again, not how the author frames it at all, though certainly possible for that to be an issue in the abstract. But I think it is reasonable to expect, if that were the main issue, it might be mentioned in the article, whatsoever
but in the article, it is implied the child has already been born, 1-2 years ago, and yet the author explicitly frames the conflict here in terms of her desire to return to normal. There is no mention of homeschooling or the child at all besides the pregnancy and that he went along on the vacation discussed in the last paragraph. I don’t think those would be unreasonable concerns, but they are your concerns, not those of the author. For all we know they’ve already worked out an amenable solution to the kid’s schooling and it isn’t a source of conflict at all.
again, not how the author frames it at all, though certainly possible for that to be an issue in the abstract. But I think it is reasonable to expect, if that were the main issue, it might be mentioned in the article, whatsoever
but in the article, it is implied the child has already been born, 1-2 years ago, and yet the author explicitly frames the conflict here in terms of her desire to return to normal. There is no mention of homeschooling or the child at all besides the pregnancy and that he went along on the vacation discussed in the last paragraph. I don’t think those would be unreasonable concerns, but they are your concerns, not those of the author. For all we know they’ve already worked out an amenable solution to the kid’s schooling and it isn’t a source of conflict at all.