imo i'd say NTA because she was being honest with her ex. she didnt say that the baby shouldnt exist. she said that Ex should have thought it through more, considering he likely could barely handle caring for Nicole with all of her extra needs, without adding another baby to the mix. and while i know that being a new mom is very hard, Calli KNEW that hr husband had a special needs daughter before they even got married and knew what she signed up for before bringing another helpless screaming tiny human into their lives. so i dont think Callie shouldve gotten pissed with him for taking Nicole to her PhysTherapy appointment. Callie being hand off with Nicole doesnt mean Ex is hands off too.
This is a crappy situation. But things changed when they split. If her ex was at fault, given how she feels about the current situation, OP surely would have brought this up, since AITA posts tend lean towards always painting the other party as doing something unfair, while being able to leave out whatever details they want to appear to be in the right. Lets assume they split on good terms. They have equal custody it seems, and that is rare in cases where the mother harbors resentment to the father. Her arguement fails to consider that it isn't fair to hold someone to an agreement made under a relationship that no longer exists. While they were together, not having another kid was a reasonable expectation. But he has a new partner, who likely wanted her own family. And if he loves her, and wants her to be happy, if having a child with her is a part of that, he isn't wrong to do so. It is unfair to argue that an agreement made in their now non-existent relationship holds any weight in his new one. This isn't to say he shouldn't be responsible for his first child, or that it's fair to just expect that the mother accept what he's suggesting. He should love and care for his children. But, and I know someone's probably gonna get their panties in a twist: if the genders were reversed, there'd be a lot of people calling the father the A hole for telling the mother not to have another kid by a new man. So I'mma hold the mother to the same standard that would be considered acceptable in the inverse, and say that yes, she is being an A hole. Look at it like this: if she found someone new, but that new guy wanted a kid, and she wanted to keep him, she'd likely end up either having a kid with him to keep him, or lose him. Then imagine the guy has a similar mindset to her ex's new partner. I think then, if she were put in her ex's shoes, she might understand better. I'm not trying to act like the father is the good guy, but I'm not gonna act like OP is either.
@@lifeandeverythinginbetwn Yup. Unfortunately, community bias, and the ability of the one posting on the sub to control all the details given tends to result in the default judgement being that they are good and the other person is bad. And despite the moderators of such a sub stating "do not downvote because you don't like it", the vast majority will not only downvote based on personal opinion rather than it being a super clear cut case, but attack and push out those they don't agree with, thus silencing meaningful debate. Like "AITA for not being a bigot/not being nice to a bigot". I genuinely despise that those get up so massively upvoted, not because I think bigotry is okay, but because I already know what the vast majority is going to answer, which, on a sub that is supposed to debate and discuss things, is objectively a bad post, and most likely a karma farm. AITA, in relation to bigotry, will simply respond with the popular answer supported by the moderation. If those who approve of the type of bigotry discussed dominated the sub and held moderation power, debates around it would always favor said bigotry. I can't believe I'm saying this, but in order for posts about bigotry to spark debate rather than be a circlejerk of affirmation, bigots have to be allowed to voice their opinion without fear of being attacked. I feel ill suggesting that, but this is one of the very few cases in which that would actually improve the integrity of the sub. You'd have both sides, thus a more accurate (and likely less pleasant) consensus. And who knows? Maybe actual debate in a place that should be about debating things, might turn those with bigoted views towards better beliefs.
@@kinorris1709 I think thats why having other platforms cover this helps, more people giving their opinions , like the comment section here has various looks on this topic.
I think this woman shouldn't have said what she said. Having a disabled child is sad but she used strong language without considering ex husband's feelings. The way she said it imply that other woman has no right to have her own child because of their daughter. I'm sorry but that's what it is. What it sound like. She could have said to her ex: "It's your daughter too, you should take some responsibilities regarding her." There's a lot of ways to communicate her thoughts and feelings about the situation but she unnecessarily brought other women's child into it and it's understandable her ex's current wife is offended. The OP should deal with problems around her daughter exclusively with her ex husband and not even think or said anything about his current wife and the baby. On the other hand, her ex should have at least explained his new wife the condition of his daughter and the fact he has and will have a lot of responsibilities the entire life of his daughter. Marrying a man with children from previous marriage requiers a lot of understanding and patience which this woman from a story lacks. Frankly, I feel bad for this man. Both of their wives aren't too mature for marriage and difficulties life sometimes brings.
But she said this in response to his *asking* "what he's supposed to do about the baby". Because he wanted his ex-wife to take on more care work for his first child so he's freed up for his second child -> *He* brought his second baby into it. OP just responded. Okay, ideally she would have shut that conversation down by keeping it at "that's up to you and your wife to figure out" But really - you kinda lose the right for people to not comment on your life choices, when you ask them to take on your responsibilities to accommodate your life choices. What's immature is his request that his ex-wife figure what HE is supposed to do about HIS baby.
imo i'd say NTA because she was being honest with her ex. she didnt say that the baby shouldnt exist. she said that Ex should have thought it through more, considering he likely could barely handle caring for Nicole with all of her extra needs, without adding another baby to the mix. and while i know that being a new mom is very hard, Calli KNEW that hr husband had a special needs daughter before they even got married and knew what she signed up for before bringing another helpless screaming tiny human into their lives. so i dont think Callie shouldve gotten pissed with him for taking Nicole to her PhysTherapy appointment. Callie being hand off with Nicole doesnt mean Ex is hands off too.
Agreed
This is a crappy situation. But things changed when they split. If her ex was at fault, given how she feels about the current situation, OP surely would have brought this up, since AITA posts tend lean towards always painting the other party as doing something unfair, while being able to leave out whatever details they want to appear to be in the right.
Lets assume they split on good terms. They have equal custody it seems, and that is rare in cases where the mother harbors resentment to the father.
Her arguement fails to consider that it isn't fair to hold someone to an agreement made under a relationship that no longer exists. While they were together, not having another kid was a reasonable expectation.
But he has a new partner, who likely wanted her own family. And if he loves her, and wants her to be happy, if having a child with her is a part of that, he isn't wrong to do so. It is unfair to argue that an agreement made in their now non-existent relationship holds any weight in his new one.
This isn't to say he shouldn't be responsible for his first child, or that it's fair to just expect that the mother accept what he's suggesting. He should love and care for his children.
But, and I know someone's probably gonna get their panties in a twist: if the genders were reversed, there'd be a lot of people calling the father the A hole for telling the mother not to have another kid by a new man. So I'mma hold the mother to the same standard that would be considered acceptable in the inverse, and say that yes, she is being an A hole.
Look at it like this: if she found someone new, but that new guy wanted a kid, and she wanted to keep him, she'd likely end up either having a kid with him to keep him, or lose him. Then imagine the guy has a similar mindset to her ex's new partner. I think then, if she were put in her ex's shoes, she might understand better.
I'm not trying to act like the father is the good guy, but I'm not gonna act like OP is either.
its an everybody suck kinda post
@@lifeandeverythinginbetwn Yup. Unfortunately, community bias, and the ability of the one posting on the sub to control all the details given tends to result in the default judgement being that they are good and the other person is bad.
And despite the moderators of such a sub stating "do not downvote because you don't like it", the vast majority will not only downvote based on personal opinion rather than it being a super clear cut case, but attack and push out those they don't agree with, thus silencing meaningful debate.
Like "AITA for not being a bigot/not being nice to a bigot". I genuinely despise that those get up so massively upvoted, not because I think bigotry is okay, but because I already know what the vast majority is going to answer, which, on a sub that is supposed to debate and discuss things, is objectively a bad post, and most likely a karma farm.
AITA, in relation to bigotry, will simply respond with the popular answer supported by the moderation. If those who approve of the type of bigotry discussed dominated the sub and held moderation power, debates around it would always favor said bigotry.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but in order for posts about bigotry to spark debate rather than be a circlejerk of affirmation, bigots have to be allowed to voice their opinion without fear of being attacked. I feel ill suggesting that, but this is one of the very few cases in which that would actually improve the integrity of the sub. You'd have both sides, thus a more accurate (and likely less pleasant) consensus. And who knows? Maybe actual debate in a place that should be about debating things, might turn those with bigoted views towards better beliefs.
@@kinorris1709 I think thats why having other platforms cover this helps, more people giving their opinions , like the comment section here has various looks on this topic.
I think this woman shouldn't have said what she said. Having a disabled child is sad but she used strong language without considering ex husband's feelings. The way she said it imply that other woman has no right to have her own child because of their daughter. I'm sorry but that's what it is. What it sound like. She could have said to her ex: "It's your daughter too, you should take some responsibilities regarding her." There's a lot of ways to communicate her thoughts and feelings about the situation but she unnecessarily brought other women's child into it and it's understandable her ex's current wife is offended. The OP should deal with problems around her daughter exclusively with her ex husband and not even think or said anything about his current wife and the baby. On the other hand, her ex should have at least explained his new wife the condition of his daughter and the fact he has and will have a lot of responsibilities the entire life of his daughter. Marrying a man with children from previous marriage requiers a lot of understanding and patience which this woman from a story lacks. Frankly, I feel bad for this man. Both of their wives aren't too mature for marriage and difficulties life sometimes brings.
I think she wasn't seeing it like that at the moment, its honestly an "everybody sucks" kind of post
But she said this in response to his *asking* "what he's supposed to do about the baby". Because he wanted his ex-wife to take on more care work for his first child so he's freed up for his second child -> *He* brought his second baby into it. OP just responded.
Okay, ideally she would have shut that conversation down by keeping it at "that's up to you and your wife to figure out" But really - you kinda lose the right for people to not comment on your life choices, when you ask them to take on your responsibilities to accommodate your life choices.
What's immature is his request that his ex-wife figure what HE is supposed to do about HIS baby.