My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

AIBU?

to risk asking for thoughts on this?

204 replies

Givesyouhell · 30/01/2015 07:38

I am very nervous asking this on here - I was mulling this over and really couldn't quite work out where I stood on it so thought I'd throw it out there...

If a woman gets pregnant (let's assume protection fails) and she doesn't want or feel ready for kids she can choose to have an abortion. The man is rightly expected to understand and support this. End of story.

If a woman gets pregnant accidently (assuming protection fails) the man would often be thought a bastard for saying he did not want the pregnancy to continue or for then denying the existence of the child if it were born. He would also be expected to provide for the child that he did not want/feel ready for.

I'm not asking this question from the 'woman's body is her own' position, more the long term life changes that a child brings.

This isn't a situation relevant to me, just something that came up in discussion. It seems pretty unfair to the man to me, in that he has no choices at all in something that will change his life and finances for decades and maybe his own view of himself if he steps away.

Please don't flame me for posting, I'm posting to get other people's views and to see if I need to revaluate mine!

OP posts:
Samcro · 30/01/2015 07:40

i suppose he had a choice. he could have kept it covered.

MythicalKings · 30/01/2015 07:45

The only sure form of contraception is abstinence. If men don't trust their partners who say they are on the pill then they should wear condoms.

On the other hand if the condom fails it does seem very unfair that a man is expected to pay if the woman decides to keep the child.

I don't know what the alternative is really. I don't think the state should pick up the bill. Maybe men should "double wrap" just to be sure.

3littlefrogs · 30/01/2015 07:46

Contraception can fail - even in the best regulated circles.

attheendoftheday · 30/01/2015 07:48

If an abortion was simply a reset button I might agree with you. But it isn't. It has repercussions and has an affect on the woman's body. And I think the woman's right of body autonomy is more important that the man's right to a "do over".

The way I see it both adults have a choice about having sex, which has an implicit risk of pregnancy even if protection is used. Then both adults have full choice over any medical procedures they wish to have done to their own bodies.

ClashCityRocker · 30/01/2015 07:50

I suppose because there's a difference between a foetus that can't survive independently from the mother and an actual baby.

I think people would find it difficult to understand if a mother had a baby, then left it with the father and disappeared saying 'she didn't want the baby anyway'.

StockingFullOfCoal · 30/01/2015 07:50

DSis and I were discussing this just last week.

Woman falls pregnant. Wants baby. Man doesn't. Expected to just suck it up and be a Dad when he doesn't want to be.

Woman falls pregnant. Doesn't want baby. Man expected to suck it up and support woman even tho he wants to be a father.

Tricky.

ClashCityRocker · 30/01/2015 07:52

My mum always said don't shag anyone you would hate to have to be involved with for the rest of your life. Probably a bit extreme, but she had a point.

EugenesAxe · 30/01/2015 07:54

I tend to feel that if you use protection, it doesn't absolve you from parenting should that protection fail. It's a bit simplistic for any man to think he's 'in the clear' from being a dad because his intention was that he wouldn't be.

However, the same could be said for the woman. I think that given pregnancy carries physical risk to the woman that is the reason people are more supportive in scenario 1... but to be honest, mental health is very important too, so I do think there's an element of unfairness in how each sex is treated in these circumstances.

TheGirlFromIpanema · 30/01/2015 07:55

Mens choices (due to biology) have to be made before the point of conception.

I don't really get what's so difficult to understand about that really

LaurieFairyCake · 30/01/2015 07:55

Then the man could have not had sex if having a baby wasn't a risk he was prepared to take.

Sex isn't a right, it's an action with consequences.

Whereas a woman always takes the risk and knows she has to deal with the consequences?

I really hate the fact that people suggest it's unfair?

More unfair than an abortion?

More unfair than bringing up a child and losing 18 years of your life while a man swans around with the fucking option of opting out ?

Really?

Thisishowyoudisappear · 30/01/2015 07:56

I think parents should contribute to their children's upbringing and welfare. If they don't want to do it by actually parenting the child even on a part-time basis, then the least they can do is give financial support.

Caronaim · 30/01/2015 07:58

Don't have sex unless you are prepared to accept being a parent. Sex is a big deal. it is played down hugely in today's society, but it is NOT an action without consequences. Sex might always lead to a new life - that is what it is designed for. it can also lead to disease and death. You can do plenty other things besides actual penetration.

RainbowFlutterby · 30/01/2015 07:58

I think it's only true if a condom splits, after all that is the only one where the man is trying to take responsibility for the contraception.

Unfortunately I think there is nothing anyone can change.

sillymillyb · 30/01/2015 08:10

I was in this situation - in fact, my ds is a product of it.

I found out I was pregnant but I didn't feel I could abort a baby for none medical reasons (totally my choice) but ds dad also doesn't believe in abortion (Irish) so we were left in the situation where I carried on with the pregnancy.

Ds dad was at best a reluctant father, he didn't want to be involved, didn't tell anyone for 6 months he had a son and told me when pregnant that he was going to do a runner and not be involved, and that if I wanted to do the same I should put ds up for adoption.

I think that the man gets to have sex and walk away. All the consequences of that there after are on the woman. Yes, I could have had an abortion or given up my son for adoption, but those choices are a lot more hardcore than the mans decision as to whether to visit and pay for a child.

Incidentally, ds sees his dad once a month now and he pays regular maintenance. It's not ideal but it could be worse.

I carry a lot of guilt for the circumstances my ds was born into - he deserved better. Ds dad on the other hand, said he feels proud of the situation we are in and how we came up with a solution that works for us all. I'm not sure what I'm trying to say here, sorry for the waffle!

SnowWhiteAteTheApple · 30/01/2015 08:12

It is unfair but I can't see any political group ever being brave enough to do anything about it.

All we can do is teach boys to always use protection regardless of what their partner says they are doing protection wise. Two methods are far better than one and if the partner lies (as sadly many do) they at least have their own security. Condoms used correctly are very effective.

NancyRaygun · 30/01/2015 08:13

This is why, if you have sons, you should discuss contraception with them early, clearly and in extreme terms. Too often it is left to the woman, but in my experience you usually need two people to have sex!

A friend was recently made aware he had a five year old son. It has turned his life upside down and, because he is a nice man, he is now trying to forge a relationship with his son. A son he didn't want and wasn't aware of. Not his choice. Do I think its unfair on him, yes. But its not as unfair as on the boys mother who found herself pregnant and had to face the consequences that were happening to her, only her.

You can't escape the biology of the situation - a baby grows in a woman. If a man wants to control whether that happens or not he must be responsible about contraception. After the point of intercourse the decision is all hers.

WhereIsMyFurryHat · 30/01/2015 08:14

So what's the solution OP?

TheRealAmandaClarke · 30/01/2015 08:15

If the impact of a pregnancy and birth/ parenthood were the same for a man as a woman then yanbu to ask this question.
However, as there is almost no comparison whatsoever, all you have demonstrated is that there is such a thing as a stupid question, despite what ppl say.

anothernumberone · 30/01/2015 08:19

Yes ultimately it is biology determining what is fair and there is not much that can be done about it. It must be hard for a man standing on the sidelines while big issues that will affect his life are being taken but it is far more difficult for the women taking the decisions so it really is as simple as sometimes life is not fair and you don't get what you want

WD41 · 30/01/2015 08:25

Unfair? YABU.

No contraception is failsafe and sex carries the risk of pregnancy.

If a man doesn't want to support children he doesn't want then he should abstain from sex. It's not a lottery which partner will carry the baby, it will always be the

WD41 · 30/01/2015 08:26

Woman and it will always be her choice whether to continue with the pregnancy.

lemisscared · 30/01/2015 08:26

What about the man who desperately wants the child that the woman decides to abort?

SoupDragon · 30/01/2015 08:27

It is unfair but I would not for one moment suggest that anything is done to change ipthe physical aspects of it - it should always be the woman's final decision whether to continue with the pregnancy or not.

Perhaps there should be more thought to allowing either party to walk away with no further contact with the child. I imagine it is extremely unlikely that a woman who doesn't want a child would give birth and hand the baby over to the father though. It should be discussed before entering into a sexual relationship but it's not really very romantic or alluring is it?!

It is one of those things that will always be unfair. It wil always be the woman's decision about whether or not a baby is the result of sex be that through deciding whether or not to terminate, taking the MAP or "forgetting" to take hormonal contraception.

The flipside of being the one in charge of this is that the woman is the one who is ultimately responsible for ensuring contraception is what suits her - the buck stops with her as she is the one who deals with the consequences. I would never rely on a male contraceptive pill for this reason.

Hakluyt · 30/01/2015 08:28

Desperately sad for him- but an unfortunate side effect of biology.

SoupDragon · 30/01/2015 08:28

What about the man who desperately wants the child that the woman decides to abort?

Unless you think a society which is able to force a woman to go thigh a pregnancy and give birth is a good idea, unfortunately that is something that can not be resolved. Unless the woman wants to give birth, she should not be made to. It is sad and unfair but ultimately a woman must have control over her own body.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.