to want a national "Deadbeat Dad" register?

[bogeyface]

Inspired by another thread and my response to it.

So many of us get royally screwed by these twats. So if you end up getting your maintenance being taken from your wages because you refused to co-operate then you go on the DBDR.

Yes yes, I know it wouldnt really work, but AIBU to wish it could be done to save other women from getting involved with these twats?

Phew!

outraged

its simple you tell him that for many reasons some of them unknown the pill is not 100% effective neither is a condom but a condom is more effective than the pill,if its essential not to end up with a baby then either dont have sex or use a condom

"That's victim blaming"

There's a lot of that on this thread. Most of it going in the direction of the mothers who are not receiving maintenance because they had a child with a wanker.

It's quite clear.

GoldenHandshake Fri 17-Aug-12 11:30:10

Shirley he hasn't lied about the circumstances, she has been quite open in saying she had told him she was taking the pill and lied about it. He is actually a decent person, just very honest about not wanting to be a father at 17,

Treats Fri 17-Aug-12 11:36:42
GoldenHandshakes - I think you're being really obtuse. If he didn't want to be a father he SHOULD HAVE WORN A CONDOM!!!!! FFS! He totally had a choice in the matter. He has to live with the consequences of his choice.

Always wear a condom. (and where on earth has this BS come that condom guarantees no kids? see www.patient.co.uk/health/Contraceptive-Choices.htm 0.3% failure with the pill; 2% with barrier methods.)

Never, ever believe a woman who says she's on the pill.

Is that where we really are?

Oh and outraged - why would you be getting into all that once your son was in a sexual relationship?

The best way is to have these conversations LONG before they are going to be having sex and the conversation goes:

Me: Well, when you decide to have sex with a woman then it means that there is always a risk of pregnancy. The only way to prevent that is to use a condom.
Son: What if my girlfriend is on the pill?
Me: If you want to make sure that sex doesn't lead to a baby then you use a condom - they aren't 100% safe either though, so you must be prepared that if you have sex there is a chance that a baby will be conceived. Which you will then be responsible for.

Happy days!

It's not about a guarantee onemorechap, it's about taking responsibility for ones own reproduction.

I believe that men are quite capable of this!

And, if the contraceptive fails then the child must be paid for. It's not rocket science.

The problem was that contraception and child rearing was made the remit of the woman, long ago (even though condoms have been around for centuries). It didn't have to be like that but it freed up the male to work and fight wars.

Now we need to drum it into our children that they have a duel responsibility and condoms outside of a long term relationship should be the norm.

It goes along with respect and self respect, contraceptions fail, a teenage lad cannot understand how a girl feels when she wants to keep the baby, if a baby arrives it is both parties responsibilty.

I would be worried if i thought my children don't use condoms (mine do), especially if travelling to some countries. Pregnancy would not be as much of a woryy but that is because i have DD's and i know what the outcome for my GC, will be.

Changlingz those are very interesting facts.

Outraged
How about, "well, son. As much as I like and respect your GF, and don't believe she would make a mistake, you have to protect yourself and her. You also have to know that no contraceptive is 100% and think about what you would do if the contraceptive fails".

Why do you have to warn of manipulative women who just want a baby (and do you REALLY think that there are thousands of them swarming around the nightclubs just waiting for your son?).

I don't understand this whole argument, tbh.

Why take the statement, 'It angers me that the majority of non-resident parents do not pay maintenance for their children' (which is the essence of the OP) and make it into 'women should not be having sex unless they have known the man for a year or two'?

Why is the woman to blame?

are some posters here really at the concept of each man taking personal responsibility for their own sperm?

But you know what? The men know she has kids she has dumped and it doesn't seem to matter to these men who get her up the duff

You could say the same about women who have children with men who don't support the children they already have! But its probably not that simple is it. Hmm.

I am Always amazed at how the parent that has stuck around and looked after their child is the spiteful bitter one and the parent that hasn't is 'decent' and the victim. Hmm again.

I have and will continue to tell my sons that if they don't want to make a baby then they must take responsibility and use condoms. If they for whatever reason choose not to then they have to be prepared for parenthood.

Oh and a man who has known for 12 years that he has a child and has had no interest in said child even if he was 'honest' with the mother about his lack of interest is not 'decent' he is a cunt

ShirleyKnot Fri 17-Aug-12 13:00:20
It's not about a guarantee onemorechap, it's about taking responsibility for ones own reproduction.

Indeed. And the fact that if a woman says she is using a more effective method you should use one too.

I believe that men are quite capable of this!
As indeed are women.

But, by the same token, if a man is using a condom, what method is the woman using to "taking responsibility for ones own reproduction"

And, if the contraceptive fails then the child must be paid for. It's not rocket science.

No problem with that.
But if the woman - as in this case - isn't taking responsibility should the man realise that she is lying and take additional precautions? I sure as heck wouldn't sleep with someone who lied about that. Willingly.

hope my grandson grows up knowing it is not derogable, that he can't ever abdicate the responsibility for his sperm to anyone or anything else

can't imagine just jizzing up someone's minge and trusting in some chemical or coil to protect me from parenthood

AmberLeaf Fri 17-Aug-12 13:46:26

I have and will continue to tell my sons that if they don't want to make a baby then they must take responsibility and use condoms. If they for whatever reason choose not to then they have to be prepared for parenthood.

and to recognise that there's a 2% failure rate with condoms and to ensure they don't sleep with a partner who also takes responsibility for contraception with a method as least as reliable?

"But if the woman - as in this case - isn't taking responsibility should the man realise that she is lying and take additional precautions? I sure as heck wouldn't sleep with someone who lied about that. Willingly."

No, the man should take precautions if he doesn't want to have a baby. That's HIS choice and HIS responsibility.

Moaning about it once the baby is here (and has been for 12 years) and refusing to pay is just revolting.

I'm not sure, but I get the feeling that we actually agree. Contraception is each persons responsibility. If I don't want a baby, I take precautions. If my partner doesn't want a baby, he takes precautions. Seriously, this stuff shouldn't be coming as a revelation to anyone.

If I met someone tomorrow and decided to have sex with them, I would make sure they wore a condom (because I don't particularly fancy catching anything nasty) but I am also protected. I have taken responsibility for my reproduction because I don't want any unplanned pregnancies.

If I DID get pregnant because of a double contraceptive failure then I would expect the man to take EQUAL responsibility for that child.

As to contraceptive failure, Whose "fault" is it if a condom breaks and a baby results? Should the man in that scenario also be exempt from paying for the child?

Onemorechap. We have discussed the failure rates of condoms and also that the failure rate is less if used correctly. They even have lessons on how to put them on correctly at school.

So yes sometimes condoms fail but still much less chance of an unwanted pregnancy if you use them.

They can't be responsible for what their sleeping partner does or doesn't use only themselves.

Onemorechap - can't understand your argument. If he's wearing a condom then surely it DOESN'T MATTER what contraception she's using, or whether she's lying about it. What 'additional precautions' should he be taking?

Honestly, though, if he's that worried about lying, scheming sperm-bandits, why have sex with them at all? Celibacy is 100% guaranteed contraception.

Unless you think men have the right to no-consequences sex whenever they fancy it and shouldn't be expected to take responsibility for it. As some people on this thread seem to think.

Sheesh.

Treats Fri 17-Aug-12 14:04:53
Onemorechap - can't understand your argument. If he's wearing a condom then surely it DOESN'T MATTER what contraception she's using, or whether she's lying about it. What 'additional precautions' should he be taking?

I suspect - much to my surprise - I'm agreeing with ShirleyKnot.

What you seem to be saying is that if he doesn't want kids he must wear a condom, and it is irrelevant what the woman is doing. Despite the fact that barrier is less reliable (roughly 7 times the failure rate to the oral contraceptive pill).

In most case - you'd hope - contraception is a joint decision with men not trying to impregnate women, nor women trying to sneakily fall pregnant. If it's the man's role to take his responsibility for contraception albeit with a less reliable method, surely it's similarly reasonable that the women takes her own responsibility for contraception.

Honestly, though, if he's that worried about lying, scheming sperm-bandits, why have sex with them at all?

Don't the women have any responsibility to avoid pregnancy as well? How about them also taking precautions? Or even them jointly deciding what they will do.

Celibacy is 100% guaranteed contraception.
As is a hysterectomy, and vasectomy, or sleeping with women who've been sterilisised is pretty close.

Unless you think men have the right to no-consequences sex whenever they fancy it and shouldn't be expected to take responsibility for it. As some people on this thread seem to think.

Why do you think thatanyone is saying that? I can't see anyone doing so

ShirleyKnot Fri 17-Aug-12 14:01:08
I'm not sure, but I get the feeling that we actually agree. Contraception is each persons responsibility. If I don't want a baby, I take precautions. If my partner doesn't want a baby, he takes precautions. Seriously, this stuff shouldn't be coming as a revelation to anyone.

Actually, I think we do, too.

As to contraceptive failure, Whose "fault" is it if a condom breaks and a baby results? Should the man in that scenario also be exempt from paying for the child?

Of course not, just like he isn't if the pill fails [Bit more of an issue if the pill isn't being taken or the condoms are being damaged, when he's still liable]. But if the woman had taken responsibility for contraception as well... it's less likely to happen.

Of course, there is huge asymmetry in this. If pregnancy results it is a huge physical impact on the woman, and far less for the man, so it's pretty fair he should expect to pay for it.

Having said that, there's also asymmetry in that the woman decides if she wants to try and carry the child to term - and the father has no decision in that.

My advice to my son was always to wear a condom, FWIW, and to choose who he's sleeping with carefully.

When my XP told me she was unexpectedly pregnant we discussed it over a few weeks. Would our relatively new relationship survive it, what would we do if it didn't, could we afford it to bring a child up, what support would there be, indeed did we want to bring another child into the world.

That and much more.

I support the idea that it's up to a woman to decide what happens to her body, but I think in a reasonable world the two future parents should work together to decide what best to do.

We both changed our minds over the weeks from yes, to no, to yes.

I know this doesn't happen in every situation but I'm grateful to my XP for including me in the decision process.

I think the majority of people have those conversations and make joint decisions WRT to pregnancy actually.

And, really it's irrelevant to this discussion isn't it? Whether or not a man wants a child or not, once a pregnancy has occured and a baby has been born he should pay.

Every single time, without exception.

'And, really it's irrelevant to this discussion isn't it? Whether or not a man wants a child or not, once a pregnancy has occured and a baby has been born he should pay.

Every single time, without exception.'

Unless you're one of the 10% of dads who are the resident-parent.
Or the 8-9% who share care equally.

I thought that went without saying.