3 ms·

Cynically I almost wonder if one of her reasons for having kids was to play into exactly this line of thinking. She knew prison time was a possibility, and she

Cynically I almost wonder if one of her reasons for having kids was to play into exactly this line of thinking. She knew prison time was a possibility, and she made her choice.

wellthisisgreat 4y ago
Can there be any doubt that it was that?
- apetresc 4y ago
  Yes, there can be lots of doubt. Women have been known, in the past, to have children even without the threat of a prison sentence.
bpodgursky 4y ago
It might. But she's 38, and she may have decided that even an 8-10 year sentence would make it impossible for her to have children later, so did it now while she's free.
- tsol 4y ago
  >But she's 38, and she may have decided that even an 8-10 year sentence would make it impossible for her to have children later, so did it now while she's free. That's her decision to make, no one can stop her or anything, though that also means only very rarely seeing your child for the first 8-10 years of their life.
  - notch656a 4y ago
    As a parent who doesn't enjoy young children, honestly being able to jump in at the less physically demanding ages (like 5+) sounds like a dream, if somehow it can be navigated while still paying top people to take care of them (her family can) and have them not hate you. For the first couple years with a kid I thought about how prison would have had a lot more freedom than parenthood, and yes I've been locked in a cell before (although not for years). If you get tossed in a cell with chill people it's honestly way more peaceful than a baby/toddler. If Holmes actually wanted kids IMO it does seem like the stars align for her to do it now while the sociopathic upsides are at their maximum. There's a decent chance the baby will be shrieking in someone's face while she peacefully sleeps in minimum security bunk. She likely won't experience the tantrums, the worst of the sleepless nights, changing diapers, potty training, the worst years of illness and communicable disease, and when she emerges her children will be semi-rational beings capable of logic and physically durable and possibly even independent enough to be left alone briefly while she goes on a trip to the store or a run.
    - bpodgursky 4y ago
      I wouldn't go this far, but I do overall agree that you can come into a child's life at 5+, or even 10+, and still have a very meaningful relationship with them. So I really don't blame her for trying to give herself that chance.
      - notch656a 4y ago
        It's mind blowing to me she hasn't run, TBH. In 20 years (the likely most she could get) she will be 58 and the kids will be gone. She could probably live in an extremely backward 3rd world shithole under an assumed name and have some chance at escaping justice at least long enough to not miss the entirety of the rest of her youth. She must think she's going to get a short sentence.
        MichaelCollins 4y ago
        At 38, she's not going to miss much of her youth anyway. She's going to miss her kids being young, but running away wouldn't fix that unless she runs away with them in tow. But doing that would be much harder than running away alone, and it would fuck up her kids lives as well. As it stands, the kids will be relatively fine, the father's family is apparently wealthy. Dragging them into a life on the run in 3rd world shitholes would be doing those kids a great disservice.

Cynically I almost wonder if one of her reasons for having kids was to play into exactly this line of thinking. She knew prison time was a possibility, and she made her choice.

wellthisisgreat 4y ago

Can there be any doubt that it was that?

apetresc 4y ago
Yes, there can be lots of doubt. Women have been known, in the past, to have children even without the threat of a prison sentence.

bpodgursky 4y ago

It might. But she's 38, and she may have decided that even an 8-10 year sentence would make it impossible for her to have children later, so did it now while she's free.

tsol 4y ago
>But she's 38, and she may have decided that even an 8-10 year sentence would make it impossible for her to have children later, so did it now while she's free. That's her decision to make, no one can stop her or anything, though that also means only very rarely seeing your child for the first 8-10 years of their life.
- notch656a 4y ago
  As a parent who doesn't enjoy young children, honestly being able to jump in at the less physically demanding ages (like 5+) sounds like a dream, if somehow it can be navigated while still paying top people to take care of them (her family can) and have them not hate you. For the first couple years with a kid I thought about how prison would have had a lot more freedom than parenthood, and yes I've been locked in a cell before (although not for years). If you get tossed in a cell with chill people it's honestly way more peaceful than a baby/toddler. If Holmes actually wanted kids IMO it does seem like the stars align for her to do it now while the sociopathic upsides are at their maximum. There's a decent chance the baby will be shrieking in someone's face while she peacefully sleeps in minimum security bunk. She likely won't experience the tantrums, the worst of the sleepless nights, changing diapers, potty training, the worst years of illness and communicable disease, and when she emerges her children will be semi-rational beings capable of logic and physically durable and possibly even independent enough to be left alone briefly while she goes on a trip to the store or a run.
  - bpodgursky 4y ago
    I wouldn't go this far, but I do overall agree that you can come into a child's life at 5+, or even 10+, and still have a very meaningful relationship with them. So I really don't blame her for trying to give herself that chance.
    - notch656a 4y ago
      It's mind blowing to me she hasn't run, TBH. In 20 years (the likely most she could get) she will be 58 and the kids will be gone. She could probably live in an extremely backward 3rd world shithole under an assumed name and have some chance at escaping justice at least long enough to not miss the entirety of the rest of her youth. She must think she's going to get a short sentence.
      - MichaelCollins 4y ago
        At 38, she's not going to miss much of her youth anyway. She's going to miss her kids being young, but running away wouldn't fix that unless she runs away with them in tow. But doing that would be much harder than running away alone, and it would fuck up her kids lives as well. As it stands, the kids will be relatively fine, the father's family is apparently wealthy. Dragging them into a life on the run in 3rd world shitholes would be doing those kids a great disservice.