To not pay for an unwanted child?

If a woman wants a one night stand - okay. But she shouldn't be able to go after the man for money if she gets pregnant.

As a woman it's disturbing to see the amount of comments on here suggesting that women should always be allowed to bully a man into a child they don't want!

For starters I feel annoyed at the heartless people on here claiming that couples that don't want to have kids, have no right to have a normal healthy sex life! Nobody has the right to dictate who has sex!

If a pregnancy happens due to a one night stand then intelligence is required! You have a grown up conversation because a one night stand with someone you barely know means it's highly likely that neither party will want to let the pregnancy proceed! I don't like the assumption that all women would rush to become a single mother in this situation and bully the bloke!

I had a friend once who had a kid after a drunken one night stand, catholic parents made her have the baby and it was pure misery for her for years! She hated being a mother, she wasn't ready, the kid had issues & was needy, he hated not having a dad and that impacted them both all the time! She would pour her heart out to me about how she couldn't help feeling like she just wanted to give him away, she couldn't cope, it had messed up her life. Her mental health never really improved in all time I knew her and her behaviour towards a future boyfriend was all kinds of wrong.

Having a baby in those circumstances is foolish for everyone involved!

That is a fantastic way of putting it! Poor child is always the afterthought

The child shares DNA with you , you are responsible- there is no ducking out of responsibility. You don't want children the only way to be 100% sure there is no chance of a child is not to have sex-you have sex you have a chance of responsibility.

I am torn on this. The child needs support and better from the parent than the taxpayer. Also allowing him to “opt out” can result in women feeling coerced into abortions.

Men who don’t want children should be using contraception. That said I am fine if the man chooses not to be in the child’s life. But financial support remains necessary.

The one I always feel most sorry for in these situations is the child, though. It seems so sad to bring a child into the world knowing its father doesn’t want anything to do them (and never wanted them in the first place). The thought of having to break that to the child one day, and the child feeling rejected is heartbreaking. Who wants to feel that they were only born due to an unplanned accident and that one of the two people who should love them more than anyone else in the world wanted nothing to do with them from even before they were born? For that reason, I insisted on using double contraception up until I was engaged and fiancée and I were definitely on the same page about it, despite having had a number of different boyfriends and been sexually active for a decade previously.

Perhaps strangely, I don’t have any issue with women choosing to use donor sperm though. That seems a different situation where a woman plans to be a mother, makes careful arrangements to do so because she wants a child so much and being able to explain that to the child when they’re old enough to understand sounds far more positive when the child was longed for and wanted in advance of their conception.

That's why it's always best to be extra safe to prevent this situation! Woman contraception, man contraception, double barrier! Also STDs.

If the DNA proves it to be his. If paying child support he should also go on the birth certificate and have parental rights

Not a real question so should be kicked out

Let's say a woman does totally trick a man, lies to him that she's on contraception, gets pregnant, he doesn't want it, she goes ahead....that probably isn't "fair"...but that's an issue for the adults involved. Why should the child be punished for that?

I know I am completely in the minority with these thoughts but I do think that an accidental pregnancy should have both parents in agreement to keep it. If the father is clear that don’t want the child and the mother chooses to keep it, it should be on the understanding she is in her own.

We have a friend who’s had a pneumonia night stand at 17. She kept the child but didn’t want him involved and actually had another man bring the baby up as his but our friend still had to pay child maintenance for 18 years. He always says it is the most expensive shag he’s ever had.

I have a 17 year old son and I drum into him to always use a condom even if his partner says she is on the pill as women have all the power and his life will be in her hands if they get pregnant.

I do appreciate that it would be difficult to manage and some men say they will support them later in pregnancy change their mind.

I think this is a difficult one. I know this couple, no longer married, who agreed on never-ever having children. She changed her mind, but he didn't follow. She secretely stopped taking the pill, got pregnant. They divorced. Yes he pays for the child but thinks he shouldn't, because they had an agreement. He feels she tricked him. I do inderstand him, sort-of.

All the things you’ve mentioned are known risks. Don’t take the risk if you’re not prepared to accept the consequences. Woman says she’s on the pill.. your penis you protect it. Contraception failing happens all the time.. don’t want to take the risk don’t have sex. Men are the least affected by unexpected pregnancies by a country mile.

Doesn’t make a difference gheres all ways of getting out of paying and a lot do. Although saying that if the woman doesn’t want the baby and him in her life can he fight for custody to keep the child that’s his

Absolutely not. Any man can opt out of the process of making a baby by opting out of sex with a fertile woman. If he doesn't want a baby, he shouldn't have sex. What happens after conception is up to the woman as he has already made his decision and decided that having a baby is OK with him.

Yes personally I think they should be able to op out but only in pregnant and if they’ve never met the child or had anything to do with them.

And what about women who for a variety of very valid reasons feel abortion is not an option for them? What about women who may be forced/coerced into an abortion by a man refusing to pay for the child he co- created because shes worried about affording things alone? What about the impact on the child who has less available income than children with two providing parents?

This stance again forces women into unfair situations where they end up taking on a care giver role, makes it even easier for men to negate their responsibilities, creates a vacuum of solid male role models which we know affects children, makes it more likely that children will grow up in poverty, will put increased pressure on statutory services and ultimately overall reinforces the concept that women should be the default caregiver while men continue on life as normal.

You do grown up things, you face grown up consequences - women have known this for millennia but this actually applies to men as well. Something some seem to forget.

You can't opt out of the other risks that having sex brings. If someone had a one night stand, took precautions but ended up with a sexually transmitted disease they can't just say "well, I didnt want it so I dont have to think about it or take responsibility for it or adjust my life in any way"

Why should you opt out of the responsibility of parenthood and carry on with business as usual?

My ex says he didn't want our children and I made him, so by that logic would argue he shouldn't have to pay.

In reality "I made him" was him saying that he wanted kids from the start of the relationship, him not saying he'd changed his mind over 8 years while we did the thing we agreed to do before having kids (established careers, buy house), him not saying he'd changed his mind while we looked up schools and catchment areas to buy in, him continuing to say he wanted kids while we (mostly me) saved for two years to cover maternity leave & childcare, then again saying he was ready for kids when we had the conversation about stopping contraception and ttc.

Motherhood is a career choice for some women. When education is finished, or not of interest, the next step many women choose is a job and then motherhood. Having a baby means independence from parents and joining a community of mums.

That board game Life, demonstrates this idea … the little cars that don’t pursue higher education get the babies first. When education is complete, for many this is at 16. How long does a young woman then wait to get that baby? And £200 is a lot if you are on very first rung of employment and have a baby, and you have graduated right into adult life with a baby, and baby-daddy to prove it.

People make different choices.

No. The reason the woman gets final say is because to forcibly perform a medical procedure on a human is illegal and abhorrent.

The moment men agree to assist with the accidental culmination of sex with a fertile woman is when they have sex.

Women get more of a choice because it’s their body at risk. They also risk death when carrying a mutually planned baby. Men take no risks when choosing to have a baby - women take all. Equally men take a greater risk when having sex with strangers.

but women can have all the sex and all the orgasms they like

lesbians do it all the time

it's just that one bit, ejaculation inside a woman by a man, that causes pregnancy

there's so much more to sex than that one bit

and that one bit for a great many women is pretty ho hum and not the bit that gives us the orgasm anyway

"would be the fair way to let BOTH genders have some say in becoming a parent or not"

men have every opportunity to be 100% sure they do not create a pregnancy if they do not want to become a father

do not ejaculate into a woman who is in her fertile years

they can still have loads of sex, just don't do that one thing

easy

no birth control, no vasectomy required, just don't ejaculate inside a woman