If he doesn't want a baby, you shouldn't seek CSA

[NeedACleverNN]

Why the hell is this line still trotted out?

I've even seen it on here. Woman falls pregnant, boyfriend doesn't want it and wants an abortion. She doesn't. People advise her to keep the baby and let him go. Don't bother seeking child maintenance because he didn't want the baby in the first place.

No!! If he didn't want a baby he should take his own precautions to preventing pregnancy. You don't like condoms? You don't have sex!

Again, why do some posters think the welfare of children is less important than the rights of a man who has chosen to have sex? The idea that paying support is punishment of men or somehow rewarding women is why so many children aren't receiving the support they deserve.

If a child comes into existence that child has the right to food, clothing and shelter. The mindset that these needs should come second to a man's right to ejaculate without consequence is abhorrent.

When I read these thread all I can think of its lucky that only a child is the end result of unprotected sex.

The hiv/aids risk is a lot more riskier and you can't pay or walk away from it.

Kittens I merely pointed out that a man's options, when it comes to contraception are limited. You gave two possibilities, which essentially amounted to Condoms and Abstinence and then listed more (but no means all) of the options open to women - which sort of proved my point.

It's amazing how many otherwise intelligent men are tricked /trapped into creating a whole new human being with their penis

I think more needs to be done about their plight. I suggest forming a support group. My ex will be first in the door. I trapped him, you know, because I'm a nasty bitch and wanted his superior, er, genetics and earning ability.

Of course, he hasn't seen his child in five years , and hasn't contributed a penny in that time. Not even a birthday card. Nothing. Fuck. All. He knows where we live and is on the birth certificate

I must be terrifying

I remember a girl in work saying about a friend of hers getting pregnant, not telling the father and 'getting on with life'. The men were both horrified pointing out that the father was never told about the baby, was never given the opportunity to be a dad and then wanted to know what the mum was going to tell the baby about their dad when they got older. Both men also pointed out that men who don't pay maintenance are scumbags and that mothers who refuse dads access are as bad. It was interesting to hear them talking about it.

Nope Malice, I didn't prove your point at all. And I never mentioned abstinence as an option. I said that there are ways of having sex that don't involve penetration. It says a lot though, that you think not sticking your dick in a woman equals abstinence.

So a man's contraceptive options are limited. You still have options though, right? So use them.

The welfare of children should definitely come above all else, to the point of preventing them being conceived if it's not a situation where they will be wanted by both parents. Yes, I accept that even doubling up on contraception can't completely erase the risk of conception, but it definitely can and does minimise it massively, especially when used accurately and carefully. The rights of the man and the woman come below this.

It's just so far from ideal that kids are born where fathers or mothers have to be chased from the very start of the child's life, not only from a financial support PoV but for the child's emotional welfare, knowing they weren't wanted and feeling rejected by a birth parent . Yes, I know it's generally the man in these situations that rejects the child but I also know a man in his 30s whose parents were in a long term relationship, mother always stated she never wanted kids but fell pregnant. She agreed to carry the baby as its father begged her to, but she made plain that she would leave and have nothing to do with it when born. She kept her word. Yes, his Dad did a great job of raising him alone (and later with a DSM) but he must feel rejection and has tentatively spoken of wanting to find her and meet her but is apprehensive knowing she might reject him again.

But how do we go about fostering more of a sense of responsibility about what a huge deal creating a child and bringing it into the world should be? I tend to think there should be more time allocated in schools to it, especially the PSHE aspect of clear conversation from early on in a relationship, before even having sex, discussing consequences of being reckless (from the child's PoV and parent left holding the baby's pov), as well as of course making young people clued up on the many contraception options etc.

Parents, too, I think shouldnt be afraid to talk to their own DCs about these issues, risks and responsibilities from whichever age they think they are ready- certainly as soon as they suspect they might start having sex.

A PP mentioned that I seem to put all the onus on the woman. That's not my intention, but I suppose I am speaking only from my own experience of being a woman, the choices I've made etc. I certainly think boys and men need to be educated equally well in these issues, and I intend to make my own DS aware of how I feel and urge him to think and act very carefully to consider the possible consequences of his actions on a potential child he creates.

OK - I think we should step away from the whole 'he said she said' part of this argument. None of us can change biology. A man cannot get pregnant and have birth so he doesn't get to choose what happens at that stage because it isn't his body.

Can we just start this discussion from the perspective of the child? A human baby, needing food and shelter, hopefully love as well. Who is responsible for supporting the child?

1. an adult who had consensual sex and created the baby?
2. other adults?
3. who?

IT doesn't matter who said what before the baby was conceived. There is a baby, who will become a child, who HAS TO be cared for. Who is responsible for that?

So what if she said she was on the pill, or he thought he'd pulled his penis out early enough? If an adult becomes a parent, they are responsible for doing the absolute best by that child that they can. That includes money, emotion, time, getting covered in shit and still loving them.

We should make it like a mantra that kids repeat at school during PSHE. "Sex leads to babies. Babies have to be cared for". NOBODY at all, ever, should think they can have sex without being responsible for any children that are born.

Because you know who got the least say in all of this?

The baby.

Surely it would not be unreasonable for a woman to have the father of her child attend the first scan (or perhaps some other time before that) and confirm that he is prepared to take responsibility for the child. This could be 'presumed' in the case of a married couple.

I see where you're coming from but please think of the women who maybe have been raped or in violent relationships who have break downs at the thought of being in the same room as the father of their child. Plus if he doesn't turn up then what happens?

Malice - we may have more varied birth control but IMO if a man really doesn't want kids, vasectomies are there for a reason. It's a non-invasive procedure that can be done quickly, safely and (from what I've heard!) painlessly and is also reversible if they change their mind. Just saying if they're that fussed it's not a bad route to go down

It's not (or shouldn't be) considered reversible. The female equivalent (I'm guessing that's also 'reversible') would be last on the list for temporary contraception.

What I've tried to get across (not very successfully I admit) is that if women have the right to choose (which I absolutely believe in) then it's not that unreasonable to think that such a right would come with slightly more responsibility I'm not saying that women get pregnant on their own btw.

"I don't think a man should be forced into keeping and therefore paying for a baby.... Yes you both take risks and yes the only real 100% affective contraception is not to have sex but why does that only apply to men?
It's unfair as a man has no choice once it's done a woman can still choose to end the pregnancy."

SmileyHappyPeople we have been through this already. Mature sensible adults understand that having sex can result in pregnancy. Mature sensible adults take responsibility for their actions and that includes maintaining and supporting any children they have created regardless of the circumstances of their conception. Mature sensible adults who really do not wish to have children abstain, get sterilised or find a partner who feels exactly the same.

Anyway I think we need a change in the law regarding children's rights to parental support as it is clear that from a sampling of the attitudes here many feel that men have an entitlement to sex and women's bodies without any of the responsibilities that come with that.

Mature sensible adults who really do not wish to have children abstain, get sterilised or find a partner who feels exactly the same.

Yes, except that all too often the partner who says "of course I would abort if I accidentally got pregnant" decides she is "broody" and can't possibly have a termination when the accidental pregnancy occurs. So a man who thought he had an ironclad agreement with his partner on this important topic is SOL and on the way to unwanted parenthood.

I'm glad I'm a woman who can abort at will and that no one could force me to become a mother against my wishes. I feel sorry for men who think they and their partner are in sync on the topic and then find out otherwise. Were I a man I would freeze some sperm just in case, and then be sterilized, so no one could change her mind on me as in the above scenario.

'What I've tried to get across (not very successfully I admit) is that if women have the right to choose (which I absolutely believe in) then it's not that unreasonable to think that such a right would come with slightly more responsibility I'm not saying that women get pregnant on their own btw.'

So what do you mean by 'slightly more responsibility', then, Malice?

clear he doesn't want a child and a woman tricks him into having one, he shouldn't have to pay in my opinion.

Well, yes, yes of course male rape victims shouldn't be required to pay child maintenance. If he can prove he was forced to put his dick into the woman, that's of course different.

If a man chooses to stick his dick into a woman, he knows that she might become pregnant, even if precautions are taken, and is willing to risk that for the sake of getting his dick wet.
While it is not nice if women lie about taking the pill, the risk is there regardless, and a man who truly does not want a child should use a condom additionally - or just not take the risk at all.

And if he relies on a woman telling him that she'll have an abortion, that's just plain stupid. A woman may very well intend to get an abortion but not be able to go through with it when she's pregnant - or may be a vocal anti-choicer and then have an abortion. You can't know that in advance.

Were I a man I would freeze some sperm just in case, and then be sterilized, so no one could change her mind on me as in the above scenario.

You see? Men do have options.
If they don't take them, that's really their own fault.

I don't know, it would be difficult to articulate, it would just somehow seem right.

The flipside of course is that we move to equal right and equal responsibility - whereby a man could require a woman to continue with a pregnancy against her wishes. Nobody would sensibly advocate that.

'Were I a man I would freeze some sperm just in case, and then be sterilized, so no one could change her mind on me as in the above scenario.' Well there you go, Malice. Options! See, you do have them after all, and no risk of being 'tricked' into accidentally impregnating a woman.

Requiring a woman to continue with a pregnancy against her wishes is so far removed from 'equal right' that it's offensive.

That'said not equal right, it's holding someone hostage. Don't pretend ignorance Malice and stop making out you believe in equality.

I'm amazed at all these many women who are tricking and trapping men and saying they'd definitely have an abortion then suddenly becoming broody when they get pregnant. It's interesting how many people keep referring to women 'falling pregnant' too.

Are we in Thomas Hardy country?

The female equivalent (I'm guessing that's also 'reversible') would be last on the list for temporary contraception.

That's because female sterilisation is very invasive, requires surgery, recovery etc and (correct me if I'm wrong) is not reversible.

You seem to be saying because we have more contraceptive options, even though men have perfectly good ones, it's our responsibility because of quantity. However my point about vasectomies is, if a man is hell bent on not conceiving a child (perfectly reasonable to be that way) he should take the most guaranteed precaution he can, no? Rather than say "well you have more options than me".

Although I agree about a male contraceptive pill I thought they'd have been available by now!

I agree with Malice.

As a woman I am in 100 percent control of my fertility. Even if a condom breaks, or we get carried away and slack off on contraception, or if properly-used hormonal contraception fails, or any other scenario, I cannot be forced to become a mother.

A well-intentioned, responsible and caring male partner (they aren't all the jerks made out here by the man-haters on this board) who finds his female partner is pregnant despite best and mutually agreed-upon efforts not to become so, can still be forced to become a father against his wishes.

I really do not think that is fair and that if a woman chooses to carry forward a pregnancy when pre-conception it was agreed between them that they did not want their sexual relationship to result in another human being, that she should be responsible for the outcome. 100 percent of the choice, 100 percent of the responsibility.

As a woman I do not feel that is unfair.

Well there's nothing equal about men insisting that a woman continue with a pregnancy versus the woman deciding to end it, Malice. Given that women bear all the risk when it comes to pregnancy. The risk of GD, HG, SPD, to name but a few. Then there's the risk of PND. A man's health will not be jeopardised by pregnancy, a woman's might.

To be honest, I'm a bit confused by your wooly argument 'i don't know, it would be difficult to articulate, it would just somehow seem right'. What does that mean? What would just seem right?

Any reasonable man (which I like to think I am) would want to provide for his children regardless of how they came to be or his ongoing relationship with the mother, surely. Children's financial needs don't change depending on whether they were deliberately conceived or not and both parents should be jointly and severally liable for ensuring their needs are met. Not sure what there is to debate to be honest.

MaliceInWonderland78 I am a woman with limited contraceptive choices. Its latex-free condoms or nothing at all. yes my options are limited but I don't feel they are limited because in 2 years I have been successful in remaining pregnancy free by

• not focusing on penetrative sex. Oral, mutual masturbation, use of toys are all considered sex and still have the connected feeling you get from penetration. Having diverse sexual techniques is in itself a form of contraception. There are many more possibilities. Find a few that suit you.
• using condoms.
• abstaining and getting the vibrator out.

you also have the option, as a man, to use spermicides alongside your condoms and having a vasectomy.

More women would choose sterilisation but we women are routinely refused sterilisation because there is this myth that all women want children and will change their mind. I tried to get sterilised a 25 and was treated like a child because I might get to 35 and want more kids. I know men who have breezed through getting a vasectomy without such interrogation or claiming they too will change their minds my local NHS has guidelines not to preform sterilisation for women unless she is over 30 or has completed her family. My GP went through this with me, still referred me but told me not to get my hopes up. He was right.

Anyway, the way I've always seen it is a man has every control over his sperm right up until the moment of ejaculation inside a woman's body and remember he can choose where to stick his penis and where to ejaculate. Any man that say's he isn't is an idiot.

Well, yes, yes of course male rape victims shouldn't be required to pay child maintenance
In the eyes of the law rape is an offence that can only be committed by a man. The offence can however be committed against either a man or a woman.