A
female
age
41-50,
anonymous
writes:I have been engaged to my boyfriend for over a year, we are both 46, and have 5 teenagers between us from our past relationships. He wants us to wait until they have all left home before we live together, as he cant stand the thought of so many kids in one house with all their mates etc. I do agree in some ways, but obviously want to live with the man I love, and it could be years before they all leave home. We are really in love, and I feel resentful that we have to waste the years we have left living apart, when we should be together. What does anyone else think.? p.s. we do spend a lot of time at each others homes, but its not the same as living a normal life together is it?
View related questions:
engaged Reply to this Question |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
reader, anonymous, writes (22 August 2007): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionThanks everyone. I have to disagree with danielepew in saying he doesnt want to get married. He does and I know when a man really loves me, but I have to agree that if you wait until they have all gone (whats to say they ever will) then you have all their children and families etc. But he did say in a couple of years when the oldest ones do move on, it will be easier, and things will change then. He is being sensible, I can see that now.
A
female
reader, birdynumnums  + ♥, writes (22 August 2007):
 Wow,
I can't imagine blending two families worth of teenagers. If it is 4 or 5 years until the last children are in University, I personally would vote for spending time at each others houses. There are instances where people need to live together to start families or change countries, but if you both are relatively stable - Do you really want to deal with the chaos that this might cause? PLUS, most kids at this age Really need a lot of stability - I think even more than at a younger age - there is so much more that can go wrong! I have read that older kids in new marriages tend to feel that they have been put into the background - behind the new marriage. It's only a few more years before you launch them out into the world - Perhaps your focus should remain on the kids. If you really love each other (and had no intention of new kids, totally different situation), you'll be fine AND you will have a lifetime to enjoy each other's company - sans kids!
...............................
A
male
reader, somewhat_anonymous  +, writes (22 August 2007):
DanielPew may be right, but he might also be looking at it from a practicality standpoint. Perhaps he doesn't want to wait until they're all gone, but perhaps when a couple are gone or a couple have at least started college to empty the house a little bit.
Think about how crazy it could get with seven people in one house. Just leaving for work in the mornings are much more manageable even if you have a house of four.
...............................
A
male
reader, Danielepew  + ♥, writes (21 August 2007):
 No, it's not the same. My gut feeling is, he doesn't really want to marry. If you follow his line of thought and marry until all the kids are gone (in, say, eight years), you will have them all, plus their five spouses, plus their twenty children, your relatives and his. His logic doesn't seem correct.
...............................
|
