"For the babies sake..."

A baby or child deserves to live in a happy household. If the lady is pregnant but the couple are not compatible the woman could become a single mother. The father could visit every week. That might make a happy little family rather than the baby having to life in an angry household. Couples should get on and not just stay together for the sake of the baby.

having a baby is not reason to stay together. Your partner should love you first so that he can learn to share that love to your baby. You are only making things worse if you just thinking to be together for your baby.

I agree. It is silly to stay with someone you don't love or even like because of a child especially a baby that has not been born yet. It is not like they are going to notice that you are no longer together. They will be born and adapt to what ever type of household they are born in to. It is better that they live with one happy parent and visit another happy parent then live with two miserable ones in a volitile household, it will hurt more if they all live together in the beginning and split up later which inevetibly will happen even if it is after the child is 18. My parents got divorced when I was 31 years old and it hurt very badly, so don't think that staying together for the children is going to hurt them any less when you eventually break up. It will hurt them no matter how old they are, but it is better to not raise them in an unhappy hostile environment.

A peaceful, stable home is more important to the emotional health of a child than simply have both parents living under the same roof. If a couple do not get along with each other there is going to be tension, at the very least, and arguing, harsh words and violent fights at the very worst. No couple should intentionally create such an atmosphere and then claim to be doing so for the child's sake.

well, i dont think its a good idea to just stay together only for the baby sake as i dont think the baby or the child will be happy to see his parents always fighting and have arguments always. besides, even if they are separated the guy can still see his child and give him financial support thats all matter specially if theres no more love already.

I agreed with optomyst.. No need to stay for the baby sake if both are always fighting and think that they are gonna useless to be together so why need to stay for the sake of the baby. Better to talk both for the baby's future and they really don't want to stay together anymore. Have a nice day...

The phrase 'We should be together for the babies sake' have got both sides. Yes like you said it does depend on the circumstances such as one of the parents is in a dangerous relationship they wouldn't want to be together. The phrase is saying that both parents need to hold it together and be there for the child when it needs comfort or diaper's. Both parents should be able to afford a baby and be brought up in a loving and safe environment. Emotionally the parents don't have to be together if it is too complicated for them, but physically. The child has every right to know who their mother and father are.

No, you should not have to stay together for the baby's sake. Children will feel much more discomfort and stress if they have two parents living together who don't want to be together. At the same token, everything possible should be done to make sure the baby has access and love from both parents. Not allowing one parent to have rights to the child is a whole other ball game, unless that person is proven to be an unfit parent.