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

[JaffaMyCake]

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?

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.

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'

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?

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.

"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

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

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.)

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"

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.

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 :/

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?

*Why is his assumption...

Uhm LondonMan I never said what she did was okay. 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.

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.

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. 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.

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.

SpecialAgent - I'm going to start following you about, writing 'like' underneath all your posts.

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

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.

SpecialAgent - smile I'm going to start following you about, writing 'like' underneath all your posts.

Aww shucks!

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.

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 (?)

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

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.

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.

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)

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.