Note: Please bear in mind that whilst this topic does canvass opinions, it is not a fight club. You may disagree with other posters but we do ask you please to stick to our Talk Guidelines and to be civil. We don't allow personal attacks or troll-hunting. Do please report any. Thanks, MNHQ.

To think if a man doesn't want a baby he should make it his business to wear a condom

(435 Posts)
JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 11:57:02

A friend of mine has got pregnant off a casual FWB situation. She's ok with this and intends to keep the baby even though she isn't in a relationship with the father.

However the father has gone absolutely ballistic, called her a bitch etc and demands she has an abortion. He's adamant he doesn't want the baby or to pay child support.

The situation regarding contraception is that it was just never discussed and they continually had unprotected sex for about 3 months. He never asked if she was on the pill and she never told him she was.

So AIBU to think if he so adamantly did not want a baby with this woman he should have bloody well used protection, regardless of whether she suggested it or not?

JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 11:59:01

I will say that I think my friend deliberately didn't bring it up with him because she was hoping to get pregnant.

ouryve Mon 15-Jul-13 11:59:11

If he doesn't want to risk having a baby, he shouldn't have sex, never mind unprotected sex.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 11:59:58

So, your friend thought it was OK to continue without contraception then? She knowingly had unprotected sex - they are both as bad as each other. How old are they?

Is she going to support herself with the baby then?

kinkyfuckery Mon 15-Jul-13 12:00:11

Contraception is the responsibility of BOTH people. Yes, he should have worn a condom, but she should have made him!
Why the fuck are 'FWB' having unprotected sex? They both sound fucking stupid!

WafflyVersatile Mon 15-Jul-13 12:00:28

My line is:

If you don't want to be dad wear a condom+. That is the only point in the process where you have a choice, after that it's out of your hands.

+or stick to bumsecks if she's into that.

LastTangoInDevonshire Mon 15-Jul-13 12:00:36

She'll do what she wants, and he will pay for it. He should have taken more precautions. Silly twats - both of them.

Men don't think about 'babies' - they think about sex.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:00:44

She deliberately wanted to get pregnant? shock

This is a wind up isn't it?

JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 12:01:27

She is 32, he's around the same age

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:02:09

Wow - old enough to know better then hmm

mynameisslimshady Mon 15-Jul-13 12:02:32

The pair of them are idiots, they should be thanking their lucky stars a baby was the conclusion of their 'relationship' and not an STD.

JRmumma Mon 15-Jul-13 12:03:59

They both sound stupid.

But yes, he should have taken precautions.

LittleBearPad Mon 15-Jul-13 12:04:59

They are both as bad as one another and should have used contraception. Your friend however shouldn't have been hoping to get pregnant from a FWB thing without warning the bloke that was what she wanted.

HopALongOn Mon 15-Jul-13 12:05:13

Hope they are both aware that a baby was probably the least dangerous thing that they could have caught in this situation.
Pair of them sound like idiots.

JessicaBeatriceFletcher Mon 15-Jul-13 12:06:31

Yeah, sorry, your friend is as much a twat as he is.

MrsPercyPig Mon 15-Jul-13 12:06:49

What is FWB?

JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 12:07:38

I think my point is that the man in question now feels "trapped" into having a baby with this woman, and has basically solely blamed her for not being on the pill!

mynameisslimshady Mon 15-Jul-13 12:07:42

Friends with benefits.

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 12:08:43

Is a basic fact that unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy,clearly she's not that bothered about the consequences but he is.

As he was always going to be more bothered by this possibility then he should have either not put his penis in her vagina or used a condom.

As now he has to deal with the negative consequences and has no choice. But he would have known that would be the situation

Fakebook Mon 15-Jul-13 12:09:31

Don't have any experience in casual sex, but one would assume you have sex without the intention of having a baby unless you are actively ttc. So he shouldn't really have had to ask should he? Your friend has tricked him into this situation. I'd be angry too.

DioneTheDiabolist Mon 15-Jul-13 12:09:37

I do think that if a man doesn't want a baby he should wear a condom. I just as strongly believe that if a woman wants a baby she should make this clear.

He was foolish, stupid and presumptive. She was calculating and manipulative. *I feel so sorry for this child*sad

Trills Mon 15-Jul-13 12:09:55

Contraception is the responsibility of both people.

It is both of their faults that she is now pregnant.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 12:09:56

I agree, condoms should be mandatory. But the only way to avoid being an unwilling father is to not have sex.
He doesn't get a choice about paying for his mistakes for the next 18 years, yes he's going to be very pissed-off.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:10:20

well, yeah, that about sums it up!!

TSSDNCOP Mon 15-Jul-13 12:11:22

Would she have had sex with him if he had insisted on a condom? Because it rather sound as though this was the outcome she was hoping for.

He is an idiot and the answer to your question is yes. He's going to be paying for that lapse in judgement for the next 18 years. Which brings us neatly back to whether that we also perhaps your friends intention. Unless she is in a position to be totally self-supportive.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 12:11:46

'The pair of them are idiots, they should be thanking their lucky stars a baby was the conclusion of their 'relationship' and not an STD.'

No, I think for the baby it's probably not a good thing.
A STD might make both of them think next time.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:11:55

I got pregnant due to a condom failure - i should have been on the pill (belt and braces)

livinginwonderland Mon 15-Jul-13 12:12:11

People shouldn't have sex without discussing the consequences! Sex can ALWAYS lead to a baby, no matter how careful you are. If you don't can't handle the potential of having a baby/an abortion, don't have sex.

LondonMan Mon 15-Jul-13 12:12:56

Creating a baby is not something you should generally do unilaterally. Getting married first may have gone out of fashion, but you should discuss it.

He was incredibly stupid to assume she was on the pill, but she's the one who did something wrong by knowingly conceiving the baby. (The situation is not symmetrical. They both knew he wasn't using anything, only she knew that she wasn't.)

However what's done is done. He has a right to be angry, but he has no right to demand an abortion. Her wrong was conceiving, now that she's done that it's totally her choice what happens next.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 12:13:28

Oh, and asking if someone is on the pill and them lying to you is still no defence against paying for the child.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:13:40

How is she going to support this child?

LadyBryan Mon 15-Jul-13 12:14:30

It takes two people to make a baby. Both are therefore equally responsible therefore both are responsible for sorting out contraception.

She could have refused to have unprotected sex....now there's an idea

BellEndTent Mon 15-Jul-13 12:14:43

Absolutely. He didn't take responsibility for his own fertility and therefore has nobody to blame but himself. If she had lied to him about being on the pill I may have been be a little more sympathetic but he still should have protected himself. He didn't, he was reckless and now there are consequences.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 12:14:56

The way most single mothers do I suppose. With whatever is available.
I share threads like this with DS as a warning.

JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 12:14:59

Fakebook your post comes across as if you think contraception is always the responsibility of the woman hmm.

I disagree that she has tricked him, you cannot just assume that someone is on the pill.

She actually earns significantly more than him.

Maryann1975 Mon 15-Jul-13 12:15:08

Very unfair of your friend to put him in this position. If she wanted a baby she should have told him that was what she was after. But he was very stupid in not asking outright if she was on the pill. Never assume stuff like that. Basically, it seems that they have both been very immature in not discussing contaceptives and now a baby is going to be born, who it seems is unwanted by one of their parents. That's not fair on the child.

mynameisslimshady Mon 15-Jul-13 12:15:20

In this situation a baby isn't a good thing, I agree, but its still a far more pleasant option than a recurring or life limiting disease.

Trills Mon 15-Jul-13 12:15:43

asking if someone is on the pill and them lying to you is still no defence against paying for the child.

No, because it's not the child's fault that their mother lied in order to bring them into being.

It's a pretty good reason to not want to have anything to do with that person ever again though. (unfortunately a pretty difficult thing to do now that you have a child with them)

kinkyfuckery Mon 15-Jul-13 12:16:18

Has she said what her expectation is from him as a father?

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 12:16:45

'In this situation a baby isn't a good thing, I agree, but its still a far more pleasant option than a recurring or life limiting disease.'

Possibly not for the baby.
Who knows? They may have both to deal with in the future.

SaucyJack Mon 15-Jul-13 12:17:12

He has been an idiot, but I have less than no sympathy for your friend too.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:18:38

Actually I would absolutely assume that someone was on the pill in that situation.

JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 12:18:51

Can I ask if the responses would be different if she had just been stupid and forgotten about contraception instead of actually wanting a baby?

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 12:18:57

Yes, he was an idiot.
Yes, he should now pay for the child.
Yes, he should be a hell of a lot more cautious about who she has sex with in the future.
Yes I think she baited the trap, and he walked into it, prick first. He's an adult and made his choice.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:20:16

And whilst i agree that contraception is a joint responsibility, it is the woman that will be left holding the baby if the man doesn't face up to his responsibilities so any woman with an ounce of sense would ensure they are covered.

I read something similar on another thread (a poster was planning to do it). Ultimately, both bear responsibility. She, as is basically trapping him, but he for being an irresponsible idiot.

Yes he's an idiot- she's not that nice either.

SaucyJack Mon 15-Jul-13 12:22:23

I can't answer that Jaffa, because I simply do not belive it is possibly to repeatedly forget to use contraception.

LEMisdisappointed Mon 15-Jul-13 12:22:54

She HAS been stupid, far more stupid than simply forgetting contraception. Forgetting contraception means you get your arse down the chemist and get the MAP.

She has deliberately trapped this person into having an unwanted child.

If she was that desperate for a child she should have
a) been in a loving relationship
b) been fucking honest about it
c) used artificial insemination

FanjoForTheMammaries Mon 15-Jul-13 12:23:39

yes, he should "put something on the end of it" wink

Really sorry - but when is it okay for a guy not in a monogamous relationship not to wear a condom?

One of the outcomes of sex is that if it is unprotected the chances of getting the woman pregnant increases ... If a man is only commited to you as far as wanting nothing but sex, chances are he is not going to embrace fatherhood.

They both are incredibly stupid

Ra88 Mon 15-Jul-13 12:24:39

there was a thread a out this a few weeks ago with the OP asking if it was basically ok to not be on any contraception and trying to et pregnant without the "FWB" knowing ..

MysteriousHamster Mon 15-Jul-13 12:25:27

They both have responsibility but presumably OP's friend doesn't disagree with that.

My reading of the OP is that it's unfair for the man to go ballistic, which I totally agree with. He shouldn't have assumed.

TSSDNCOP Mon 15-Jul-13 12:26:25

Is it really even possible to "forget" about contraception. It's not like forgetting to cancel the milk whilst you're on holiday.

Contraception failing I can buy. Forgetting is harder to get my head round as I suspect it would be somewhere in your mind in a 3 month block.

Plus I think if she'd forgotten, her response would have been to discuss the outcome rather than present this neat fair accompli.

Even if this silly man is a nice guy, she's rather impeding his better side from being at the forefront I think by presenting him with only the option that best suits her.

Is the friend actually you OP?

They both should watch more Jeremy Kyle

JRmumma Mon 15-Jul-13 12:28:23

I don't agree with the posters who say that if you don't want to be a parent you shouldn't have sex, that's just ridiculous. But i do think that if you don't want to be a parent then you should take responsibility for making sure this doesn't happen for yourself, not assume that the other person has it covered.

And OP, if it was an accident and not her intention then she is still an idiot, just a different kind of idiot.

ChunkyPickle Mon 15-Jul-13 12:28:39

He was responsible for his own contraception! If you don't want a baby, you don't have sex, or you risk contraception - and that counts for both of the people doing the deed.

He did nothing to stop this when he had a chance, and it's out of his hands now, and he has responsibility for the life he created. He can be angry all he likes - he had unprotected sex, and now there is a baby which is half him.

Nanny0gg Mon 15-Jul-13 12:29:15

LEMisdisappointed

I agree.
And he was stupid for not asking or taking precautions himself.

None of this is the child's fault, so he'll have to pay and she'll have to explain to the child why its father doesn't want to know - unless a miracle occurs when it's born.

I hate threads like these.
Irresponsible idiots.

Besides the whole pregnancy thing - would she be quite so pleased if it was genital warts rather than a baby?

It wasn't an accident from her point of view.

It sounds like they both made assumptions

Her- he's happy to have a baby

Him - she's on the pill

Pobblewhohasnotoes Mon 15-Jul-13 12:30:32

How did she trick him?

Regardless of her intentions, he chose not to wear a condom. Of course that leads to babies!

I wonder if she did tell him that she had contraception under control.
If not then he is really dim.

TSSDNCOP Mon 15-Jul-13 12:33:21

It's going to be a nice conversation to have with the child isn't it when it wonders why it's parents loathe each other.

Daddy's a bone head that didn't wear a condom and didn't bother to ask mummy if she had it covered.

Mummy chose not to mention her lack of contraception and didn't refuse to shag until daddy had it covered.

Lazyjaney Mon 15-Jul-13 12:38:15

He was a dickhead. She is too if she thinks she will get much money out of him.

Frizzbonce Mon 15-Jul-13 12:39:20

As LadyBryan says, it takes two to make a baby. It always amazes me - the men who exhibit the most outrage over being 'trapped' are generally also the ones who display the least interest in taking any responsibility for contraception. Think of the numerous male pop stars who get a girl up the duff after a one nighter and then run squealing to their lawyers. You'd think that they would realise that some women would be angling to have their baby and then demand huge sums in child support. But they seem to keep on doing it - there's a case in the paper right now about an unnamed male singer who is desperate for his wife not to find out about his fling that resulted in a little girl.

When I was speaking to my teenage son about just this, I pointed out that 'presuming' his girlfriend was on the pill isn't good enough and if he doesn't want to get an STI or get her pregnant he uses a condom. And part of the Right to Choose is her right to choose to keep the baby which means he has to support it. He is not a stupid boy but he hadn't thought this scenario through. We need to explain this stuff to our sons.

Fakebook Mon 15-Jul-13 12:41:21

I was referring to your third paragraph, where you say he hadn't asked and she never told him. Lets assume that he assumed she was protected and never bothered to ask her for that reason? What was her excuse for not telling him she was on the pill? If you really don't want a baby, surely you discuss this, and as the woman who would be carrying the child for 9 months, yes, she should have told him and then asked him to wear a condom.

I disagree that she has tricked him, you cannot just assume that someone is on the pill.

^^ You've just completely made a u-turn on your second post. What do you believe? She didn't want to get pregnant or that she did and tricked him?

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 12:42:05

Each party is responsible for there own contraceptive situation.

Nobody should rely on someone else nobody should just assume the other person has it covered anybody that does is a prat.

Granted shes the one who can't just walk away from the outcome but it sounds like the outcome is something that she does not wish to walk away from. But its no more her responsibility than it is his.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 12:44:55

'I don't agree with the posters who say that if you don't want to be a parent you shouldn't have sex, that's just ridiculous. '

I find all the claims of 'Oh, it was an accident, the condom split, the pill didn't work, they inserted my coil in the wrong orifice' absurd too.
It's the only 100% certain way to ensure no conception.
So the risk of having a baby is always there.
That said, I had a happy, healthy sex life for a decade before children, but then I didn't have deceitful or careless partners.

FeegleFion Mon 15-Jul-13 12:50:59

Pregnancy happens even when contraception is being used.

Neither the pill or condoms are 100% pregnancy proof and any sexual encounter has the possibility of resulting in an unwanted pregnancy; and if your suspicions are accurate she's a damned fool for thinking she was not only entitled to orchestrate this but for having no understanding how bloody hard having a baby is mentally, emotionally and physically when you don't have the support of the father!

Regardless of her intentions, he's a bloody fool if it never crossed his mind that this is going to be the likely outcome of months of unprotected sex.

They sound like a pair of bloody kids and I feel terribly sorry for any child brought into the world like this.

ScrambledSmegs Mon 15-Jul-13 12:54:51

Well, yes. He's been an idiot.

But there's something very underhand about her intent to get pregnant without telling him.

Neither comes out of this very well. The poor baby sad

Is she actually surprised at his response, btw?

Mitchy1nge Mon 15-Jul-13 12:55:11

if he didn't realise that shooting his load up someone's cunt could result in pregnancy maybe he lacks the capacity to consent to sex at all and she is guilty of something far more serious than wanting to conceive a child?

FasterStronger Mon 15-Jul-13 12:58:26

It always amazes me - the men who exhibit the most outrage over being 'trapped' are generally also the ones who display the least interest in taking any responsibility for contraception

yes. this type of man is irresponsible in many ways

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 13:04:53

Irresponsible and not very bright.
As I said, I read these sorts of threads to my DS as a warning to be responsible for himself, his body and any relationships he gets into, however fleeting. It is very difficult to get through to him that people lie, he hasn't had experience of it.
DD is much more canny and aware of the potential for abuse and exploitation and risk-taking.
But I'm not a grandmother yet, so I'm hopeful that the discussions are working.

Mitchy1nge Mon 15-Jul-13 13:07:32

It doesn't sound like anyone lied in this situation, they've both gambled with their own and one another's health but no deception?

DuelingFanjo Mon 15-Jul-13 13:12:54

Obviously the same applies to your friend OP.

Or did she want a baby? Was she having sex with him knowing it may result in a baby.

Dahlen Mon 15-Jul-13 13:22:45

Your friend sounds like a selfish, irresponsible idiot who is the last person who should be having a baby TBH. Has she considered the effect on her child of her actions? Has she checked for STDs that may affect the foetus?

All that said, no sympathy whatsoever for the man in this situation. To shag someone for 3 months without even asking about contraception says it all.

chicaguapa Mon 15-Jul-13 13:23:37

I suppose the difference is that of the two of them, she was the only one who knew they were definitely not using contraception. So I can understand his anger as she wasn't being honest in their FWB relationship. Rightly or wrongly, he just assumed she was on the pill but she knew she wasn't.

She also holds all the cards with the baby. She can decide whether to keep it, that he's got to pay for it and can slate him for not wanting anything to do with it, when she was the only one who knew that getting pg was possible.

So even more reason to make sure that if he absolutely didn't want a baby, he should have sorted out his own contraception and/or not had sex at all. Because he's the one that's stitched up now with no choices and a lifetime of responsibility.

As Eyes says, it just serves to remind me to teach DS that he has to take responsibility himself, whatever the girl says. I remember when the male pill was talked about and women said they'd not trust a man if he said he was on the pill anyway. The only way to be 100% sure that contraception is being used is to use it yourself.

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 13:23:51

If your version and assumptions are correct:

She was stupid, irresponsible, selfish and deceitful.

He was stupid, irresponsible, selfish and complacent.

If they didn't discuss contraception of any sort then she hasn't tricked him. But if her intention was to get pregnant then she has deceived him about her intentions in their arrangement.

Both of them have behaved badly. I pity the poor baby who is going to grow up with this nasty situation hanging over him/her for the rest of their life.

ChunkyPickle Mon 15-Jul-13 13:24:36

She clearly doesn't mind that there's a baby - she wasn't using contraception. He does mind that there is a baby, he also wasn't using contraception.

No-one's been 'tricked', I don't see why she should have to list out medications she's not on to him! 1000 times, contraception is your own responsibility, not the just that of the woman!

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 13:26:10

'So even more reason to make sure that if he absolutely didn't want a baby, he should have sorted out his own contraception and/or not had sex at all. Because he's the one that's stitched up now with no choices and a lifetime of responsibility. '

Exactly, and at around 32 rather than 17 he should have been a lot more responsible. I'm surprised he doesn't have a string of offspring in his wake. Or perhaps he does?

WhoNickedMyName Mon 15-Jul-13 13:30:37

She didn't want a FWB, she wanted a sperm donor.

He's a bonehead for not considering the issue of contraception.

The only person I feel sorry for in this mess is the baby who is going to have a pair of gobshites as parents.

Yes, presumably both knew they were having unprotected sex and a pregnancy might ensue. now it's happened she's taken it like a grown up and he's taken it like a child.

Nice to see that the majority of MNers assume she has been a scheming bitch though. hmm

why on earth would you assume she wanted a baby but not him?
hey were BOTH doing EXACTLY the same thing

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 13:34:53

grin I wonder how we came to that assumption SPB?

aturtlenamedmack Mon 15-Jul-13 13:36:34

Well they both 'knowingly' had unprotected sex.
If he wasn't wearing a condom and hadn't asked about other forms of contraception then I don't feel that he can argue that she tricked him into impregnating her.
If she was trying to get pregnant then she was dishonest and irresponsible, and I say that as someone who got pregnant in a similar situation, although contraception was used and I certainly wasn't ttc.
I got the same response as your friend from the father.
This is not the kind of situation that you should want a child to be born in to.
Both were stupid, both are responsible but your friend was dishonest in her motives, so although the father should not be placing all of the blame on your friend, I'm not surprised that he is angry.

chicaguapa Mon 15-Jul-13 13:38:00

So to summarise, I think:

She did trick him as she knew they weren't using anything and that she could get pg. She wasn't honest and at 32 should know that not explicitly discussing contraception is not the same as wanting to have a baby together.

He's an idiot for allowing himself to be tricked into something so important and at 32 should know that not discussing contraception is not the same as her explicitly being on the pill.

aturtlenamedmack Mon 15-Jul-13 13:42:29

The fact that she 'holds all the cards' when it comes to the baby is all the more reason why he should have taken responsibility for preventing the pregnancy to begin with.

chicaguapa Mon 15-Jul-13 13:42:55

They were BOTH doing EXACTLY the same thing

I don't think they were.

She knew they were having unprotected sex, she knew she wasn't on the pill, she knew they weren't using a condom

He assumed they were having protected sex, he assumed she was on the pill, he knew they weren't using a condom.

Yes, he should have checked, yes it's his responsiblity too, but I don't think they thought they were doing the same thing.

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 13:43:37

Oh,oh, but it just doesn't feel the same.

I'll give you the effing same.

K8Middleton Mon 15-Jul-13 13:45:26

You can only have responsibility for yourself. He didn't take responsibility and so has ended up in a situation he doesn't like.

He was stupid. I have no opinion on her - she's not lied.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 13:45:52

'The fact that she 'holds all the cards' when it comes to the baby is all the more reason why he should have taken responsibility for preventing the pregnancy to begin with.'

The one thing he had control over, and he didn't bother. hmm
Is your friend going to the CSA to get him to financially support this child?
What a hateful, antagonistic and spite-fuelled setup this baby is going to be born into.

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 13:46:46

Also, I think when you write something it should match the rest. As we expect from polititions etc, and don't get.

Ezio Mon 15-Jul-13 13:47:24

If your in it just for sex, then both parties should be taking care of contraception, never believe the other person when they say they got it covered.

If she said she was on the pill, he still should wore a condom.

And she if she did shouldnt have been so deceitful or if a baby wasnt the intention then she should demanded protection.

Idiots the pair of them.

"Check yourself before you wreck yourself"

LondonMan Mon 15-Jul-13 13:48:05

No-one's been 'tricked'

A couple of people have said this. It's wrong. Only a complete arsehole would assume its OK to make someone a parent without their consent, so it was reasonable for him to assume she would say if she wasn't using contraception. (He was a moron for not taking into account the possibility that she's a complete arsehole.)

Erato Mon 15-Jul-13 13:49:35

If he really didn't want kids he should have used a condom. I've been in a relationship where the guy REALLY didn't want kids, and condoms were always used - it wouldn't have mattered if I had a coil + pill + diaphragm, he still would have worn a condom.

So it's his problem really. It's not news that unprotected sex = babies.

And this 'trapping a man into having a baby' bollocks? Regardless of what she said or didn't say about her contraception situation it's still his fault since he has contraception options and chose not to use them, therefore signing away his right to be upset about any baby outcome. Anyway, why you'd 100% trust someone in a casual FWB situation over something as important as potential parenthood is beyond me. Ball squarely in his court as far as I'm concerned.

aturtlenamedmack Mon 15-Jul-13 13:50:52

I don't think that's a reasonable assumption to make. Not in a situation with such serious consequences if the assumption turns out to be incorrect. He should have made no assumptions at all.

RestingUnderTheSun Mon 15-Jul-13 13:55:21

Well I think this guy has the right to be outraged of that woman behaviour. Tbh I am too.
Trying to trick someone into doing something they don't want isn't on in books.

He however should have been much more careful. If you don't want a child, you use a condom or don't have sex at all.

What I would feel very uncomfortable about is that woman then asking HIM to give her some money for the child, have him/her every other weekend etc... Because if you want a child so badly that you are prepare to try for one wo the express consent of your partner, then you should be the one to deal with all that.

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 13:56:32

Someone I knew told me a friend of his pretendied he'd stay with his pregnant partner until she 'delivered' his child.

peggyundercrackers Mon 15-Jul-13 13:56:44

sounds like your friend has been a little naughty and wanted this to happen to didnt tell him she wasnt on the pill - hes obviously presumed she was alright with having sex without a condom on so she must have been protected.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 13:58:29

That's what I tell both of my children. If you make assumptions, then don't be surprised if things go very wrong, in any endeavour.
Have a plan, a back-up plan and an emergency plan. Take responsibility for yourself and your actions.
So if DS asks a girl if she's on the pill, and she says yes, I'd still expect him to use a condom if they wanted to have sex. Considering STDs as well as conception.
Likewise with DD, I'd expect her to insist on a condom as well as whatever precautions she chose to use.
Anything else would be potentially disastrous.

FreckledLeopard Mon 15-Jul-13 13:58:57

I don't think he's been 'tricked'. As far as I'm concerned, there is no positive duty or obligation to tell someone what contraception, if any, you are on, unless they ask and you choose to answer.

If he didn't want a child, or to run the risk of having a child, he should have used a condom or not had sex. He did neither. As such, I don't believe he has the right to cry 'woe is me', or to rant and rave about the perceived injustice.

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 14:00:13

No, it wasn't reasonable of him to assume anything.

That's the whole point of the thread.

Should she have told him? Yes.

Should he have asked? Yes.

Should he have taken responsibility for his own contraception regardless of what she did or didn't say? Yes.

He wasn't 'tricked' into parenthood, that's the OP's assumption. He didn't ask her if she was taking the pill and she didn't volunteer the information that she wasn't. Which I think was equally wrong of both of them.

He assumed she was taking responsibility for both of them without bothering to ask and now he's learned the hard way that that's a stupid risk to take.

Even if she had been on the pill, it fails frequently and it doesn't prevent STI's.

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 14:00:53

Peggy - what?

5madthings Mon 15-Jul-13 14:01:16

They are both stupid. They are both equally to blame.

Fgs 'assuming' anything about contraception is bloody idiotic, you don't make assumptions you make sure you are covered, esp if you don't want a baby. If he felt so strongly about not wanting a baby he should have used a condom and spoken to her about what contraception if any she was using/would use.

Bollocks t is default its a woman's responsibility, she hasn't tricked him. She didn't lie, neither of them discussed it.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 14:02:00

Well, it's a free country, so he can rant and rave and call her whatever names he likes to anyone he chooses to.
But he will have no choice but to pay a contribution to the upbringing of the child if the mother chooses that path. He can refuse to have nothing to do with the child.
How would that make you feel, if you were that child?

aturtlenamedmack Mon 15-Jul-13 14:02:09

Can I asked whether you know what outcome your friend was hoping for?
Is she happy for the father to be entirely out of the picture or is she hoping for him to come round to the idea and be involved with the pregnancy and child?
Don't think this has much bearing on whether he should have worn a condom or not, just nosy interested.

WafflyVersatile Mon 15-Jul-13 14:02:44

I generally think we should be able to trust people to be telling the truth and be annoyed if it turns out that they were not on the pill or putting on a condom, honest.

they are adults and should have had an honest conversation and taken responsibility for themselves and to a degree the other. If you don't you have to face the consequences. For her deciding whether to terminate or have a child. His options ran out when he didn't wear a condom because from now, the decision are all hers.

'I presumed she was on the pill because she didn't say otherwise' is not taking responsibility.

Lazyjaney Mon 15-Jul-13 14:03:07

I wouldn't be surprised if he had asked and been told she was protected, if she was trying to get pregnant. Men are led by their dicks but most are not total dickheads iyswim.

Still should have used a condom for a casual sex partner anyway though

Namechangingnorma Mon 15-Jul-13 14:08:24

she has only tricked him if he wasn't aware sex made babies, which I am sure he was aware of. I think it's really nasty to keep saying poor baby too, you have no idea what the girl is like, her ability to bring up a child, her support network or her financial situation. he should not have assumed anything, if he didn't want her to get pregnant then the responsibility was solely in his court

RoxyFox211 Mon 15-Jul-13 14:12:53

yanbu. He sounds like tit. He has no right to demand what she does with their baby whilst it is in her body. Why is it always meant to be women who demand condoms if they are not on the pill?? If he was that bothered he should have thought about it first. Why we always let men off the hook in thee matters.. angry. She seems to be getting a lot of shit on here (your mate) but im completely on her side with this. She is standing up to the responsibility whilst he's doing FA! (although if he had asked her and she had lied then obviously that would change things dramatically imo).

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 14:21:33

I agree.

The pill is all well and good and should be available to women who want it. It is not an invitation to shag who you want.

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 14:23:33

For the men, I mean.

RedHelenB Mon 15-Jul-13 14:23:36

Is it just me or is money the only thing that is being mentioned? What about the fact that his poor baby may well not have any meaningful relationship with his Dad? Your friend was very wrong - yes he should have had protected sex but knowingly wanting to get pg without discussing this with potential fathers is plain WRONG!

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 14:24:47

Women's bodies are their own.

Agree with Waffly

"She knew they were having unprotected sex, she knew she wasn't on the pill, she knew they weren't using a condom

He assumed they were having protected sex, he assumed she was on the pill, he knew they weren't using a condom."

Why on earth would you assume someone is on the pill??? Why would you not assume this was exactly what it looked like - unprotected sex?

Why are people not coming on horrified to say but she assumed he'd had the snip, he tricked her into pregnancy?

Why is it OK for a man to assume the woman has taken care of the contraception but not the other way round?

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 14:29:20

Stealth I was wondering the same thing, why shouldn't she assume that he'd had the snip since he hadn't worried about a condom?

5madthings Mon 15-Jul-13 14:29:42

I know stealth its a depressing attitude towards women.

I agreed with freckledleopard at the top of trhr page.

happyyonisleepyyoni Mon 15-Jul-13 14:31:55

YANBU

JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 14:32:09

SPB that is my point! I am quite shocked at some of the responses on here tbh!

I am pretty convinced she didn't lie about being on the pill, she has sworn it was never mentioned and I believe her. If she's lying however then my opinion would completely change!

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 14:32:12

I think some people are making alot of assumptions.

You don't know how long she'd been a friend or what their relationship "with benefits" entailed. She/he could both have known about their other partners or perhaps neither or them slept around (they're 30 not 18). It could have been a one off when a bit drunk or a regular f**k buddy situation.
As for the child she at least knew and liked the father. She might be perfectly up to the challenge of raising the child without his financial help or bitterness.So they weren't married but plenty of families planned or otherwise end in disaster. Perhaps she'll meet someone new who'll be like a father to her child.

I speak as someone with the exact same experience.It wasn't so much that I wanted/planned to be pregnant but I realised time was ticking and was happy to be pregnant if it happened.

32 might sound young but when you have to find someone new (a year or more?), date for a while (a year or more?), get pregnant (6 months if you're luck?) and carry the baby to term (9 months) waiting 4 years or more is a risky prospect.

WafflyVersatile Mon 15-Jul-13 14:33:37

I hoped (and maybe still do) that one good thing that would come out of the CSA is that men would stop 'assuming' after seeing their older siblings, peers etc have to pay up rather than just walk away because it was the woman's problem.

I guess it will take a while yet.

JaffaMyCake Mon 15-Jul-13 14:34:02

AFAIC we all know sex makes babies. If you do not want a baby then you make sure your contraception is covered IMO, rightly or wrongly, it is not up to the other person.

Lazyjaney Mon 15-Jul-13 14:37:04

>Why are people not coming on horrified to say but she assumed he'd had the snip, he tricked her into pregnancy?<

Because in that case probably he would want her to have the baby and she'd want the abortion?

formicadinosaur Mon 15-Jul-13 14:41:22

If he doesn't want a baby, he should use protection.

Val007 Mon 15-Jul-13 14:44:50

He got what he deserved. He wanted free sex, but there is nothing free in this life - someoone has to always pay!

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 14:47:53

'I think it's really nasty to keep saying poor baby too, you have no idea what the girl is like, her ability to bring up a child, her support network or her financial situation.'

Nothing to do with that at allconfused
Every child should have the right to two parents that love them and who want to be involved in their lives. This child is unlikely to have that, unless the parents can come to an adult agreement about how to handle the consequences of their FWB arrangement.

Namechangingnorma Mon 15-Jul-13 14:48:32

if the baby doesn't have a meaningful relationship with its father then that again is solely his responsibility, it isn't down to the lady in question, she can only develop her own relationship with her child and make it as easy as possible for the child's father

formicadinosaur Mon 15-Jul-13 14:49:32

He should take responsibility for his own actions.

Namechangingnorma Mon 15-Jul-13 14:52:54

eyesunderock - ideally yes but children can still have a loving, well balanced childhood without both parents, just making the point that we know so little about the mother's circumstances.

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 14:54:22

What a load of anti woman bollocks,

He knew it was unprotected as HE didn't wear a condom,he just took the not my problem stance, she knew it was unprotected but the consequences don't matter to her,clearly they do to him so boo hoo his I'm alright jack attitude failed and this time he's not alright.

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 14:54:25

Why would your opinion change OP? You've already said you think she kept quiet deliberately as she was hoping to get pregnant.

That's not really any different to lying to him about being on the pill.

I still think that both of them are in the wrong if your version of this and your assumptions are correct.

But neither one of them had any more responsibility for using contraception that the other.

If they both ignored it, made assumptions about the other one or didn't both to ask/tell as it suited them not to bother, they are both as bad as each other.

And there's a baby coming into this mess who could have a lifetime of "your father didn't want you/your mother deceived me" to cope with.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 14:55:04

if he genuinely didn't ask... and who the fuck doesn't ask he is an idiot. If he did and they were friends and trusted each other she's a total asshole.

And they are both idiots for thinking unprotected sex with someone you aren't in a relationship with and have no way of knowing their full sexual health is a good idea.

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 14:56:09

Namechangingnorma spot on.

Dahlen Mon 15-Jul-13 14:56:40

What I still don't get - from either of them - is how you can repeatedly 'forget' contraception for a whole 3 months' worth of unprotected sex. confused Getting carried away in heat of the moment may be one thing, but to carry on for another 3 months? What did they think would happen, especially the woman who can't even use the pathetic excuse of 'assuming' contraception was taken care of.

I stand by my case that she was irresponsible (towards her health, the prospect of pregnancy, and the health of the foetus), immature (unable to broach the subject) and selfish (not considering the emotional consequences for all involved, particularly the baby).

If she did choose to do this deliberately, my sentiments are even stronger. Having a baby as a single parent is not a problem, but if you do it responsibly you should find an amicable co-parent or a sperm donor.

But absolutely none of this takes away from the fact that the man bears 100% responsibility for his own sperm. She didn't rob him of it or pierce a condom. He chose to have unprotected sex (idiotic in itself with a new partner) for a whole three months without checking about contraception. He's entitled to feel anyway he feels - duped or whatever - but that would be abdicating his personal responsibility. We are all responsible for our actions even if you weren't fully aware of all the facts at the time. Ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law when it comes to tax evasion, for example, and let's not forget the old adage "you can't con an honest man".

Ultimately, it doesn't matter who did what. If you consent to sex, you consent to the consequences no matter how much effort you have made to control the outcome. Any resulting baby is the product of two parents and therefore two parents have responsibility.

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 14:59:56

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps they could have been friends for years.

Mine lived with me for 3 years and we were friends 5 years before that. Fully aware of all his partners and he mine.It was a close relationship just not a sexual one (apart from the one time).

He is entirely to blame for the situation he is in through his choice not to use a condom. He made a choice to have unprotected sex and that's that.

Her behaviour is also awful but for a different reason. Her motivation does not change the fact that he is responsible for his own situation, however.

themaltesecat Mon 15-Jul-13 15:02:42

God, it sounds like one of those infernal poems we had written on the toilet wall at school.

One night of pleasure, nine months of pain
Lyin' in hospital, baby without a name...

OP, I agree with you. If he didn't want a baby, he should have worn a condom. It's really rancid not to if you're not in a stable relationship with someone, anyway. Ick.

I can't really congratulate your friend on pulling such a plonker, but hey ho.

Can I ask a question? If there was a man pill, how many of you would have a casual relationship and use the man's word that he was on the pill as sole contraception? Even if she had told him she was protected he should still have protected himself and used a condom.

Namechangingnorma Mon 15-Jul-13 15:08:20

this thread is teaming with misogyny

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 15:11:32

Really?
I see a lot of posts saying that they are both responsible for their own actions and that if he didn't want to be a father he should have used a condom and that even if he feels trapped and resentful, he is still liable for the consequences of the sex he has had.
Even if she intended to use him as a sperm donor, he made the choice to have unprotected sex for three months.

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 15:17:53

How many of them have passed comment on her as a person and on her future parenting skills?

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 15:18:27

Or the assumption that its about money

Namechangingnorma Mon 15-Jul-13 15:21:21

agreed Sockreturningpixie

WafflyVersatile Mon 15-Jul-13 15:23:34

Ehric That's slightly different too because if he told me he'd had the snip and I got pregnant, I still have choices.

If I don't want to get pregnant I can use contraception. If that doesn't work/happen i can get the MAP, if I miss my chance for that I can have an abortion. I can tell him or not tell him. I can give his name to CSA or not.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 15:28:00

I think both of them will be shit parents, and hugely selfish/stupid.

I'm not being sexist.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 15:30:04

I was ready for a baby before dh, so I said to him that I would be going off the pill as I wasn't going to take measures against what I wanted and polutte my body besides.

He had every right to use a condom or not, but he knew where he stood.

If a woman had been told by her partner who wanted a child that he had a vasectomy and he hadn't I'd think the same about the person.

Dahlen Mon 15-Jul-13 15:30:20

I think it's valid to judge her potential parenting skills TBH - anyone who takes such a long-term cavalier attitude (let's not forget she chose to take this risk repeatedly over the course of three months) to their sexual health is unlikely to make a great parent. Bad decision making in one area of life tends to be mirrored in another. Parenting is the most important job any of us can ever do, and just like jobs, some people are better at it than others.

I still think the man is the greater twat though, because at least the mother is prepared to accept the consequences of her behaviour, unlike him. In her case finding out she is pregnant may at least prove a pivotal moment in her life where she becomes more responsible, whereas in his case he just seems to be trying to run away and behaving more irresponsibly than ever.

FeegleFion Mon 15-Jul-13 15:41:11

...pretty sure there's a male contraceptive pill now...for those men who really don't want babies.

He's a fucking eejit if he didn't once consider that this woman was, probably, extremely fertile.

They are both consenting, willing participants and are both to blame for the creation of this baby.

I'm pretty outraged at those with the opinion that he's a poor man who has been cruelly trapped by this succubus. confused

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 15:42:30

I don't think they will both be shit parents, but I do think they sound like selfish and irresponsible people right now. And it doesn't matter what her motives were or how he feels about it and their financial situation is secondary to how the baby may feel as it grows up if they don't get their act together and put it first from now on.

Men have limited choices. Condom, vasectomy, abstinence. If they don't avail themselves of any of those choices they should not be surprised if a pregnancy or STI results from their sexual activity.

Women (here in GB at least) have more choices, both to prevent a pregnancy in the first place or to continue or end one.

But both parties have to take responsibility for their own contraception.

No contraception is foolproof, not everyone can be relied upon to us contraception properly. Both parties need to take reasonable measures to protect themselves.

Condoms are the only way to prevent an STI if you are sexually active so perhaps calling them contraception is misleading. They should always be worn in a casual relationship to prevent STIs.

No assumptions should be made, perhaps especially by the party who then (and quite rightly) has no say over what to do about any resulting pregnancy.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Mon 15-Jul-13 15:44:58

Why are people assuming she'll be a shit mum? Her intentions of getting pregnant may not have been great but that doesn't mean her parenting skills won't be.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Mon 15-Jul-13 15:47:07

Yes, he was an idiot.
Yes, he should now pay for the child.
Yes, he should be a hell of a lot more cautious about who she has sex with in the future.
Yes I think she baited the trap, and he walked into it, prick first. He's an adult and made his choice.

^^

I got this far and didn't bother reading further because this sums it up. He's responsible for his fertility, her for hers. If you enter a casual sexual relationship, you cannot just assume the woman is 'taking care of it' and obviously doesn't care about getting a disease hmm

She chose not to discuss her contraception, he accepted this, didn't protect himself and blames her.

Not a lot of sympathy.

Also, he has no right to demand an abortion and if she wants CSA, that's her child's right.

Also going to be up to her to explain where baby's father is when baby is older, but that's to do with contraception.

With no emotion, it just comes back to:

Regardless of gender, you are responsible for your own fertility. If you're angry that a sexual partner didn't use contraception, you have no one to blame but yourself. If a sexual partner misled you or outright lied EG: I'm on the pill and infertile, or he poked holes in a condom? My response would be very different. Lying isn't the same as not offering up information on your sexual status to a FWB. Took the risks, can't be angry that nature happened.

(Though I'd still think he was stupid for not wearing a condom! So many diseases around and the pill isn't 100%)

Erato Mon 15-Jul-13 15:52:16

I really don't think this is about either party having to volunteer information about their contraceptive or fertility situation. Since when has sex involved compulsory prior disclosure of all relevant information?

If you have sex, you must assume that there may be a baby as a result. (And STDs as well, but that's not the question of the thread).

If you don't want a baby, you must take responsibility for preventing pregnancy. Contraception isn't hard to come by these days.

In any situation, but PARTICULARLY a casual one, both parties need to look after themselves. The potential outcome (unwanted child) is so grave that anything less than proceeding with extra caution is both stupid and naive.

As a side note, this thread has reminded me about how annoyed I am that there still isn't a reliable temporary non-barrier form of male contraception.

WafflyVersatile Mon 15-Jul-13 15:54:46

I wonder if the man has spent any time at all being angry at himself for not using a condom or if it's all at her.

I don't think we can tell from this whether either of them would make good parents. Very few parents have never done anything irresponsible at some point in their lives.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Mon 15-Jul-13 15:59:56

Read the thread now.

So... Because he assumed she was on the pill it's her fault?

Her intentions may be morally ambiguous, but he was the moron who took the chance for unprotected sex.

He really has no right to be angry.

Dahlen Mon 15-Jul-13 16:02:55

For some people becoming a parent marks the end of irresponsible behaviour. However, there is a world of difference IMO between carrying out irresponsible acts from time to time (getting drunk to the point of collapse, a ONS, etc) to sustained patterns of irresponsible behaviour. The latter tend to be far more indicative of an ingrained character trait.

Lord alone knows I've done my fair share of irresponsible things before now, but I can't ever imagine a situation where I would have felt it was ok to have unprotected sex for 3 months. AIDS, hepatitis - both incurable and far more life changing/limiting than an unwanted pregnancy. Anyone who doesn't think about those things for 3 whole months would have me questioning their ability to live independently on their own, let alone bring another life into the world. That goes for both the man and the woman BTW.

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 16:03:18

My stbexh has a child he neither wanted nor loves, she's a delightful girl and a pleasure to be around he says her mother tricked him.

My stance on the matter has always been he should have taken precautions himself and if she was going to trick anybody she's intelligent enough to pick a decent man not a nasty bully like him, her stance on the matter has always been she did not trick him in any way she actually had the implant.

He's just another prime example of a man who does not care what happens as long as he gets his pleasure its always someone else's responsibility.

And I have no idea why that's relevant I just remembered his rantings on the subject.

movingonandup Mon 15-Jul-13 16:20:36

I'm pretty shocked at some of the attitudes on here.
As far as both of them were concerned they were having unprotected sex so a baby is the obvious outcome. For him to be shocked let alone angry is unreasonable.

If he'd had the snip, he never mentioned it and she never asked.
If she was on the pill, she never mentioned it and he never asked.
They both chose not to use condoms so for both of them the sex was unprotected based on what they knew.

Plus they both knew sex leads to babies - the only difference was the woman was happy to accept this outcome whereas the bloke wasn't yet did absolutely nothing to enquire about it let alone prevent it.

If he finds himself a father after 3 months of unprotected sex having made no attempt at contraception and not even discussed it with his partner, what the hell did he think would happen?

"If a woman had been told by her partner who wanted a child that he had a vasectomy and he hadn't I'd think the same about the person."

Did I miss the bit where she told him she was on the pill? Or is it simply the assumption that every woman of child bearing age is responsible for contraception and the poor man only has to take responsibility if explicitly asked to?

D0oinMeCleanin Mon 15-Jul-13 16:36:33

YANBU. Abstinence is the only form of fail safe contraception, any eejit over the age of 13 knows that sex can result in babies, lest of all unprotected sex.

He was stupid to assume that she was on the pill and even more stupid to assume she would abort if she became pregnant.

He and he alone is responsible for his contraception, to trust someone else with it when the fall-out is so life changing is beyond silly.

If was adamant he did not want children he should've abstained or at the very least used a condom to minimise risk.

GreenSkittles Mon 15-Jul-13 16:40:53

Sorry if I missed one of your posts Jaffa but why do you think your friend did this deliberately? She either told you she did, or you're just guessing.

My feeling is that anyone who is against being a parent should take steps to stop it happening, and obviously men should be more pro-active (though oddly they don't tend to be) because once conception has happened the matter is pretty much out of their hands.

Whothefuckfarted Mon 15-Jul-13 16:41:01

These days I think by about age 14 most all children/adults are old enough to know better

He should have asked about whether she was on the pill instead of assuming, especially in a FWB situation.

YANBU in my opinion.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 16:41:31

SPB, I never claimed to read all 7 pages, I said in earlier post he was an idiot if he didn't ask. I don't think most women are out to get men hmm equally I don't think most men are dumb enough to assume women are on the pill with out asking.

I do believe however if you want to get pregnant and you know the person is having sex with you is doing so because he believes you are on the pill, you've not exactly got the moral high ground. Adults discuss having children, they don't think ah well if he's dumb enough to assume I'm on the pill this will all turn out great.. It is not misogynist to assume this person is selfish and stupid and my mind won't be changed on that. Is he also a fuck wit? Yes, yes he is. The only one who will realy suffer is the child.

Sperm is all around if you want it. What happened to the good old fashioned way of ordering it off the internet form a willing donor?

He didn't ask.
Why would he assume she was on the pill?

Keztrel Mon 15-Jul-13 16:48:08

He's an idiot and has no right to be angry at her. She's an idiot too, but I can only assume she wanted to get pregnant.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 16:48:57

I'm not saying he isn't wrong, I have no idea what their previous relationship was, maybe she had previously been on the pill maybe she hadn't. I'm fully accepting the fact she hadn't been and that he is an idiot.

But are you disagreeing that two adults shouldn't maybe have a discussion before trying to make a human? Was he an irresponsible twat? Should he be held financially responsible? Yes and yes. Does that change the fact that maybe he isn't someone she should choose as the person she has to see at every school play for 18 years?

Keztrel Mon 15-Jul-13 16:53:52

I definitely wouldn't say she trapped him into it though - what kind of utter fool doesn't discuss contraception before shagging without a condom? But I will never in a billion years understand why someone would choose to bring a new life into the world in this way.

yes, I agree. She is a fool. but they both "chose" this.

Chunderella Mon 15-Jul-13 17:03:33

Truly irresponsible, on both sides. As this seems to have turned into a comparison, I'll throw in my two cents. If this was deliberate, her behaviour is more objectionable than his and his stupidity greater than hers. Both have been equally irresponsible, and this is why:

1. They were both irresponsible to have continual unprotected sex with a new partner. The potential health consequences are severe, and one could argue that we all have a responsibility to do what we can to curb the spread of STIs.

2. Her behaviour in terms of the sex has been worse than his because his intention was some consequence free sex, hers was to bring a child into the world without even discussing it with the father first. It is the intention that matters here, and hers was worse. She hasn't tricked him, because there was no lying involved, but she has been unbelievably irresponsible. However, his behaviour since learning the news has gone a long way towards evening things out.

3. He has been way more stupid than her because ultimately, she got what she wanted. I don't agree with it, but it was smart. Whereas for a flavour of just how dense he has been, reverse the sexes here. Imagine she hadn't wanted a pregnancy, but assumed he'd had a vasectomy or was on the male pill and had therefore, without asking, abrogated any responsibility for contraception. Think what we'd all be saying then! Well, this is the same. Additionally, he appears not to understand that once his sperm are out into the world, he can't control what happens to them. They aren't like Frisbees, they don't come back.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 17:03:52

I know this might sound a bit miserable but before dh and I tried for a baby I actually considered whether he was the kind of person I'd be happy to be divorced and raising a child with. I really wish men and women would put more thought in to having a child, being an unwanted child (and even if one parent loves you)..it's harsh knowing there is someone out there who doesn't.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 17:05:10

They [sperm] aren't like Frisbees, they don't come back.

I will use this one day!

Chunderella I think you mean boomerang grin

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 17:08:00

They are both as bad as each other, but he should have used a condom if he wasn't prepared to pay for a child. She was out of order for not letting him know that she wanted a baby.

Now that she is pregnant though, I think the law should give him the right to waive all his responsibility towards the child if he wants to. The mother has that right because she can have an abortion if she doesn't want the responsibility, so a man should have that right too. It is fundamentally wrong that the woman can make such a life changing choice for someone else.

Chunderella Mon 15-Jul-13 17:09:41

Maybe I do! Instead, this is like someone desperately trying to recall an email that everyone's already seen.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 17:10:21

that's true, I guess they are just like frisbees! I'll use the revamped version when I steal it later grin

Clouds and yet the man is able to make the life changing choice on behalf of the baby that he or she will receive no financial support from their father?

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 17:12:05

cloudandtrees ts not quite fair to say she can have an abortion..not everyone can have an abortion. His chance to not become a father was before he impregnated someone.

Comes down to when a man and a woman have sex and she gets pregnant, he is allowed to stamp his feet and yell IT'S NOT FAIR like a petulant child, and have everyone soothing him and calling her a bitch, while she (the woman) is meant to get on with it. No leaving your child in childcare, bad for them. No leaving work and staying on benefits, scrounger. No asking the man for money, poor little delicate flower.

GreenSkittles Mon 15-Jul-13 17:13:31

We are all, including the OP, just assuming she wanted to get pregnant.

'*I think* my friend wanted to get pregnant' is not the same thing as 'My friend told me she wanted to get pregnant.'

I had a shitstorm to deal with from my ex when I got pregnant, accusing me of trapping him, when it was him who assured me he didn't need to use a condom because he was infertile (40 and no children).

D0oinMeCleanin Mon 15-Jul-13 17:14:19

'It is fundamentally wrong that the woman can make such a life changing choice for someone else.'

He made the choice to put his fertility into someone else's hands without so much as a little chat first.

I am happy assume that OP's friend did not force him to enter without a condom.

Men make the choice when they choose to have penetrative sex. If they're not happy for the woman to have ultimate control about what could happen next, then they should keep it in their pants.

life is full of choices and their consequences. Sometimes the consequcnes aren't as we planned. Almost never do we get to deny all responsibility. Unless you happen to be a man who had sex with a woman.

Erato Mon 15-Jul-13 17:15:13

It is fundamentally wrong that the woman can make such a life changing choice for someone else.

She didn't make that choice for him. He's the one that chose not to put on a condom but still have sex. His sperm didn't magically get up her fanjo unaided. Unlike women, men can only make their decision (baby / no baby) pre-shag, so therefore rather than that absolving them of responsibility it means they should be more careful about avoiding pregnancy not get away with "it wasn't my idea" bullshit.

Or would you prefer to return to the 1950s?

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 17:15:58

I think* my friend wanted to get pregnant' is not the same thing as 'My friend told me she wanted to get pregnant

We'd all much prefer she did it on purpose than that there are two people in this world who don't know how babies are made out there raising a child.

kim147 Mon 15-Jul-13 17:16:12

You create life - you have a responsibility towards the child you helped to make.

Birth control has "put the fact you can get pregnant / make someone pregnant" far from people's minds. But that's what sex is for.

It may seem harsh that the father has no control over a pregnancy but that's life. A man cannot dictate if a woman has an abortion or not.

Unfortunately, the CSA are pretty ineffective when it comes to a parent living up to their responsibility.

GreenSkittles Mon 15-Jul-13 17:16:18

What a super idea Clouds And not open to abuse at all... hmm

Erato Mon 15-Jul-13 17:22:18

Incidentally, why does there seem to be a subtext to this thread that putting on a condom is for some reason a bloody difficult thing for a man to do and really we shouldn't be expecting it?

No one bats an eyelid when women take hormonal forms of contraception that can have horrible side effects and yet when a side-effect free (as long as you're not latex intolerant) barrier form of contraception for men is discussed apparently it's understandable in some way for men not to want to do it, and not to use it routinely even in casual (possible STD risk) relationships?

TheCatIsUpTheDuff Mon 15-Jul-13 17:25:05

Cloudsandtrees - I would agree with you IF she had actively deceived him, for example by telling him she was on the pill.

As far as we know, neither of them mentioned contraception, so both are equally responsible for the consequences.

I know a girl who did what the op's friend did. The kid is 12 now. He is a v cherished wanted child with a devoted mother but a dad who was destroyed by the situation and has been v lost for many years now. He stayed around and he does his best to maintain a relationship with his son but he is v unhappy this I know.
I don't know what the answer is. No one should tell any woman to have a termination but I do feel for these blokes railroaded in to fatherhood.

the answer is simple and taught in biology lessons up and down te land (or should be)

D0oinMeCleanin Mon 15-Jul-13 17:28:10

They're not railroaded into fatherhood.

They and they alone put themselves into that situation when they chose to have penetrative sex without a condom.

FFS, why is this is so hard to understand? These threads are fucking scary.

Men are equally capable of making sure they have their own contraception in place before having sex. It's not fucking hard for christ sake.

themaltesecat Mon 15-Jul-13 17:28:47

Sockreturningpixie Mon 15-Jul-13 16:03:18
My stbexh has a child he neither wanted nor loves, she's a delightful girl and a pleasure to be around he says her mother tricked him.

That's so awful. What an arsehole. I will never understand those who, being blessed with beautiful children, fail to love them. They're horribly deficient.

What a pair of twits.
It's really that simple.
Equally to blame, equally responsible.

Lazyjaney Mon 15-Jul-13 17:31:37

"He made the choice to put his fertility into someone else's hands without so much as a little chat first"

If it was just in her hands he'd have been ok, it's where else he shot it that is causing the problem grin

I find extremely difficult to believe that "a little chat" was not had, in 3 months of bonking - and that all followed from that....

GoshlyoHeavens Mon 15-Jul-13 17:32:22

use a condom. i cannot see why not.

tittytittyhanghang Mon 15-Jul-13 17:36:29

By God this thread makes for depressing reading, tricked, trapped,railroaded. FUCK OFF. He had unprotected sex. She had unprotected sex. The difference being that she is the only one willing to take responsibility for their actions. Yet its the woman getting most of the vitriol. Him 'assuming' she was on the pill makes him an even bigger fucking idiot than he already is.

movingonandup Mon 15-Jul-13 17:37:31

his because his intention was some consequence free sex

How do you get to that conclusion???
He was having unprotected sex with a woman not knowing if she was on the pill. The obvious consequence is an STI. The probable consequence is pregnancy. He totally put himself in the frame to become a father by not asking about contraception and taking zero action to prevent pregnancy

I think the law should give him the right to waive all his responsibility towards the child if he wants to

Why? He will become a father in the same way that most men do - through choosing to have unprotected sex knowing perfectly well what might happen. She didn't steal his sperm in his sleep! She didn't lie about contraception.

I do feel for these blokes railroaded in to fatherhood

Railroaded in the sense that once the woman is pregnant, it is too late to decide they should have been more careful since they know (and knew all along) that they have zero choice about continuing a pregnancy. And quite rightly so. If she'd lied then that would be railroading (but even then if is is that casual and he is that determined not to become a parent, he should have taken the measures needed to ensure he doesn't end up in that situation.

Dahlen Mon 15-Jul-13 17:42:14

I strongly disagree with the notion that the father being able to abdicate all responsibility is comprable to a woman choosing to have an abortion.

It's a complete misnomer to think that this is about fairness between the parents. It's about fairness to the child. A child has two parents and has the right to expect support from both. Oftentimes that means being unfair to one of the parents, but better that than unfairness to the child, who certainly didn't end up as an unwanted responsibility through the results of his/her own actions.

Chunderella Mon 15-Jul-13 18:13:49

That's true movingonandup, for all I know he genuinely intended to get the friend pregnant without discussing it with her first, but has since changed his mind. It seems more likely that he didn't, though.

Anyway, there is clearly a distinction between doing something with intent and doing it due to ignorance, recklessness, whatever you want to call it. The issue is whether the one is morally different from the other. But the intent is very obviously not the same- she and he appear to have had two totally different outcomes in mind here. I think hers is worse than his. One can think it is worse to be intentional than idiotic, as I do in this case, and not excuse the latter. This reminds me of the thread the other week about whether a pregnancy is truly accidental if one or both of the parties has been stupid.

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 18:23:23

Cloudsandtrees "Now that she is pregnant though, I think the law should give him the right to waive all his responsibility towards the child if he wants to."

That would be wide open to abuse and takes nothing of the child's wants or needs into consideration.

"The mother has that right because she can have an abortion if she doesn't want the responsibility, so a man should have that right too."

Waiving all responsibility is not the same as having a serious operation that affects the woman physically and emotionally and ends a life (I am pro-choice btw).

It might possibly compare to say she can put the baby up for adoption, in which case both the man and woman know they have a child in the world that they don't see or provide for.

But even then, the woman will have carried the child for nine months and everything in her life from her health to her finances could have been altered in every way possible. Once you are pregnant there is no easy get out clause for a woman regardless of her choice.

"It is fundamentally wrong that the woman can make such a life changing choice for someone else."

Which is why the man should take control at the point in which he can make the choice, when he choses to have sex with or without a condom.

Hamwidgeandcheps "No one should tell any woman to have a termination but I do feel for these blokes railroaded in to fatherhood."

They are not railroaded, they make a choice to have unprotected sex. Contraception and safe sex is the responsibility of both parties, so even if a woman claims to be on the pill or otherwise protected, the man still needs to take his own precautions. If for no other reason than to protect them both from a possible STI by using the condom and because the pill etc is not 100% effective.

If they have chosen not to bother with a condom, they have made a choice and can't claim to have been railroaded.

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 18:42:55

How many of you with boys will teach them that condoms are there responsibility and how many will teach them that its not there problem?

Its flaming obvious that ones a sensible lesson the other sets a piss poor example encourages feckless behaviour

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 18:46:37

I think this thread is definitely going a long way to explaining why it's so common for men to be sexually incontenent, irresponsible adolescents for the entirety of their lives.

Chunderella Mon 15-Jul-13 18:47:35

I only have DD, but yes if I ever have a boy I'll be drumming the condom message into him. My little brother asked me to get him some when he was 15 and began to be sexually active, so of course I did, and have had no unscheduled nieces or nephews yet. Hopefully DD will step up if her hypothetical little brother does the same.

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 18:48:11

I didn't expect people to agree with me, but I still think it's unfair. Two people make the same mistake, and only one has the choice on how it affects their life.

I will be teaching my boys that condoms are always their responsibility because that is their only chance to prevent the consequences, and I will be warning them that there are women out there that will get pregnant on purpose even if they say they don't want to. I know that's not exactly what happened in this case, but this woman was still deceitful.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 18:49:02

Several of us have said that we have and will, Pixie. And that they would be foolish to take a partner's word on something so potentially life-changing and hazardous.
Contraception is the responsibility of the individual, especially in a casual relationship.

D0oinMeCleanin Mon 15-Jul-13 18:53:11

<head/desk>

They both a get a choice, unfortunately biology dictates that the man's choice ends when he chooses to have penetrative sex without a condom and when he chooses to trust that the condom will not fail. He can also choose to abstain if he is certain that he does not want children with the woman willing to have sex with him.

That is the man's choice and it is a choice.

If you are man and you don't want children, wear a condom or abstain. It's that simple. Men have those options.

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 18:53:12

What do you think is less fair, CloudsandTrees? Being able to force someone to have an abortion or give birth against their will? Do you think women are farm animals?

IneedAsockamnesty Mon 15-Jul-13 18:54:14

Its not about taking someone else's word for it, its about being responsible for your OWN actions and choices.

gordyslovesheep Mon 15-Jul-13 18:54:23

I think this thread is definitely going a long way to explaining why it's so common for men to be sexually incontenent, irresponsible adolescents for the entirety of their lives

YY to this

Bonsoir Mon 15-Jul-13 18:54:36

Yes.

Chunderella Mon 15-Jul-13 18:55:41

It's not fair CloudsAndTrees but that's mother nature for you, she's an arsehole sometimes. Just like it's not fair that when two people make the same mistake, one of them gets pregnant which is more risky than being unpregnant, and the other doesn't. And one of them has to endure what will almost always be a painful and somewhat dangerous experience when the product of that conception exits her body. Whereas the other need never engage with the situation again if they don't want to.

Xales Mon 15-Jul-13 19:04:31

Assuming there were no lies.

If he didn't want the risk of a child then he should have (before sex) asked not assumed his sexual partner was on some form on contraception.

He could then have chosen to use a condom knowing the failure rate for them or not had sex.

He did not ask, he did not use a condom. The only person at fault for their contraceptive choice is him.

That he did not ask and did not ensure he was protected could be assumed that he was happy for the consequence of a child as much as he assumed the woman was dealing with contraception.

Absolutely no point him chucking his toys out the pram over his choices now.

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 19:08:45

Of course, we can imagine that his abject failure to even discuss contraception, let alone take the unprecedented step of using it, might have led this woman to suppose he was not entirely against having a baby either.

Lazyjaney Mon 15-Jul-13 19:16:10

"I didn't expect people to agree with me, but I still think it's unfair. Two people make the same mistake, and only one has the choice on how it affects their life"

I do agree with you, its not right that only one person gets to define the future of the pregnancy and the other has to pay up no matter what.

I also find it very hard to believe the bloke wasn't led to believe she had contraception quite early in a 3 month relationship.

The lesson for our sons is to use condoms no matter what has been promised re contraception - especially if there is a possibility of a biological clock ticking......

BoneyBackJefferson Mon 15-Jul-13 19:21:49

I doubt that contraception was never discussed, but this thread is why a man should always use a condom.

(and if it ever becomes available the male pill)

needaholidaynow Mon 15-Jul-13 19:23:47

Both as bad as one another. He didn't want a baby, he should have worn a condom sure. But she can't honestly not use anything herself, or still use something and fall pregnant and expect the dad to be hitting the roof with delight.

I suppose he's stuffed really. He'll get a letter from the CSA in a few months. He might not want to play a physical or emotional part, but financially he's screwed.

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 19:25:14

It's not particularly fair that although there are two of us, and we have two children, I had to carry both of them.

You cannot redress biological "unfairness" with the law.

Men have a choice. If you choose to have sex, then there is a chance of pregnancy. You can significantly reduce that risk by using a condom. This is perfectly common knowledge.

If you choose firstly to take the risk, then your next choice is whether to minimize the risk. Men have choices.

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 19:26:21

We are, as I said, assuming that she knew he was against her getting pregnant while she wasn't. His actions to prevent it were as non-existent as hers, why do we assume that she didn't think he'd mind either?

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 19:34:41

"I didn't expect people to agree with me, but I still think it's unfair. Two people make the same mistake, and only one has the choice on how it affects their life."

Whichever choice the woman makes though, there's never an easy choice.

A man has an easy choice. Do I want to have sex with this woman? Yes. In that case shall I bother to put this bit of rubber, which could save our lives and prevent an unwanted pregnancy, on my penis or shall I leave all that responsibility down to her because it feels a bit better without it and I can't be bothered?

The fact that he has to make his, agreeably more limited but final choice, at an earlier stage than a woman might have to make hers, isn't fair. But it's nature. Which is why it's vital that he makes the right one before he has sex. Shouting "it's not fair" after the fact won't change anything, and nor should it because to suggest any other way is to put women and children at risk of abuse.

I have a son too young for this talk as yet, but I have spent years reminding my niece that once you are pregnant you can never go back. You have to go forward with a pregnancy or a termination and neither is an easy choice.

And I will tell my son what I tell my niece and my nephew. A sensible man would always wear a condom regardless of whatever other contraception was in use. A decent man would always wear one. There is no such thing as 100% safe sex and once a pregnancy occurs there is no easy way out, no easy decision for anybody. Men do not have the right to control a woman's body. Nature is not fair, to either party.

FasterStronger Mon 15-Jul-13 19:36:50

Apolcalys: if they did not discuss contraception, i very doubt they discussed having a baby together

he wanted sex without a condom. he got sex without a condom. asking if she was on the pill would have lead to him having to behave responsibly. which i doubt he wanted.

needaholidaynow Mon 15-Jul-13 19:40:47

I will be making sure my sons take contraception so seriously. The last thing I want for them is for them to be a father to a child they just do not want and be forced to take responsibilities.

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 19:41:39

No, men don't have the right to control a women's body.

But a woman shouldn't have the right to control a mans finances.

It would be better for everyone concerned if men were able to waive their rights and responsibilities in the same way a woman is if she chooses to abort or to give a child up for adoption.

That way, women wouldn't kid themselves that the man might come through and love their child when he simply won't, and she will be able to make an informed choice about her pregnancy and how she pays for it.

Personally, I feel very lucky to be the one that had to carry and feed the babies, I think men miss out there.

IT'S NOT FAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIR
Woman - make it right

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 19:42:49

Hats the point, Faste. Had they discussed it, he might have found out some useful information. But he didn't. He made an assumption, we imagine, because we don't really know. I'm just hypothesizing that, in the absence of any word or action to the contrary from him, she might have assumed that he was as ok with pregnancy resulting from unprotected sex as she was.

stupid manchildren

needaholidaynow Mon 15-Jul-13 19:44:45

But a woman shouldn't have the right to control a mans finances

It would be better for everyone concerned if men were able to waive their rights and responsibilities in the same way a woman is if she chooses to abort or to give a child up for adoption.

^^ This basically.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 19:44:56

trust me dh isn't missing out. been sick 3 times today. and in a few short months I get to push another 10 pounder most likely a baby out of my vagina.

fucking magical

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 19:45:17

Stupid women who think that men shouldn't have to offer financial support for their own children and should be entitled to abidicate responsibility at ever single point in their feckless existences.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 19:46:56

what about men who claim to have had a vasectomy? or who have all ready got 20kids being paid for by the state?

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 19:48:11

children supported by one parent are more likely to live in poverty. cloud are you an MRA?

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 19:49:53

My experience of pregnancy may be somewhat different to yours then...

Women don't have control of men's finances when they have a child together. What an odd thing to say.

I actually can see this from both sides. My biological father made no contribution, material or otherwise, to my upbringing, which left me free to have an uncomplicated father daughter relationship with my adoptive father. But my sister's similar situation has not had a similarly straightforward outcome. And looking at wider society, I think a waiving of responsibility by one parent is something to be strongly discouraged.

thebody Mon 15-Jul-13 19:53:10

poor child.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Mon 15-Jul-13 19:54:55

It is fundamentally wrong that the woman can make such a life changing choice for someone else

Well he should have put a bloody condom on then! He made the choice when he decided not to! He wasn't railroaded into fatherhood, he knew that would be a possible consequence of having unprotected sex.

I can't believe that some people are giving this bloke the sympathy vote.

BoneyBackJefferson Mon 15-Jul-13 19:59:20

Is it fair that she can stop taking contraception and have a child with out consent?----- No its not

Should he be forced to pay for a child he did not want want but helped create?----------------------------Yes.

"ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 19:45:17

Stupid women who think that men shouldn't have to offer financial support for their own children and should be entitled to abidicate responsibility at ever single point in their feckless existences."

Oh yes very true. There are plenty of women willing to make everything fucking perfect in a man's life, because god forbid a MAN should ever not have everything be perfect for him. Screw what happens to her, that's just biological unfairness. Stupid women me included

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 20:07:47

The stupidity seems to be equally divided between the two adults involved here. The consequence is a child.

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 20:08:02

I don't know what one of those is Humps.

Boney, if you believe that one person should be forced to pay for a child they didn't want but knowingly helped create, then why shouldn't another person be forced to carry a child they didn't want but knowingly helped create?

Now, I don't agree with making women carry children they don't want either, but I think things have to work both ways. If we want equality for the sexes, then in my mind that means that we can make equal choices over whether we are responsible for children we created or not.

I don't think it's ok that a man can be forced to pay financially for 18 years, when a woman can take away a mans right to be a father to the child they both created.

If you believe that it's unfair that women can 'force' fatherhood on a man against his will and that men should be allowed to vanish out of a child's life as if they never existed then you are a bit thick really, aren't you?

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 20:11:03

you can't have "equality" until men gave uteri

you're behaving like someone I used to know.

that person was a complete fucking idiot.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 20:11:25

Clouds, equal rights means that if he changes and truly wants to be a father, he will have the right to challenge for custody in the courts.
What you are proposing seems akin to the current thinking in the more Republican states of America, or possibly Ireland. Not human-rights friendly.

^point proven

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 20:14:09

And you think that a termination and not being required to pay for a child for 18 years are equivalent?

There can't be equivalence. You can't make it fair for the adults involved (and I think you could argue unfairness from both sides).

What you can do is require parents to be responsible for a child once they have been born.

"Boney, if you believe that one person should be forced to pay for a child they didn't want but knowingly helped create, then why shouldn't another person be forced to carry a child they didn't want but knowingly helped create?"

Bloody hell

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 20:15:28

Clouds - Historically women had no choices.Guess who lost out.
Now woman have choices and guess who still gets blamed?

Making men responsible is the only way to make pregnancy a joint decision.

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 20:18:02

Yes, he would have the right to challenge for custody/residency, but he has no choice over whether his child actually gets born or not.

And if we can't have equality then we could at least make it fairer by allowing men to waive their rights and responsibilities. Things would still be more in favour of women when it comes to children if we did that, but it would mean that people of both sexes were encouraged to be responsible for their own lives as individuals.

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 20:20:56

What do you mean by "take responsibility for their own lives as individuals" in the context of a child being born as a result of them having sex?

Clouds
What about the child's right to know their parents? A fairly fundamental principle that we agree is very important for children's well being and stability as they grow into adults. Should we fuck these children over just to make sure we aren't being meanies to the poor menz?

D0oinMeCleanin Mon 15-Jul-13 20:21:47

'but he has no choice over whether his child actually gets born or not' <- but he does have a choice over whether the child gets born or not, he can chose to take responsibility for his own contraception and not create the child in first place.

Which part of this are you struggling to understand?

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 20:22:12

I'm 100 percent pro choice. It's not a choice I could make unless it was the better option for the child though. even if I really didn't want, even if I wanted to cry every day. I'd be forced to be pregnant and give birth. and then support it myself apparently.

how many kids are feckless husbands allowed to have before they should have to pay? and how long would they have in the pregnancy to change their mind? what if they do it 35 weeks? should she just abort then?

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 20:24:02

cloud men who don't want children can have a vasectomy. and so they should if they won't pay

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 20:24:15

She should bloody well do as she's told, the worthless cow.

Dahlen Mon 15-Jul-13 20:24:43

Again, it's not about what's fair to the parents, it's about what's fair for the CHILD. - which is support from both.

Clouds - do you care about the unfairness of pregnancy on women?
no man has ever died in childbirth. Few 50-something men have stress incontinence. It's not faaaaiiiiiiiirrr! How do we even this out?

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 20:25:41

Clouds - It is perfectly easy for men to "waive their rights and responsibility" If they aren't married to you they don't have to be on the birth certificate.
The only recourse for a woman is the CSA which wasn't designed to be a father catching service. You a proper name and date of birth as starters (so a ONS has a fair chance of never needing to bother)

needaholidaynow Mon 15-Jul-13 20:35:53

For gods sake it's not the men's fault that nature decided to pick women to be the ones who get pregnant and give birth! Why the attitude towards men just because they don't have a uterus??

And neither is it the women's fault that they either give birth or have an abortion. Nature. Affects both men and women unequally and in different ways. yet the cries are only ever about the unfairness to the poor men.

reveal, what was the CSA actually meant to be?

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 20:38:09

shock
((backs away slowly to FWR))

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 20:42:44

My attitude is simply that men should take responsibility for the entirely forseeable consequences of their actions.

You have sex, pregnancy could follow. You choose not to use a condom, that's more likely to happen.

I think most men get that, actually.

foreverondiet Mon 15-Jul-13 20:43:44

This is a hard one. Of course he should have asked but equally can see why he assumed she was taking pill etc if it wasn't mentioned.

why?? no one has actually answered that?

Could she have safely assumed he'd had the snip?

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 20:48:05

Stealth - it was based on the US model as a way of recouping money for the government. Unfortunately that didn't translate well over here but was adopted as it fitted in with a Conservative agenda of penalising feckless fathers in their wallet. So essentially they are a money collection service.

If you can present them with a "father" who is within the system they can take his money. If he is not in the "system" or you don't have information about him he's home free.

Tellingly you can only backdate till the date the CSA find him. So if that's 12 years later then hey ho he doesn't have the responsibilities of a father for the first 12 years.

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 20:49:21

Or that he wanted her to get pregnant?

The only option that anyone seems to engage seriously with is that his unspoken assumptions were legitimate, the ones she may have had were not and now she should fix it all up for him, all nice and smoothed over.

Oh I see thanks.

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 20:50:10

So many women think the default responsibility for contraception lies with the female partner!

Where is individual responsibility now?

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 20:51:58

Clouds - the point at which a man gets to decide if his child gets born or not is actually the point at which his child gets conceived or not. Which he can control as much as anybody can by having protected sex.

Thereafter, he has no right to what goes on with the woman's body but can take it up again with the courts but NOT through waiving his financial responsibilities to his child.

Nature has made things this way, and yes it is a fantastic thing to be the one that carries and gives birth, but it can also go badly wrong. If I'd been born in another country or another time, pregnancy and childbirth would have killed me. Not everyone comes out of pregnancy well and terminations can be just as risky.

A woman can't waive her risks in the way you think a man should be able to waive his responsibilities.

And if you bring the law into it, you get the nightmare scenarios like the one happening in Texas, where woman might be forced to carry babies so ill that they have no chance of life once born, and where tampons are confiscated. In Texas, if they get their way, they would have let me die.

Do you seriously think that the only men to waive their responsibilities will be these poor tricked innocents that are just waiting for the right woman to have a child with but fell into the trap of some money grabber first?

Or do you think there's the slightest chance that some nasty git will dump his pregnant girlfriends, time after time, while screaming to the courts "It's not fair, she tricked me! Again!"

"And if we can't have equality then we could at least make it fairer by allowing men to waive their rights and responsibilities. Things would still be more in favour of women when it comes to children if we did that, but it would mean that people of both sexes were encouraged to be responsible for their own lives as individuals."

Being held responsible for your own actions doesn't seem to work with some men at the moment does it, so why would they get any better with your get out of fatherhood free card?

It shouldn't come as a surprise to any man to realise that if he has unprotected sex that results in a pregnancy, he may have to face up to his responsibilities to his child, including financially.

Which brings us right back to the point. If he doesn't want to do that, he should not leave the responsibility of contraception to everyone but himself.

I don't understand what you find so difficult or objectionable about that.

IfNotNowThenWhen Mon 15-Jul-13 20:55:16

They are both idiots. I have been shocked by the fact that the few men I have been sexually involved with in the last 5 years have all wanted to have condom-free sex, and none of them have asked about my contraception.
I have said, when they are clearly wanting to have sex sans condom-"I would love another child, but you do realise that would mean 18 years of child support for you, don't you?
They also don't seem concerned about whether or not I might have HIV/chlamydia/ genital warts/herpes etc etc.
Baffling.

But won't someone think of the men?!

ApocalypseThen Mon 15-Jul-13 20:58:27

Oh their mothers are preparing them to be self centered and walk away from any responsibility towards their children, so phew! Someone is thinking of the men!

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 21:01:48

Clouds - do you care about the unfairness of pregnancy on women?

Not women in this country, no. I think we are lucky to have the amazing experience that is pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding. If we get pregnant by mistake and we decide not to take responsibility for that mistake, the law protects us.

Clouds - It is perfectly easy for men to "waive their rights and responsibility" If they aren't married to you they don't have to be on the birth certificate.

Fair point. So does that mean a man can't be chased for money if he is unmarried and hasn't agreed to be on the birth certificate? If so, then that makes me feel a bit better about the whole thing.

yet the cries are only ever about the unfairness to the poor men.

You're kidding right!? You have seen the whole topic that is FWR haven't you? grin

IfNotNowThenWhen Mon 15-Jul-13 21:02:12

And everything that DOinmecleaning has said. He had a choice. He chose an unwanted pregnancy.

IfNotNowThenWhen Mon 15-Jul-13 21:05:07

Clouds, the I was never married to the father of my child, and he is not on the birth cert because registering ds coincided with a family emergency (his).
He has never paid much child support, but if he didn't have to pay any for that reason then his child would be even worse off than he already is.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 21:05:39

Well stealth, tbh I assumed there may have been some massaging of the truth as it had ever occurred to me that men would be so incredibly stupid as to not ask, ever.

They are both idiots. I have been shocked by the fact that the few men I have been sexually involved with in the last 5 years have all wanted to have condom-free sex, and none of them have asked about my contraception

ifnotthensthenwhens post is fucking shocking to me tbh. I can definlty believe there are men willing to go the whole pull out and hope for the best method but it never occurred to me that any would just assume. I find easier to believe that there are people out there (of both sexes) who lie about being on the pill or having vasectomies or poking holes in condoms than those who don't want to have children not asking . confused Just because someone consents to condomless sex doesn't mean they've consented to you spunking up them. Again I find it amazing that two adults who are old enough to have sex can't discuss this with each other.

GreenSkittles Mon 15-Jul-13 21:06:07

CloudsAndTrees is female? Oh dear... I hope you don't have daughters.

MrsHoarder Mon 15-Jul-13 21:06:44

Women get an extra get-out because they have extra risks. Legally you cannot have an abortion in the UK for purely financial reasons, only for reasons of concern about physical and mental illness (which isn't difficult when you consider what pregnancy does to women).

Once a child is born they have an absolute right to support from both their parents even when those parents would rater have fun.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 21:07:18

Fair point. So does that mean a man can't be chased for money if he is unmarried and hasn't agreed to be on the birth certificate? If so, then that makes me feel a bit better about the whole thing

you really are a loon

MrsHoarder Mon 15-Jul-13 21:08:56

And whilst ds is still a baby I have warned friends in casual relationships that women do this and advised always taking their own condoms. So I am all for the men not becoming parents against their will.

BoneyBackJefferson Mon 15-Jul-13 21:09:06

Clouds

I don't agree with all Myhumps posts but in the case of your post
"why shouldn't another person be forced to carry a child they didn't want but knowingly helped create?" I agree with her.

On the one hand (even taking in to account the highly possible duplicitous nature of the woman involved) even when wearing a condom a child being conceived is possible. It is a known consequence of sex.

To try and take away the rights of a person over control of their body is (for me) beyond contempation.

McNewPants2013 Mon 15-Jul-13 21:13:03

It both the adults responsibility to use contraception.

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 21:13:08

Which country are you in Clouds?

And why do you think "It's okay to have unprotected sex, ignoring the fact that it potentially puts lives at risk, because the woman should be using contraception for both of you. But don't worry, if she isn't she can have a nice easy termination. Or think herself lucky to be giving birth while you take her to court to waive your responsibilities" is a good message to give to your son/s?

Because I'm telling you, "Use a condom/don't have sex without thinking of the consequences" is a far better message to give to them.

lottieandmia Mon 15-Jul-13 21:15:07

I haven't read whole thread but YANBU.

He doesn't bother asking about contraception and then wonders why a pregnancy results? He is as responsible as her and should pay child support.

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 21:15:29

Sarah, what I find objectionable is that is is so completely different for the other sex.

he has no right to what goes on with the woman's body

Or to what happens to the child.

A woman can't waive her risks in the way you think a man should be able to waive his responsibilities

Not completely, no. But she can always decide on the most important thing, which is whether the baby is born or not.

Being held responsible for your own actions doesn't seem to work with some men at the moment does it, so why would they get any better with your get out of fatherhood free card?

It doesn't work with some women either, but if the whole thing were changed, and a man had actively chosen to be responsible for their child by being on the birth certificate or by not legally waiving their rights, then that could lead to men being forced to be more responsible. The law could take more power to ensure that men pay for their children, because there's a lot of men that started out wanting to play Daddy and that now haven't paid a penny for years. It could make men more accountable for their choice if they were made to make one at the start of the pregnancy, and that would work out better for all concerned.

* If he doesn't want to do that, he should not leave the responsibility of contraception to everyone but himself.*

I agree with this, but I think if it's going to be that way, then it has to be the same for both sexes, neither of whom have any choice over which sex they are.

CloudsAndTrees Mon 15-Jul-13 21:18:06

Because I'm telling you, "Use a condom/don't have sex without thinking of the consequences" is a far better message to give to them.

Oddly enough, that's what I'm planning on doing.

lottieandmia Mon 15-Jul-13 21:19:39

Clouds - I don't understand your perspective at all. It sounds pretty misogynistic tbh. Everyone knows sex can result in a pregnancy and if a man is certain he doesn't want a baby then of course he should use a condom.

D0oinMeCleanin Mon 15-Jul-13 21:20:26

I honestly think I am going to weep with despair.

Clouds, the man makes his choice when he chooses not to use a condom knowing all of the risks that it entails. That is when he gets to chose. I would say that 99.99% of men old enough to participate in intercourse know that unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy.

OP's friend did not steal his sperm, he willingly gave it to her, without considering the consequences of this. If he was so against becoming a father, he should have taken responsibility for his own contraception. Condoms are not hard to come by these, they sell them at petrol stations, fgs.

No-one is forcing the poor menz to become fathers, they are making themselves fathers by expecting everyone else to take care of their fertility.

lottieandmia Mon 15-Jul-13 21:21:48

It's different for man because they don't have to go through either an abortion or childbirth. So they should take responsibility for contraception as much as the woman.

IfNotNowThenWhen Mon 15-Jul-13 21:23:57

It is shocking MyHumps. Any of those men would have been horrified had I then a) got pregant and b) expected child support.
Hopefully that would never happen, as I have a coil, but not even to be asked is awful-and I would never go condom free in a non-relationship anyway.

McNewPants2013 Mon 15-Jul-13 21:24:54

Cloud it seems like the women here is going to be a single parent.

It will effect her a hell of a lot more than the father. All he has to do is pay for the child that through his actions help to create.

IfNotNowThenWhen Mon 15-Jul-13 21:25:58

And I must say to BoneyBack-this woman was an idiot, yes. But duplicitous? No.
She never told him she was on the pill or similar. He never asked.

McNewPants2013 Mon 15-Jul-13 21:26:32

Condoms are free in family planning, so it just pure laziness.

D0oinMeCleanin Mon 15-Jul-13 21:29:30

Even if the woman did tell him she was on the pill (which, yes is morally wrong) he still should have used a condom if he did not want to become a father.

To rely on another person to take their pill on time, not forget a day, not become ill and all of the other things that can go wrong with the pill, if you do not want to become a father, is a very, very big risk.

Take responsibility for your own contraception if you do not want to become a parent. Women have to, why shouldn't men? Are they not clever enough?

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 21:33:29

I remember my father having "the" chat with me .He me that I should always be careful because it was always the woman that got pregnant and therefore would be lumped with the responsibility. This was obviously based assumption that I didn't want a baby.

So what happens if I did?

Son's should be told that if they don't want the responsibility of fatherhood they should be careful because sometimes women might want a baby. It's not complicated.

SarahAndFuck Mon 15-Jul-13 21:35:05

I really don't think you understand Clouds.

He has no right to what goes on with the woman's body Or to what happens to the child

- which is why he needs to use his own contraception if he doesn't want to be placed in that position.

A woman can't waive her risks in the way you think a man should be able to waive his responsibilities Not completely, no. But she can always decide on the most important thing, which is whether the baby is born or not.

- Not at all. The risks are the risks, and in pregnancy and termination you have no idea what might go wrong. Terminations are risky, pregnancy is risky, giving birth is risky. You make your choice but nobody has a crystal ball. The UK has a dreadful rate for baby loss and risk to mothers. And you can't go to court and say "actually I don't fancy being harmed or damaged by this pregnancy/termination, write me a waiver so everything will be fine."

Being held responsible for your own actions doesn't seem to work with some men at the moment does it, so why would they get any better with your get out of fatherhood free card? It doesn't work with some women either, but if the whole thing were changed, and a man had actively chosen to be responsible for their child by being on the birth certificate or by not legally waiving their rights, then that could lead to men being forced to be more responsible. The law could take more power to ensure that men pay for their children, because there's a lot of men that started out wanting to play Daddy and that now haven't paid a penny for years. It could make men more accountable for their choice if they were made to make one at the start of the pregnancy, and that would work out better for all concerned.

- You can't opt into being responsible for a child you have created through choice or by accident/irresponsibility. Your idea of waiving responsibility or opting into it is bizarre. By design of nature men can already opt out, just by not being the one to continue a pregnancy or terminate it and by easily walking away crying about how unfair things are, and you want them to have legal rights to make walking away easier on them?

If he doesn't want to do that, he should not leave the responsibility of contraception to everyone but himself. I agree with this, but I think if it's going to be that way, then it has to be the same for both sexes, neither of whom have any choice over which sex they are.

- I'm going to put my full words in here. "It shouldn't come as a surprise to any man to realise that if he has unprotected sex that results in a pregnancy, he may have to face up to his responsibilities to his child, including financially. Which brings us right back to the point. If he doesn't want to do that, he should not leave the responsibility of contraception to everyone but himself."

Nowhere have I said that the responsibility should lay entirely with the man. I've said it shouldn't lay entirely with the woman. Both parties should take control of their own contraception but it seem to me especially important to do so when, as you have said so often, MEN HAVE NO OTHER WAY TO CONTROL AN UNWANTED PREGNANCY. Both parties should take responsibility and if they don't, crying "it's not fair" just doesn't cut it.

Pilgit Mon 15-Jul-13 21:38:16

this brings to mind my friends mums reaction when she found out friend was pregnant (product of an affair - all very messy) - I happened to be there, knitting in the corner (yes I did feel like I was at the guillotine) she asked about contraception to which my friend said she was on the pill (she messed it up and didn't realise) in a resigned tone of voice 'of darling, there are worse things you can catch than a baby.'

but in answer to the question - yes he bloody should take responsibility for his actions - either use a condom or take responsibility for the consequences.

Buddhagirl Mon 15-Jul-13 21:56:21

OPs friend might be posting in conception

"That could be where I've been going wrong as I never hold my legs up after making love. Mind you I might as well be honest as you don't know me but my partner or rather friend with benefits does not know I am ttc, so I think he'd wonder why I had my legs up after the event! I see him Wed and Fri just to make love there is no commitment. Although there will be no love making tommorow as A.f arrived today (sad face). We are using each other, really. There is Absolutly no argument that what I am doing is deciectful I know that, but what do I do wait for Mr Right forever, and and needs can/do make a person deciectful. I am certainly not doing this to trap him. I mean once I am pregnant he is free to go or to stick around. If he does opt not to stick around well the world will still turn. It's not like I am a stranger to being a single mum. If I am lucky enough to fall pregnant I will just say it was a happy accident.
I find quite a lot of sperm leaks out of me. Carry on putting your legs in the air after making love it can't do any harm can it.
I guess all I can do is keep having fun trying and hope for the best.
"

Or there is 2 women doing the same thing.

Probably the latter.

movingonandup Mon 15-Jul-13 22:07:31

It takes 2 people to make a baby.
Biology therefore dictates that both of them have a choice about it.
He made a choice when he was having unprotected sex knowing it leads to pregnancy and knowing that they weren't using any contraception. He knew totally that he was doing nothing to prevent pregnancy and did not ask and did not care whether she was or not.

After conception, the choice is all hers. His biological part of it is over and he cannot take it back again so it is too late to then complain he regrets his first choice of unprotected sex. He made his choice and she has to make hers.

As others have said, there's no going back for her at this point really. She will either have a baby (emotional, hard, risky, life changing) or have a termination (emotional - for many, risky - for some, hard - for most and life changing - for some physically and psychologically).

As for allowing men to opt in or out depending on whether they think their biological contribution was well thought out or not - that's absurd.

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:13:55

she was in chat yesterday Buddha, I actually assumed that's what made the op think of it

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:13:59

she was in chat yesterday Buddha, I actually assumed that's what made the op think of it

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:14:03

she was in chat yesterday Buddha, I actually assumed that's what made the op think of it

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:14:05

she was in chat yesterday Buddha, I actually assumed that's what made the op think of it

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:14:09

she was in chat yesterday Buddha, I actually assumed that's what made the op think of it

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:14:13

she was in chat yesterday Buddha, I actually assumed that's what made the op think of it

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:14:35

she was in chat yesterday Buddha, I actually assumed that's what made the op think of it

MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps Mon 15-Jul-13 22:16:32

confused hmm grin

WTF happened there?

chicaguapa Mon 15-Jul-13 22:19:04

No-one is forcing the poor menz to become fathers, they are making themselves fathers by expecting everyone else to take care of their fertility.

I agree with this if he didn't have that conversation with her because he felt it was her responsibility.

I think the grey area in this particular case is did he really think she was on the pill or did he not think about it at all, believing it to be her responsibility? The first was a schoolboy error never trust the contraception unless you have visible proof of it, the latter is an out-dared attitude which he is now going to regret.

I do think it's easier for men to be a bit laissez faire with contraception as they feel more removed from the consequences. And I completely agree that this man should have made sure himself that they were using contraception.

Unless they have agreed to not use contraception, it shouldn't be assumed by either party that pregnancy would be welcome. In the same way that he shouldn't have assumed she was on the pill, she shouldn't have assumed he wanted a baby because he hadn't expressly said he didn't. But it was both their responsibility to make sure they were protected.

There is a fine line between omission and lying. I still stand by the fact that she absolutely knew they were taking risks and he either assumed wrongly that they were safe or hadn't thought about it all. I completely take on board that he should have realised he was taking a risk when he didn't take care of it himself. But there's a difference between taking a deliberate risk and a thoughtless one.

But one thing's for sure, those of us with a DS is going to be drumming the message home when they're old enough to listen/ understand.

teetering13 Mon 15-Jul-13 22:20:00

I've not read all the replies but my view is ... she wanted a baby, she found an irresponsible man (theres plenty of them) and had sex ... hey presto, she got what she wanted ...

To late for him to have a tantrum now .. but what else would you expect from someone who expects others to be responsible for him .. guys a nob ... good for her that he wants nothing to do with the child ... she chose well I guess! smile

DioneTheDiabolist Mon 15-Jul-13 22:41:15

So are we saying that there is no such thing as a lie by omission?

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 22:49:57

So many assumptions.

Firstly, that it should be assumed that pregnancy is not a desired outcome of a sexual encounter - when biologically...

And, built on that assumption, that the default responsibility for contraception lies with the woman in the absence of any effort, or indeed request for information, from the man.

Why?

The first is clearly not a valid assumption, as this thread and others referred to, make clear. Some women want to get pregnant when they have sex. Therefore the second is built on dodgy ground too.

So rather than harping on invalid assumptions, perphas the better option would be for people to take responsibility for their own fertility, men and women. Which works out better for the partner who doesn't want pregnancy in fact - as their choice is much more likely to prevail!

Mumoftwoyoungkids Mon 15-Jul-13 22:50:41

He's a total and utter idiot.

She's.....

Actually I'm not sure.

If she was purposely ttcing then that makes her pretty deceitful.

If she wasn't then she is an idiot too.

I know a bloke who got caught in a similar way to this. Long term relationship (as in years). They agreed to use the pill as their contraception.she decided she wanted a baby. He wanted to wait a couple of years as he was still qualifying in a profession. She stopped taking the pill and didn't tell him. He found out in the first midwife appointment when he worriedly asked whether her being on the pill when they conceived could hurt the baby and she answered (presumably without thinking) that she wasn't.

Relationship fell apart as he could never trust her again. He has shared care of their daughter though.

Dh and I have discussed the situation loads over the years - is there a point in a relationship where you do trust the other party to use the contraception they say they are? Or should men always wear a condom and if not have no right to complain no matter what the circumstances?

teetering13 Mon 15-Jul-13 23:04:46

I know a couple who were together for 14 years before she came off the pill and got pregnant without him knowing

When they met he told her he didn't want more children .. she accepted this until she heard her clock ticking loudly

So yeah .. they have a son who's near 10 now, and no, he doesn't know it wasn't an accident

revealall Mon 15-Jul-13 23:08:16

I disagree that she was deceitful if she was TTC. If she told the father she didn't want children and was protected,then yes she lied. However she could still have got pregnant - none of it is 100%

Sounds to me like there was an assumption made on his part. Which is his fault.

teetering13 Mon 15-Jul-13 23:08:59

Oh and yes, I think she had every right to do what she did ... she was looking out for herself, whereas he, who had said he didn't want anymore children, didn't do anything about it ...

DioneTheDiabolist Mon 15-Jul-13 23:13:15

So if she didn't ask if he had an STD, but he had and infected her, would we saying that she has no right to go mad because all adults know that only condoms provide protection against STDs?

complexnumber Mon 15-Jul-13 23:13:31

Deceit is more evil than stupidity.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 23:19:00

'So if she didn't ask if he had an STD, but he had and infected her, would we saying that she has no right to go mad because all adults know that only condoms provide protection against STDs'

Now that's sneaky!
Why not wait a few months and try it out as a thread?
My money is on 'Oh no, cocklodger, wanker, evil shithead, poor you' from the majority. grin
With a few of us saying, your orifice, your responsibility.

Although if you have AIDS, isn't it possible that you can be charged for not disclosing if you shag multiple partners and they get ill?
Or am I channelling an American TV series?

TheFallenMadonna Mon 15-Jul-13 23:19:47

To minimise the risk of STI, you ask a man to wear a condom. And you don't have sex with one who doesn't. Win win in this situation...

DioneTheDiabolist Mon 15-Jul-13 23:23:25

Eyesunderarock, I think you're spot on.

teetering13 Mon 15-Jul-13 23:24:55

If I had unprotected sex and got an STD it'd be my fault ..

WTF the guy can't see his part in getting the woman preggers? ... He has no right to 'go ballistic'

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 23:27:21

Dion, I may pencil that in as a Bored in January thread activity.grin

DioneTheDiabolist Mon 15-Jul-13 23:34:21

Teetering, you are right it would be your responsibility and some posters would be telling you that. However I do think that you would have every right to go ballistic at the non disclosure. Particularly where it results in lifelong consequences such as herpes, hepatitis and HIV.

DioneTheDiabolist Mon 15-Jul-13 23:34:58

Knock yourself out Eyes.grin

Xales Mon 15-Jul-13 23:37:25

After I ended my last relationship I had a health check. The guy I was planning on some care free shagging with also had one.

Shag fell through for some reason but we were both sensible adults who discussed contraception and STIs.

This man either assumed or didn't care until it came back to bite him. His stupidity and own fault. How many times has he made assumptions?

The woman was actually stupidly putting herself at risk if she knew he liked to not use condoms and it would be her fault if she caught something by not taking care. Just line he is at fault over the pregnancy.

YouMakeMeWannaLaLa Mon 15-Jul-13 23:48:21

There is a pretty huge difference between a committed couple discussing and deciding upon contraception and two FWB just going at it with no discussion.

Pretty much every ONS I've ever had has just attempted to get on with things without a condom. I've always had to be the one to bring it up (so to speak wink ).

And I've often had some outrageous hostility from men at insisting on the use of condoms. All the usual moaning about how uncomfortable they are /don't fit hmm to taking offense at 'virtually being accused of being an 'AIDser'' angry

I also had one man tell me I could always have an abortion if I 'caught on'.

God, I used to attract some true princes.

Eyesunderarock Mon 15-Jul-13 23:49:44

Perhaps you ought to up your standards a bit? Aim for a better quality human?

differentnameforthis Tue 16-Jul-13 04:18:34

Hiding the fact that she wanted to get pregnant is hugely deceitful & is close to trapping him, BUT I agree, if a pregnancy made him this angry, he should have used a condom.

They are both stupid, but she is worse, as she had a plan all along.

goodasitgets Tue 16-Jul-13 04:54:36

I have a FWB, we don't use condoms. But neither of us sleep with anyone else. My contraception failed and I got pregnant. He never wants children (I didn't know this as we hasn't discussed it). Since then I've reviewed my contraception and had a copper coil fitted and track my cycle too. I made him aware of what new contraception I was using

CaptChaos Tue 16-Jul-13 06:23:09

Everyone who has PIV sex should knows that a baby might happen. If they don't want that to happen, then they need to take care of contraception. If they don't, then they are equally responsible for whatever the consequences are. A man cannot not use a condom during PIV sex and then cry 'deception' should his partner become pregnant, regardless of whether his partner has sworn on all that is holy that she is using all possible methods of contraception or not.

To counter clouds, I'm all for men being able to waive their responsibilities as long as the first questions they get asked in that regard are: 1, Did you wear a condom? and 2, If you did and it split/failed, did you go with your partner to get the MAP and watch her swallow it? As long as a man can answer yes to both questions, then he can make the attempt waive his responsibilities, if not, tough!

Both people in the OP have been irresponsible, he because he failed to act like an adult and use some form of contraception and she because she left herself and any potential child at risk of STIs. That being said, she is now pregnant and both people have to be responsible for the sake of the child that will be born.

BoneyBackJefferson Tue 16-Jul-13 06:51:58

IfNotNowThenWhen
"And I must say to BoneyBack-this woman was an idiot, yes. But duplicitous? No.
She never told him she was on the pill or similar. He never asked."

FWB would indicate no strings attached sex, that would indicate to me that precautions are being taken.

someone up thread meantioned "lie by omission" and TBH I think that this is what this was.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Tue 16-Jul-13 07:00:00

So he has sex without a condom, women gets pregnant and he stamps his feet about it?

Oh, boo-fucking-hoo..

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 07:01:35

So if you were just having sex with somehow, you're essentially saying this would indicate to you protection was being used? That's naive. Plus, what about STI's?

Guy was responsible for his fertility and safety, her for hers. Both were equally foolish IMO.

Although if genuinely was just trying to get pregnant (has OP come to clarify?) all stupidity on both parties aside, I do agree she lied by omission. Doesn't change the fact he should have protected himself from pregnancy and disease.

That's why we all need to always use protection in casual sexual relationships. Need to protect ourselves! (Female or male.) You never know someone's motives in a casual relationship or if they are sleeping with others etc.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 07:01:55

Someone! Not having sex with somehow blush

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 07:03:06

Or, what Pobbles said. That basically sums it up.

He didn't wear a condom. He cannot therefore be angry she wasn't using protection. Double standards on his part.

Lazyjaney Tue 16-Jul-13 07:18:52

>You never know someone's motives in a casual relationship or if they are sleeping with others etc<

This is what it boils down to.

>That being said, she is now pregnant and both people have to be responsible for the sake of the child that will be born<

I don't think it's right that only one party can make the abort call, and the other must support the child no matter what.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 07:27:42

As someone who was conceived in similar circumstances I feel sorry for the child. Even a decent bloke wont be able to brush aside the feelings of anger towards the mother and indifference toward the child and be a good dad.

My mother lay with her legs up after casual sex with someone elses husband, to try and trap him into leaving his wife. It didn't work, the bloke ran a mile.

I grew up hearing non stop from my mum what a crap father he was, and on the few occasions I saw him, he would bleat that she trapped him.

For my sake, I 100% blame my mother. I loathe her for it (she was a terrible mother) and I cant feel too strongly about my father. I do feel sort of sorry for him.

I don't have a relationship with him, which Im fine with, although its not what Id want for my own children. He is very generous financially, and I am glad she picked a rich man to steal sperm from.

tumbletumble Tue 16-Jul-13 07:35:04

The man was stupid to assume the woman was on the pill. But the woman behaved shockingly too.

TheFallenMadonna Tue 16-Jul-13 07:41:20

I'm almost more shocked by the notion that a man who doesn't want a child should march his partner to get the MAP (and watch her while she takes it) than I am by the abdication of all responsibility.

Men's choices are limited to whether they have sex or not, and to their own contraception. Those are the only points where they are autonomous.

Lazyjaney Tue 16-Jul-13 07:53:49

^^
I'm surprised by the number of women on here who think a woman has an absolute right to have a baby regardless of the father's wishes.

Do these women really think that a father who feels is going to turn into a loving, supportive dad who will happily give time, money and love to the child?

"DioneTheDiabolistMon 15-Jul-13 22:41:15

So are we saying that there is no such thing as a lie by omission?"

As long as you accept they both lied by ommission in exactly the same way?
Yet people seem to think the man can assume she's on the pill (why the pill, anyway?) But it would be ridiculous for her to assume he's had the snip

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 08:07:21

I cant help thinking that the way you feel about your children has a lot to do with the way you feel about the person they are conceived by.

Im sure I love my children so much partly because I see my husband in them who I adore. I don't think Id feel the same if the father was a casual relationship who didn't want a child.

From a fathers point of view, if his first reaction is horror rather than delight, surely that will affect the long term feelings? Don't all children at least deserve the chance of that?

I personally always felt inferior growing up in a single parent family, like it was a bit seedy. I know it happens, but its hardly ideal, and I don't think it should be planned like this

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 08:27:07

Goodtouch .. I felt inferior growing up in my two parent family what with all the abuse going on, I'd have LOVED for my drunk of a mother to boot out her wife beating husband .. So think yourself lucky, there is a LOT worse than having a loving parent take care of you ... maybe you should care less about what society thinks and judges and more about how good you had it ... unless your mother was shit of course

oh and I love my kids but their bio is a prat .. I will not blame them for that.

:/

Samu2 Tue 16-Jul-13 08:30:29

This is so simple really isn't it? Men, don't want a kid wear a condom, get snipped or abstain.

If you do happen to get someone pregnant then no, you should not be able to waiver your rights because once the decision has been made by the women that the pregnancy is going ahead then it becomes about the child and the child shouldn't suffer because you were too stupid to use protection. You helped create a life, suck it up and be a parent.

Sex has risks and you take them every time you have sex, your choice starts and ends there.

My 14 year old knows this.

The women in the OP is an idiot as well.

Jengnr Tue 16-Jul-13 08:30:29

Two people have unprotected sex. One of them is willing to take responsibility for the consequences and the other one chooses to whine and bleat and blame instead.

It's his own fault.

BreadNameBread Tue 16-Jul-13 08:36:46

I am going to show this thread to my sons. sad

It is disgraceful behaviour by the OPs friend if she was secretly trying to get pregnant and it was idiotic behaviour by the 'boyfriend'.

It is a very sad situation and it is unfair on the child. There is nothing wrong in deciding to be a single parent but there is if it involves deceiving someone.

I thought Dahlens and chubblinas post were excellent.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 08:42:14

Er OK teetering, you had a worse time than me. Happy now?

Single parent/split families are embarrassing for everyone IMO.

I think its wrong that there is never any intention to be a family, its not fair on the child

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:04:37

Single parent/split families are embarrassing for everyone IMO.

Not true! I don't think people are embarrassed by having single parents. I don't, but if my DP divorced I wouldn't be embarrassed. Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding, that just seems to be quite a sweeping judgement there.

Lots of single parents have relived DC they left an abusive parent, for example.

Or do you mean a 'accidentally-on-purpose' pregnancies are embarrassing? I don't have any experience with that so wouldn't know.

Mumoftwoyoungkids Tue 16-Jul-13 09:10:59

Captchaos What if the woman refuses to take the MAP? Is he supposed to hold her down and force feed it to her?

Incidentally I refuse to take the MAP (due to implications involving fertilised eggs). I also would unilaterally make the decision about keeping the baby.

(In my defence because of this I have never had a ONS, all boyfriends I have slept with have had this explained to them pre bouncy cuddles and I have always always been very careful about contraception.)

Mumoftwoyoungkids Tue 16-Jul-13 09:15:45

It doesn't apply in this case but I do think that in a long term (as in someone you would refer to as "my partner" or "my husband") then there does need to be trust over contraception.

So if the couple agree that they want to use hormonal contraception rather than condoms then he has the right to expect her not to decide to stop taking it without telling him because she wants a baby. Just as she has the right to expect him to not sh@g everyone he meets and give her an STI.

It's avert sad world otherwise.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:18:21

I think sometimes people just need to accept we cannot try and put fair and just laws on biology. Biology dictates the man gives semen and the woman gets pregnant.

The only way to have a 'fair' system would be to implement forced contraception and forced abortions or forced births... Which I sincerely doubt anyone actually agrees with. That isn't fair to the woman. There is no system that is 'fair' to the parents, that's why we do our best to adopt a system that allows as much risk management as possible, and if pregnancy happens, it happens and is then about what is best for the child.

There is no 'fair' in biology. We all know the risks. We all know appropriate measures against the risks. Even if we do take the appropriate measures (which no one here did) pregnancy and STI's and still happen.

Now the only 'fair' system is to take care of the child.

IMO, it should stay that way. Educate as much as possible about the risks, offer alternatives for women who do not a pregnancy, and after that it's all about what is best for the child.

I don't think there can be a fairer system than that TBH.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 09:19:57

"that just seems to be quite a sweeping judgement there"

Sure, OK, not for everyone in life, I meant everyone in the family. Some people might be laid back about things like that, but as a child I was embarrassed (why dont you have a daddy? etc) and Id be even more embarrassed about being a single parent as an adult

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:20:29

As for men 'opting out' of pregnancies they don't wat? Again, unfair on the child. The law accepts a man can feck off on his child, but he must financially help the life he was 50% on making.

CSA isn't about the mum, it's about what's best for the child.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 09:24:54

For example - having "father unknown" (because he refused to sign) on my birth certificate felt as bad to me as "mother is an indiscriminate slut" or "child not planned/unwanted"

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:26:06

Sure, OK, not for everyone in life, I meant everyone in the family. Some people might be laid back about things like that, but as a child I was embarrassed (why dont you have a daddy? etc) and Id be even more embarrassed about being a single parent as an adult.

^^ Fair enough, each to their own. I can see a family being embarrassed their daughter purposely got pregnant (BTW, sorry your mum was such a shit and your dad used you as a sounding board, that's horrible)

I was thinking more... 'Do strangers judge a SP because there isn't a dad in the picture?' I thought that's what you meant and was a bit horrified people would whisper about the mum in baby group not knowing her circumstances IYSWIM?

Being close to the subject though is obviously different than everyone whispering and frowning and gossiping about the new SP on the block! smile

IfNotNowThenWhen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:26:35

My sons dad is a bit of a cock. I couldn't love my son more. And if DS grows up feeling embarrassed about our family, then I will be dissapointed he hasn't more of a backbone tbh.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:27:45

sad So sorry GoodTouch. I won't pretend I know how that feels but I understand where you're coming from now.

And OT, I have read your other thread about your horrid inlaws/the kidney thing, clearly you have a lovely, strong family of your own now so I'm glad you got your happy ending. flowers

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 09:41:48

Thank you for the flowers SpecialAgent - they are beautiful smile

Ifnotnow - Id say there is at least a chance he will feel that way, but difficult to say without knowing your circumstances. Anyway Im not criticising single parents, just women who get pregnant deliberately while single

kim147 Tue 16-Jul-13 09:44:45

I have a friend of a friend who used anonymous sperm donation to have children. The children have no idea who their dad is but I know that those children were wanted and are loved.

I'm not sure what they think about not having a dad. I do know the mum desperately wanted children but did not find the right partner to have children with.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:47:56

You're welcome. smile

But by 'deliberate,' do you mean cases like your DM, or any case with an unwanted pregnancy? Because many men walk out on pregnant wives/partners. I don't think their DC should be embarrassed by that at all, or be judged by other parents. In that case, 'smug marrieds' is a term that definitely applies. (And I hate that term)

But most people don't deliberately intend to end up pregnant and alone.

Then there's gay parents. Technically only one is a biological parent. What about children who permanent live with stepmums/stepdads? Only one biological parent there.

I just don't understand the judgement. (Except by a child in your circumstance GoodTouc, that must have been hard.)

Plenty of wonderful single mums/dads out there! Just check MN grin

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:48:34

I meant to say or any case of an unwanted pregnancy?

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 09:50:40

I reserve my judgement for the (male or female) parents who abandon their child completely. At least some absentee parents accept they never wanted to be a parent and pay their CSA dutifully. May not be my idea of a good parent but it is taking responsibility for the actions that created a child.

Mumoftwoyoungkids Tue 16-Jul-13 09:53:59

Ifnot There will be a time when your son is embarrassed by his family situation. Just as I (two married parents both chose to have me and my brother) at one point was really embarrassed by my family situation. They were so dull! I desperately wanted my friends single mother "we're more like sisters!" mum who let us drink alcopops at 14.

Instead I had a dad who went on the dance floor at the awards dinner for a sport I played. In front of the boy I liked!

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 09:55:30

Its not that I had a worse time .. It's that you were embarrassed because just your mother cared for you ... I can't think of a bigger slap in the face to give your poor mum tbh

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 09:56:31

No Im only angry about people like the OPs friend. Being a single parent cannot be easy or any fun, so why on earth would you choose that for your child?

I agree children shouldn't feel embarrassed by single parents who were victims of circumstance, but I do think they sometimes are. I think a lot of parents are (again, not that they should be) which is why for example people stay so long in violent relationships, because they dont want the stigma of being a single parent family.

Im not srue what I feel about gay parents or single parents who use sperm donation. Again its not ideal is it, I cant imagine any child asking to be born into such circumstances, but I cant say I definitely wouldn't do it myself if I was gay or still single and losing my fertility.

Obviously everyone would ideally want to create the perfect nuclear family, but of course life isn't like that

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 10:01:25

Agree on that GoodTouch, life isn't perfect and (sorry but it is true, feel more than free to berate me for using 'I said sorry' as an argument!) society really seems to think the majority of single mum's are like yours.

Bizarre. I son't know one single mum who is a single mum by choice. Why on earth is that the stigma? Is it sticking from the Good Ole' Days of unmarried = whore? confused It's just such an utterly uneducated assumption I really don't understand how in this day and age, there are people who still believe that.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 10:01:38

"It's that you were embarrassed because just your mother cared for you ... I can't think of a bigger slap in the face to give your poor mum tbh"

I have no idea where you got that from.

Are you saying I should feel lucky because she went to all the effort of tricking an unsuspecting man into impregnating her? So I must have been really wanted?

The way I see it is she didn't care enough about the life she was creating to at least give it a chance of 2 parent. She was only thinking of herself and the possibility that her man might leave his wife (and kids) if she got herself knocked up.

That's a ghastly thing to do, I have zero respect for her.

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 10:04:31

Well I suppose in the days where women stayed home and did fuck all except rear children and care for a hubby then nuclear families made the only sense to men ...

Fortunately times have moved on and the shame women were made to feel has gone for the majority

I do not wish for a nuclear family ... I am happy being a single parent, the kids don't feel different as they aren't unusual or unique ...

I do understand where you're coming from though, after all it was how everyone thought 50 years ago .. but eventually that'll die out smile

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 10:08:00

"That's a ghastly thing to do, I have zero respect for her"

hmmm sounds like you have other issues going on ... you can't have had a happy unbringing then find out how you came to be and turn on her can you?

kim147 Tue 16-Jul-13 10:10:12

A surprising amount of children are in lone parent families. 50% by the age of 16. 47% of children are born to parents who are not married.

We are a long way from the attitudes of previous generations.

The only people who should be ashamed are the people who do not provide financial support for the children they were responsible for creating and the Government who charge single parents to access the CSA.

You create life. You have a responsibility to support the child you create.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 10:13:02

I hope condemning people who trick men into pregnancy never dies out.

Its selfish and irresponsible, and I do place far more blame on the woman

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 10:16:35

"you can't have had a happy unbringing then find out how you came to be and turn on her can you?"

I always knew how I was conceived. All my family knew. We knew he had another family living in the next county.

You need to read the thread properly, I never said I had a happy upbringing, you just assumed I did because there was no domestic violence like in your situation (poor you, how terrible - is that what you wanted?)

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 10:23:23

I was just using my example of how 2 parents isn't better than 1 in some cases ... I'm ok with it and don't need sympathy ... you on the other hand sound very bitter sad

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 10:24:22

oh and men shouldn't be tricked, you're right there .. they need to take responsibility

Bonsoir Tue 16-Jul-13 10:24:57

50 % of DC are not in lone parent families by the age of 16. Do not confuse the statistic for DC not living with their two biological parents with the statistic for DC in lone parent families.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 10:30:48

It was clearly a case of competitive misery, you have made up parts of my circumstances (like my poor mother who cared for me) and told me to realise how lucky I am.. What else could you want but sympathy?

I wouldn't say bitter, but certainly I despise selfish people like my mother.

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 10:37:13

Well we see things how we want depending what type of person we are ... so no matter matter what I say you will see it that way

But yes I was taking you on your word that you felt embarrassed being brought up by a lone parent, Yes I did assume all was ok apart from that ... I was very wrong I see now :/ ..

But I still say, it's not about how many parents a child has got or how they came to be here, it's about how cared for and loved the child is

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 10:45:38

The key word IMO is 'tricked.'

In the OP the man was not 'tricked.' He chose to take zero responsibility and now is furious nature happened.

He was stupid and now is blaming her for her motives. However morally ambiguous they may have been, he is and will continue to be responsible for his own fertility and health. He was more than happy to risk his health assuming this woman would tell him if she had an STI, but is enraged she didn't say she was on hormonal contraceptives.

That makes no sense IMO. If you rely on a stranger for your fertility and yes in some instances life for casual sex then you're a fucking idiot.

Technically, she just did the same thing he did. She was just okay with accepting a pregnancy/STI. He wasn't. If we blame her for being irresponsible, we also blame him.

^^ I mean that taking the moral ambiguity out. I am NOT responsible for DH's fertility. He is NOT responsible for mine.

Obviously because I trust him I also expect not to be exposed to AIDS and other STI's, but you simply have no guarantee when you enter a seuxal, casual relationship.

He was happy to risk his life for unprotected sex so he cannot be angry a pregnancy happened. He should just be relieved he didn't contract HIV or something and know better for the future.

You enter a sexually casual relationship, you take risks. Don't be mad when something happens... Especially something you did fuck all to STOP from happening!!

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 10:48:51

"it's not about how many parents a child has got or how they came to be here, it's about how cared for and loved the child is"

Im not sure someone who is selfish enough to bring a child into the world that way really has it in them to be a good parent, since parenting is all about putting someone else first.

Im sure there are some fab single parents though, who do just as good a job as 2 parents. Especially 2 lousy parents.

IneedAsockamnesty Tue 16-Jul-13 10:58:32

Good touch I hope condemning people who trick men into pregnancy never dies out

*Its selfish and irresponsible, and I do place far more blame on the
woman*

Your mother whom by your own accounts was not an especially good one slept with a married man.

Your seriously messed up if you place more blame at her door (granted just for the conception) than you do at his, assuming she did not rape him he was married to someone else he willingly had sex with her he did not take responsibility for his own sexual health,he put himself at risk of sti's and his wife,breached trust and willingly placed his sperm into your mother. He behaved really badly.

Its highly likely your view of your mothers parenting is clouding your judgement hugely.

Also how old are you? Father unknown has not been used on birth certificates in the uk for at least 25 years. Its just left blank.

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 11:00:11

It's hardly selfish .. unless you find a man that has no clue as to how babies are conceived, a guy that really doesn't have any clue that putting his dick inside a woman and ejaculating could lead to pregnancy

Only then can it be called selfish and 'tricking a guy'

PrettyPaperweight Tue 16-Jul-13 11:13:08

OP - I hope your friend has considered the fact that her baby will have two equal parents - either of whom could secure residency and be primary carer to the child she decided she wanted?

What happens if her FWB steps up and decides to do the responsible thing and share parenting? Was that part of her plan?

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 11:15:26

Im 31. On the mini birth certificate it says nothing, on the full size one it says father unknown.

I do blame the woman, yes of course the man was irresponsible, but I blame the woman who chooses to conceive an essentially unwanted child.

I dont blame my own father (or any father) at all for having no contact (he did/does contribute LOADS financially) I completely blame my mother for choosing an unavailable man to inseminate her.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 11:19:09

"It's hardly selfish .. unless you find a man that has no clue as to how babies are conceived, a guy that really doesn't have any clue that putting his dick inside a woman and ejaculating could lead to pregnancy"

Its selfish not to think of the child

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 11:33:59

I think your circumstances are different than OPs story ..

Your Mother conceived you in the hopes it would make him leave his wife .. it didn't work

Whereas OP wanted a baby whether the man wants to be involved or not.

It's all about the child in the OP ... but in your case it was all about the man and his affair .... In your circumstances I would say he is totally to blame and extremely selfish

In OPs case I would say (like I have) that it's too late for him to have a tantrum now, he knew shagging without a condom can easily lead to pregnancy

LondonMan Tue 16-Jul-13 11:53:47

Lying isn't the same as not offering up information on your sexual status to a FWB. Took the risks, can't be angry that nature happened.

I disagree, withholding highly relevant information that would be likely to affect whether he used a condom or even had sex at all is equivalent to lying.

If the unwanted consequence for him (or her) was getting HIV infection from someone who knew they were infected, would you say that the person who knowingly passed it on had no obligation to mention their status? (I have heard this said, presumably by the same kind of person who thinks what she did is OK.)

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 11:54:23

Absolutely its too late for him to have a tantrum!

He can however refuse to acknowledge the child, or provide for it.

The woman always holds the cards in these situations. There are not many men who when faced with free fanny would insist on a condom. Unscrupulous women know this and take advantage. Of course the bloke cant complain after the event, but he is going to feel like a mug when he realises hes been had and may well refuse to co-operate.

BTW did you really mean HE was totally to blame?

I was really lucky, my father has been great financially, he bought us our first house in Devon outright, which means we have never had a mortgage. He uses money to make himself feel better for not being around, which is fine by me. Even now my husband earns a lot we still get cheques.

Id feel hugely ripped off if Id been deliberately conceived into a household with no money or opportunities. OP doesn't say whether this is the case with her friend. I suppose my mother was a money grabbing type of slut. Nevertheless its a despicable thing to do IMO

I know not everyone will agree, but I dont think its such an out there point of view that I must be "seriously messed up"

SarahAndFuck Tue 16-Jul-13 11:57:51

LazeyJaney - I don't think anyone has the absolute right to have a baby.

However we only have the now vanished OP's opinion that her friend was actually trying to conceive one.

But if a man feels strongly that he does not want a child he absolutely should not abdicate all contraceptive responsibility to someone else and then complain that life is not fair.

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 12:11:49

Yes he was totally to blame .. and it's a myth that men can't control themselves .. 'faced with free fanny' a man can walk away (contrary to what they'd have us believe they are not controlled by their dicks)

Your dad was married yet had an affair .. no one forced him to do that, it was his choice and he took it. He then chose to have unprotected sex with full knowledge it could lead to his mistress becoming pregnant .. he chose to do that anyway.
The most dispicable thing he did then was to not own up and be responsible at this point (though from previous behaviour we don't really expect this type to care much about responsibility) .. so instead of physically being involved in his daughters life he just threw money at the problem and in doing that his daughter has grown up to respect him ... so yes, I would say I blame him and I'd also say he sounds horrible :/

SarahAndFuck Tue 16-Jul-13 12:12:40

LondonMan if she did do this on purpose to get pregnant, no, that's not okay. We don't know that's the case though, it's just the OP's assumption.

If it is the case, nobody is saying that she was right or that he deserves all he gets, but he choose to take zero responsibility for his own protection and so has to face that now.

He's old enough to understand that if a woman becomes pregnant, even in a casual sex FWB relationship, and he is the father, she is the one who gets to decide what to do about the pregnancy from that point on.

And if she decides to keep the baby when he would prefer her to terminate, then he is going to be held accountable, financially and otherwise, whether he likes it or not.

Which is why he should have done everything in his power to prevent a pregnancy while he still had some control over it. And worn a condom. Because now, no matter what her motives were, no matter what she planned or said or didn't say or even if she just thought it was a safe time of the month, it's not up to him anymore.

If you have a STI you know there is no safe time to have unprotected sex and you should disclose it to everyone you have sex with even if you use protection. But there are times when you are less likely to conceive and might assume it's 'safe' to have unprotected sex.

But again, why his his assumption less unreasonable than hers? Why can's she assume he's had the snip or is infertile or will pull out without ejaculating etc or that she is in a 'safe' point of her own cycle?

SarahAndFuck Tue 16-Jul-13 12:15:56

*Why is his assumption...

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 12:19:19

Uhm LondonMan I never said what she did was okay. hmm I just haven't jumped up and down defending his right to be irresponsible and then demand she has an abortion because she also wasn't responsible. (Remember, OP hasn't come back and said yes, I knoq 100% she got pregnant on purpose)

He didn't use a condom. He cannot then be angry she was also not using protection.

Unless of course, he thought it wasn't up to him to protect himself as best he could from fatherhood.

Whatever 'kind of' (person you think I am, comparing spending three months FWB without a condom, then becoming enraged your FWB is pregnant and demanding she has an abortion isn't the same as knowing you have HIV and purposefully withholding, because that is illegal. Even if it were legal, it's an offensive analogy. Especially to go on and say the same 'kind of people' condone both. shock

I condone neither but not really the same thing at all. Hence why one is illegal, and the other is considered to be up to people to make responsible choices.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 12:23:15

But again, why is his assumption less unreasonable than hers? Why can's she assume he's had the snip or is infertile or will pull out without ejaculating etc or that she is in a 'safe' point of her own cycle?


Oh, didn't you know Sarah? It's stupid to assume a man has had the snip, but equally it's irresponsible and grossly wrong of the woman not to point out before he happily puts it in that she's not on the pill.

As for disease?? Pfft. Only an issue in these sorts of debates, clearly. hmm Otherwise it's up to her, 100%!

Men who put their health and fertility in a stranger's care 100%, don't have a leg to stand on when they argue that she 'had' to tell him she wasn't on the pill. Really? Did he tell her he hadn't had the snip?

Sounds like a clear case of whoops, nature happened to me.

SarahAndFuck Tue 16-Jul-13 12:26:55

I feel like Jeremy Kyle, shouting "put something on the end of it then" over and over, with the message still not getting though.

But I'll say it again, in the way I'm going to explain it to my son. The only options a man has to prevent a pregnancy are condoms, vasectomy or abstinence.

And he should ALWAYS use one of those options, especially when having a casual sex with someone who isn't a long-term partner. He has no other way to protect his health and prevent pregnancy so those are the only options unless he is actively trying to impregnate someone. Not using a condom is not an option.

It does not matter one bit what arrangements the woman has or hasn't made for her own contraception, he can't just leave it all to her and pick and choose when to use a condom. It's condoms every time or be prepared for a situation like this. Even if he's told a condom isn't necessary. Because they are necessary, every single time.

I don't understand what's so difficult to accept about that.

SarahAndFuck Tue 16-Jul-13 12:28:51

SpecialAgent - smile I'm going to start following you about, writing 'like' underneath all your posts.

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 12:31:55

He cant be entirely to blame, It takes two. At most its only half his fault!

Of course the man is also responsible. Doesn't mean he is going to step up though. Im lucky that my father did, he didn't have to.

I think it happens quite a lot, which is part of the reason lots of children grow up in the shame of a single parent family where the father isn't around.

Whats so terrible about believing the woman you are about to have sex with when she says she is on the pill? Maybe irresponsible but does he really deserve to be punished by fathering an unwanted child?

My point is, no matter whose to blame, its the child that suffers, and I feel sorry for them

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 12:38:55

Agreed in my case he probably was horrible (mustve been to get involved with my mother) but I dont think OPs friends man (or any man in that situation) would automatically be a bastard for not wanting anything to do with the child they are saddled with.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 12:39:05

SpecialAgent - smile I'm going to start following you about, writing 'like' underneath all your posts.

Aww shucks! grinblush

GoodTouch I definitely, definitely agree it's 50% responsibility on both parties - Something that should be truly emphasised more in the media, but that's a different rant -

But I cannot agree there are many women who get pregnant 'accidentally-on-purpose' by their fuckbuddies.

Also, the friend never said she was on the pill apparently. Which makes it a clear case of: protect yourself, fend for yourself and pray nature doesn't play a joke on you (male of female) Both parties were equally responsible for this child.

Even in your DM's case, didn't she get pregnant to get your DF to stay? OP says she assumes friend just wanted a baby.

I do hope she clarifies that point, because everyone seems to be focusing on that and not there was risk for much worse

Even on contraceptives, I'd insist on a condom for casual sex. I don't want a disease. Far more in my mind than pregnancy TBH.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 12:41:01

I wouldn't think he was a bastard for not wanting a regular father-child relationship.

However if he hid his assets and refused/paid as little CSA as he could and if he DID see the child, told them all sorts of things about their mum? Then year, that's bastardly (?)

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 12:49:59

YY in the OPs case, he didn't even bother to ask.. he cant even claim he was misled. I totally agree with you when you say "what did he think would happen?"

But its all very well to say it serves him right, he should've used protection, but what about the child? If she had used a donor she could tell the child that she was a single mother by choice when she realised she wasn't going to find a man in time.

What does she tell the child in this situation? That its father knows but isn't interested in it? That it was a mistake?

Yes I agree, you cant blame a guy for not wanting a relationship with the child, but only a bastard would refuse to provide financially. I was extremely lucky

SarahAndFuck Tue 16-Jul-13 12:51:52

They are both equally responsible for the pregnancy, yes, but he is entirely responsible for his own actions/inactions and poor choices that lead to his part it. Just as she is responsible for hers.

Together those actions led to a pregnancy and he is entirely to blame for his part in that, especially if it's something he didn't want.

JohFlow Tue 16-Jul-13 12:54:08

They both take responsibility for lack of contraception - therefore they should both take responsibility for the life created. There is no NSA fun without contraception.

SpecialAgentTattooedQueen Tue 16-Jul-13 12:59:21

Well with the 'what about the child?' question, what about all the children born from casual relationships where the condom split and the father does the same advocating of responsibility?

As you said, I think all we can hope for in this case the child (and all, but that is again a different thread) is loved and financially secure. If a parent genuinely feels he can't provide love, the law says he must provide security.

So fingers crossed this a happy and loved child.

What I can't get my head across is -by this thread alone- clearly some men are far more terrified of pregnancy than disease... Yet does anyone truly believe if a disease was accidentally passed on he wouldn't blame her for his not wearing a condom? Even if she didn't know? (Think diseases that don't always show symptoms, like Chlamydia, or even HIV)

I think many men would still blame the woman. I saw a thread on here the other day where a man gave his wife herpes, then accused her of cheating because he's merely a carrier!! (Or the kind how has no symptoms)

GoodTouchBadTouch Tue 16-Jul-13 13:07:47

They are more terrified of pregnancy than disease because they cant do anything about a pregnancy. Unless you are talking AIDS, STDs can be treated. And generally at worst only lead to infertility.

It would be different if the condom split (IMO) because the woman would be able to sleep at night knowing that even though the man hadn't hung around, she had had good intentions but just been unlucky.

teetering13 Tue 16-Jul-13 13:18:36

Until men start taking responsibility for contraception, women can take advantage.

And as women have no need for a man under their roof these days but still have the urge to breed I'd say ... tough luck

Times have changed ... shaming/blaming women for something that could have been prevented if the man was responsible is ... well just ridiculous and old fashioned imo

Dahlen Tue 16-Jul-13 13:20:05

As an aside, I think women are something like 3x more likely to contract an STD from a man than men are from a woman.

The risks of sex for men and women are not equal.

Squitten Tue 16-Jul-13 13:36:36

He is absolutely responsbile for not preventing pregnancy himself if he didn't want a child.

She is responsible for not choosing a better father for her baby if she wanted one that badly.

pmgkt Tue 16-Jul-13 13:41:05

Another stupid woman giving us a bad name. I can see while he now feels trapped. She has deliberately got pregnant, albeit he should have also done something to prevent it too if he didn't want it, but now he is totally powerless. The woman gets to decide his future in a life changing way and there is nothing he can do. He has no say if he wants her to have an abortion, and I'm not suggesting that he should be able to force her too, but also he can't say he would raise it if she wants an abortion. I suppose what I'm trying to say is she holds all the cards now to his future, she still has choices but he doesn't. And that loss of any control has just hit him. Yes he should have control what he could by wearing a condom or not having fwb sex.

kim147 Tue 16-Jul-13 13:44:10

"I suppose what I'm trying to say is she holds all the cards now to his future, she still has choices but he doesn't"

She holds the cards to his financial future - even though the CSA are crap with this stuff.

But he had a choice at the start. And he can not have a say over what happens to the pregnancy or the baby.

DioneTheDiabolist Tue 16-Jul-13 13:44:57

I can't believe that some of the posters here think they have a Ruhr to c

DioneTheDiabolist Tue 16-Jul-13 14:09:39

What lie of omission is he guilty of?confused.
And I am shock that anyone thinks that this man is not entitled to have his own feelings about this. How controlling to think you can control the feelings of another human being.

cumfy Tue 16-Jul-13 14:17:50

But why has the father has gone absolutely ballistic ?

It sounds most likely she has lied about contraception (explicitly or implicitly).

Or else, he's a complete moron, in which case why would she have unprotected sex with him ?

movingonandup Tue 16-Jul-13 14:21:14

Whats so terrible about believing the woman you are about to have sex with when she says she is on the pill? Maybe irresponsible but does he really deserve to be punished by fathering an unwanted child?

But she didn't lie.
She didn't say she was on the pill.
Neither of them ever discussed it at all.
His assumption was based purely on wishful thinking which, as everyone knows, isn't the best contraceptive going!

He knowingly had unprotected sex. Nothing he had been told led him to believe otherwise. And unsurprisingly the result of that is imminent fatherhood.

It is hardly a punishment - he knew what he was getting into and if he didn’t then he’s either very innocent or very stupid.

Dione, she didnt ever say she was on the pill. He didnt ever say he'd had the snip. Yet she is being called a liar and he the victim. Why?

revealall Tue 16-Jul-13 14:37:22

"I suppose what I'm trying to say is she holds all the cards now to his future, she still has choices but he doesn't"

How's that then? A man still has the choice about involvement or not. The CSA has nothing to do with contact. He can also escape the CSA fairly easily if the woman involved doesn't know his details/moving abroad /being self employed etc. He's home free until the CSA make contact which can be many years down the line and none of it is back dated.

Women still have to make the worse choice which is whether to kill the potential life inside them.

cumfy Tue 16-Jul-13 14:52:26

So what happens if she now finds out that she and the baby have contracted HIV from him ?

Now it's too late for her to have a "tantrum" re their unprotected sex.

What a wonderful world, eh ?

"she didnt ever say she was on the pill. He didnt ever say he'd had the snip. Yet she is being called a liar and he the victim. Why?"

^^That.

He's the fool if he didn't even ask, they're both old enough to know what sex leads to and if he didn't want a child then he should have used protection, just as she should have if she didn't.

He had a choice to use a condom, he didn't bother.

My opinion would be a little more sympathetic had she lied but still pretty much the same. You take control of your own fertility and any man that calls a woman a bitch and demands an abortion because he chose not to use protection is an utter twunt.

And they had been having sex for 3 months, had they been in a relationship for 3 months I bet a lot less people would be screaming about STI's. Unless every person on this thread had their partners tested before they decided to have children?

DioneTheDiabolist Tue 16-Jul-13 15:10:25

SPB the OP said that she thinks that her friend deliberately did not bring up the issue because she wanted to get pregnant. The deliberate non disclosure of pertinent information is a lie of omission.

But he didnt disclose that hed done nothing about contraception either. I fail to see the difference really. He deliberately didnt say oh and my little swimmers are still fully wriggly

tittytittyhanghang Tue 16-Jul-13 15:46:23

IMO it doesn't matter if she wanted to get pregnant or not. This is 2013 people, woman cant get pregnant on their own, and unless they knock a man out cold and steal his sperm, we cant trick them neither.

What is so hard to understand that a man is solely responsible for his own fertility. Since men cant have babies they are given a clear choice pre piv. Either abstain, get the snip, or wear a condom (bearing in mind that the latter two only minimise the risk of pregnancy and only the abstaining 100% guarantees no pregnancy ). ITS NOT FUCKING ROCKET SCIENCE. Once they have made their choice, it is then out of their hands, and if the end result is not what they want, then they only have themselves to blame.

As an aside, as a woman, I would never assume that a man had had a snip, or taken their pill (if it was available). Who the fuck relies on a fwb to take care of their contraception.

CaptChaos Tue 16-Jul-13 16:51:31

Dione so, by your argument, he is equally guilty of lying by omission when he failed to disclose that he a) hadn't had the snip/wasn't infertile and b) that, despite the fact that he wasn't going to take any level of responsibility for his fertility, he would reserve the right to 'go ballistic' should the obvious happen and she becomes pregnant.

He deliberately didn't bring the subject up, because he is an irresponsible person, for whom consequences don't matter, until they are presented to him. And then he reserves the right to go ballistic about them.

Mumoftwoyoungkids I was trying, in a slightly cack-handed way, to suggest that there really aren't any circumstances under which it would be acceptable for a man who has fathered a child to be able to 'waive his responsibilities'. Even couples who take every precaution under the sun, up to and including taking the MAP run a risk of conception. If someone is adult enough to get it on, they must accept that they are adult enough to bear the consequences.

However, loving the 'It's the woman's fault, the scheming bitch' comments, good to see that misogynistic double standards are alive and well! hmm

tittytittyhanghang Tue 16-Jul-13 16:54:50

If someone is adult enough to get it on, they must accept that they are adult enough to bear the consequences.

The voice of reason :D

Owllady Tue 16-Jul-13 16:55:11

He sounds like a right idiot. Did he miss the sex education classes at school? hmm

kickassangel Tue 16-Jul-13 17:23:53

when you stick Mr. Happy inside somebody’s hoo-ha without a raincoat, that’s the kinda shit that happens.

(from True Blood).

DioneTheDiabolist Tue 16-Jul-13 21:37:16

SPB we don't know that he didn't tell her that. Maybe he did.

SarahAndFuck Tue 16-Jul-13 21:52:11

And we don't know that she wanted to use him to get pregnant. Maybe she didn't.

The OP (who hasn't come back for some time) assumed so. As did a lot of others on this thread.

tittytittyhanghang Tue 16-Jul-13 21:58:07

Well Dione if he did tell her that his sperm was in full working order he will surely have been aware of what happens to full working sperm is inserted into a womans vagina. Moral of the story - Your fertility is your look out, dont expect anyone else to take responsibility for it.