wrong.
If a woman likes the movie Titanic (which I loathe), it's an issue that I could deal with. Just don't watch the movie with her. Major things like having kids though? I can't exactly ignore the kids unless they are at boarding school or something.
(06-13-2010 03:17 AM)CF Scorpio Wrote: [ -> ]...And no, an alcoholic or ex-con should not disclose that info on a first date either. First dates are not for those types of topics.
What type of topics do you discuss on first dates? Your favorite color, favorite food or favorite TV show? How many dates should you have before someone should disclose information that will probably be a deal breaker? How would you feel if by the third or fourth date, you're starting to develop strong feelings for someone, and the guy says: "Oh, by the way. I just got out of the pen recently. I thought my girlfriend was cheating on me, so I murdered her, chopped up her body and burned her remains. But I'm OK now." Wouldn't you rather find that out on a first date?
I can see why they would advise clients not to disclose that info on the first date. For example, say the murderer in above example wasn't going to get a second date because she didn't like him enough to move forward, just based on his personality and general interests. Then he discloses it. He basically just embarrassed himself for no reason, and know there is one more person out there who knows and can spread rumors and make it even worse. Maybe it's just the social worker in me, but I can see the other's person's need for socialization as well, and yes the info needs to come out, but if you're just discussing the headlines over coffee, maybe its not the appropriate time. I could see gently and tactfully informing the other person out of respect and honesty once a little relationship has been built, but before it gets too intense, and it kinda becomes a lie by omission.
Well, too, jail time doesn't always mean the person is NOW a danger, or a criminal, or whatever. One of my SILs went to jail on a drug possession charge for a few months, but she turned her life around and now teaches special ed (don't ask me how someone with a drug felony on their record is now a teacher, because I have NO idea!). In that context, her having done a stint in jail doesn't say much about who she is NOW.
I completely agree with this. I used to be a psych student, and I myself am a recovering codependent.
There are "first date" topics, and then there are "This may be going somewhere" topics.
IMO, whether one has kids or not IS a first date topic. Addiction issues, STDs, criminal history, etc are "This may be going somewhere" topics.
How can people be expected to heal from deep trauma, if they can't have social interaction? Also, you're not going to sleep with every person you go on a first date with, so no--I don't think an STD needs to come up right away--only when sex becomes a possibility.
This policy makes sense to me.
Jen M.
(06-13-2010 11:50 PM)Koi Wrote: [ -> ]I can see why they would advise clients not to disclose that info on the first date. For example, say the murderer in above example wasn't going to get a second date because she didn't like him enough to move forward, just based on his personality and general interests. Then he discloses it. He basically just embarrassed himself for no reason, and know there is one more person out there who knows and can spread rumors and make it even worse. Maybe it's just the social worker in me, but I can see the other's person's need for socialization as well, and yes the info needs to come out, but if you're just discussing the headlines over coffee, maybe its not the appropriate time. I could see gently and tactfully informing the other person out of respect and honesty once a little relationship has been built, but before it gets too intense, and it kinda becomes a lie by omission.
OT: I looked up the original column online and noticed that the 2nd letter is equally interesting. It's from a single woman who wants to get artificially inseminated but her whole family is trying to talk her out of it.
http://www.ctpost.com/default/article/Sh...485676.php
I'm going to post it under "fencesitters".
I've never understood the "tread lightly" attitude towards first dates. Isn't the purpose of a first date to determine whether or not this person is someone you'd be interested in having a relationship with? It seems, to me, to be common sense to get all the hardcore stuff out in the open so that you don't waste any more time should your date not meet your expectations. I know that I'd be royally pissed if I started to develop feelings for someone and suddenly find out that they have a kid/criminal record/STDs/whatever. Like Eddy said, it would make me wonder what else they were hiding.
I think you should lay all your cards on the table straight up. I don't like nasty surprises, and I don't think most people do. Granted, you may limit your number of potential partners (using myself as an example, a lot of people aren't thrilled when they find out I don't work due to my illnesses), but at least you know that you're not compatible before emotions come into play.
I agree obviously. Those are major dealbreakers and I'd hate to start feeling emotionally attached to the person only to then find out.
What's with the constant flip-flopping? Check out this letter and response:
Dear Carolyn:
I am dating my dream guy. The only catch is that he doesn't want to have kids and I do. I have been trying to decide for some time if this should be a deal-breaker, but I can't seem to make up my mind. How should I handle this?
Va.
Choose him over having kids, definitively -- just keep the decision to yourself. Then, live with it for a while.
The other way to go is to make the other, definitive choice: Break up with the guy, then live with it.
Neither approach guarantees an epiphany; they're both just nudges in one direction or the other, and both are more or less reversible (the former is more reversible than the latter, obviously). But both are a lot better than just throwing up your hands and saying you can't decide. You can, and you will, you just need to listen to yourself, and trust what you hear.
By the way -- your "dream guy" would want kids, no? So what have now is a "reality guy," which is fine, because that's all anyone ever has. But you need to be honest with yourself if he's not the reality you want.