To not pay for an unwanted child?

I’d exclude the very small number of cases where a boy was sexually assaulted and a child resulted. I really don’t think that’s the scenario most men are thinking of when they try and argue for the ability to walk away.

I don’t think it’s reasonable for it to be the woman’s responsibility to consider if she can pay for the child alone - it’s not about her, it’s about the needs of the child being as well met as possible by the people who made them. Because let’s say she does decide that she can go it alone and then she discovers that actually she can’t fully independently support herself and her child. Is it then ok for the child to pay the price for that poor decision and live in poverty? Or does the taxpayer have to step in? I’d say it’s the primary responsibility of the man willingly chanced creating the child when he chose to have sex.

It could be the way the question is viewed. I was responding to the title, therefore yabu.

All those people saying go and have a vasectomy - the odds are small but even they can fail. Sex still = chance of pregnancy no matter what contraception.

And he just doesn't pay for his child because the woman won't be frogmarched in to an abortion? That's a really low bar you are setting for all men.

@AlmostAJillSandwich - are you kidding?

Any time people have sex (during childbearing years) they are taking the risk of having a child. If they can't accept that, go off and have a vasectomy.

Otherwise, use all birth control available to them, never rely on a partner doing so, and accept the risk as part of the deal.

I notice your response didn't give any consideration to what was best for the innocent child created. Just the wants of the parents who created it.

The right to financial support belongs to the baby and isn't something that parents should be able to opt out of.
The fact is though, all these people saying men should be able to walk away, well the fact is, they can and do walk away. Regardless of what the law says about it, it doesn't actually force men to support their children.

Yes. If the woman gets the final say to keeping an unwanted pregnancy, then it follows it is her responsibility to raise the child alone and let the man leave her and the baby behind to move on with his life. That’s the only way both parties get what they want. The woman gets to keep her baby; the man gets to not have a child.

I'd love to see a split of the 17% who think it's acceptable for fathers to opt out of responsibility between men vs women...

No because

1. Anything other than celibacy is an acceptance of pregnancy risk. It's informed consent. He doesn't get to insist on a woman taking a proactive step toward abortion to mitigate for him losing a gamble.

1. If a child is born, we are talking about a real person being let down by a man shrugging their shoulders.

In both those cases the men made their choices and the consequences are theirs to deal with.

I've educated my sons about risks and responsibilities. Any sex = potential baby and they have no say over what happens next.

There’s all kinds of shitty people doing shitty things.
Some women do try to get pregnant for reasons - I know of 2. One because the guy was a catch & she saw an income opportunity - hugely ££ successful lawyer & she told him she was on pill because she wanted a baby and this guy had £££. She got nice child support, flat, private school & maintenance even tho they were literally never dating. The other, a professional woman wanted baby and she didn’t want to do IVF, got pregnant on a business conference w nice man from other side of the world & he doesn’t know. Never asked for support.

Guys need to know these ladies are out there.

Many people are careless with birth control which I find shocking - because everyone knows the outcome of pregnancy. And you get this “one night” guy in your life - forever!!!

For condom fails-
There is morning after pill - it’s not an abortion as conception wouldn’t have happened yet (most likely)

Anyway, yes I think he has to pay child support & should have opportunity to shared parenting.
Both parents should support the child, I don’t think third-party tax payers should pay for the baby.

The child support is not for the mother it's to pay for the child's needs. The child's needs don't go away just because man doesn't feel he should contribute.

If you are old enough to have sex, you should be old enough to understand than sex can lead to conception. And that no form of contraception is 100% reliable.

So the taxpayer should pay for the child? Taxpayers who had no part in the child's conception, while the man who is the father, who willingly had sex and who impregnated the mother, walks away?

A man should control his fertility or take the consequences.

Why is it being a one night stand relevant? What if it was a fling, FWB etc? That would only work if it was extended to say unless any pregnancy was planned (and what, we need to written proof of that?) If the man asks for an abortion and the woman declines then he can opt out of caring for his child financially? If it wasn't planned then it being one night or a 15 year marriage with 3 previous children is completely irrelevant. They knowingly had sex with someone who is capable of getting pregnant, the mutual responsibility is exactly the same.
Being married or wanting a hook up with a stranger does not affect the likelihood of conception.

Why wouldn’t I be? I’m here to tell the WHAT ABOUT ABORTION I FEEL SORRY FOR MEN WHAT ABOUT IF HE SAYS SHE TRICKED HIM types that they sound like dimwits

How would you police that? Surely it’s a ‘he says she says’ situation at this point? How do you ‘prove’ the woman was lying to entrap the male? Surely any woman who does that would get the free prescription but not take them.

Also, I disagree - the man can choose not to have sex. You shoot your load, you play Russian Roulette with your future, each and every time, regardless of any safeguards you put in place. They only mitigate the risk of conception, they don’t remove it and you know that from the outset. You need to nut up and accept the consequences of your choice if it goes against you.

This said as a woman who has fallen pregnant twice while both on the pill (taken regularly as prescribed) and using high quality condoms…I chose not to take either of those pregnancies to term but if I had, why on earth should I be the only one on the hook when we both made the choice to have sex?

This

The flip side of this is that you can then argue that a woman can be compelled to carry a baby she doesn't want but the man does, and that he is prepared to be a single father of without her involvement.

I know of one such real life situation and the father was devastated when the woman terminated.