Couple Wants Brother-In-Law’s Help Having Kids, He Demands She Carry Three Extra Babies For Him First

Family plans can get complicated, but one couple found themselves in a situation far beyond anything they expected. They hoped to grow their family with the help of a relative who kindly offered to be a sp*rm donor.

But when that relative later discovered he could not have children with his own partner, the arrangement suddenly changed. Instead of donating once, he asked for something much larger: five pregnancies so both families could have the exact number of biological children they wanted.

What once felt like a loving gesture turned into a high-pressure demand that would require years of physical and emotional commitment. When the couple said no, nearly the entire family accused them of being unfair. Now the situation has escalated into a major conflict, leaving everyone asking the same question: was this request ever reasonable?

A couple hoping for two children is stunned when their sp*rm donor demands five pregnancies in return

Family relationships often become strained when love and obligation start pulling in opposite directions. In this situation, the conflict arises not from a lack of generosity but from the vastly unequal stakes involved.

While the original agreement was a simple sp*rm donation, a gift of genetics, not bodily labor, the brother’s new request demanded years of physical, emotional, and medical burden from someone whose role was never meant to resemble that of a surrogate.

The heart of the issue is bodily autonomy, and the fear that family expectations can sometimes overshadow an individual’s right to set limits, even when everyone involved is hurting.

At the emotional core, the brother’s grief around infertility is real and understandably painful. Infertility often triggers a deep grief response, and research shows that couples facing infertility frequently struggle with feelings of failure, desperation, and identity loss.

The Mayo Clinic notes that infertility can cause “anger, grief, shame, and a loss of control”, feelings that can drive people to seek solutions that may unintentionally cross boundaries.

The OP’s experience, meanwhile, centers on the reality that pregnancy is not symbolic; it is a medically demanding, physically taxing process.

Harvard Health Publishing states that pregnancy significantly stresses the cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and metabolic systems, and long-term risks rise with additional pregnancies, including pelvic floor injury and organ prolapse.

This situation reflects a cultural misunderstanding about “fairness.” The brother sees fairness as a reciprocal exchange of children, focusing on genetic contribution. But fairness cannot exist when one person’s “ask” requires nine months of medical risk, hormonal change, birth trauma, and recovery.

His contribution takes minutes; hers takes years. In psychology, this mismatch reflects a failure to recognize asymmetrical cost, where one party views an emotional desire as equal to another’s bodily sacrifice.

Expert insight helps clarify this boundary. According to Psychology Today, reproductive coercion includes any behavior that pressures or manipulates someone into pregnancy, even within families. It is defined as a violation of autonomy, regardless of intent, and is common when emotional distress leads others to minimize a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body.

Applying that insight here, the brother’s request and the extended family’s pressure cross from emotional appeal into coercion. Wanting a biological child does not justify asking another person to undergo repeated pregnancies for them.

The most constructive resolution is the one the couple already chose: stepping away from biological expectations and returning to adoption, where autonomy, boundaries, and mutual respect remain intact. Sometimes, the healthiest family decision is the one that protects everyone from demands that no one should be obligated to meet.

Here’s how people reacted to the post:

This group stresses that OP is not an incubator and the request is wildly unreasonable

These commenters highlight the massive physical risks and unequal burden OP would carry

This group calls out the emotional manipulation and says OP owes nothing

These Redditors detail how multiple pregnancies would severely impact OP’s health and life

This group emphasizes how lopsided and unfair the “deal” is compared to sp*rm donation

The in-laws framed pregnancy as a simple transaction but the emotional and physical cost of gestating five babies cannot be “returned” like a borrowed item. Her refusal wasn’t selfish. It was a clear, necessary boundary in the face of overwhelming pressure.

Adoption gives the couple a loving path forward, while the brother-in-law must confront his own misplaced expectations. What do you think? Was her “no” justified?