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!

Basically my point is that if more people followed a similar stance Autumn, there would be far, far fewer children for whom CSA would ever need to be involved with and chasing money etc from absent parents would be far less of an issue!

I think my opinions are just as valid as anyone else's, although I appreciate that many will not agree.

children who are not fervently wanted via mutual agreement by two stable, solvent, employable parents should be aborted. I don't mind saying that.

So I take it you think a disabled person unable to work shouldnt ever have children?

Oh yes, LilacInn, forcing women to abort children that are not wanted by men will greatly contribute to the sustainability of our societies and environment. I do wonder how it will be accomplished in practice. Tie unwilling women to beds? Late-term abortions when criminal women managed to hide their pregnancies for a few months? I also wonder how the level of "fervour" in wanting a child would be measured.

LittleMoonbuggy, if wishes were horses.... I am of the more realist school and prefer to deal with the situation as it really is right now. It's of course desirable to have some kind of vision of a better future, but it does not absolve anyone of the responsibility for here and now.

How about sperm donation, Pinky? That removes the potential hurt of the rejection from the father, no one is pushed into anything they don't want to do, the decision to have a child is made carefully. Seems a good solution, though not 100% guaranteed to succeed.

children who are not fervently wanted via mutual agreement by two stable, solvent, employable parents should be aborted. I don't mind saying that

So I should've been aborted?

My DC should've been aborted?

My Ex (his dad died before he was born and his mother, due to PTSD caused by his death wasn't employable nor stable) should've been aborted?

Fuck off.

Since when was it the school's job to educate on contraception, responsibility,mfinancial mplications, long term issues related to parenting....fed, surely we expect parents to be doing this?

Would you have them put down too ? You know if daddy goes off them after a couple of years ? Or mummy for that matter

Seriously. moonbuggy, you don't have a clue....my children were born in a long term marriage with serious money and all the stability you could ever need....but the CSA is still needed to chase my ex for maintenance. Not supporting children is a huge social issue that goes way beyond the arguments made here. It sure as he'll isn't the domain of children born as a result of one night stands.

Little sperm donation is a good idea but generally has low success rates, and cost money. I'm talking about women who already have fallen pregnant. Are you saying you think they should have an abortion and get a sperm donor instead?

Look it's great that you've been more on the ball than most about contraception, but your personal views don't count for everybody in the country.

I have been thinking about this and tbh I think before the baby is born a father should be able sign his responsibility away.

Not because it will save the biological father money. But it gives the mother more security and protection.

Once those rights are signed away at no time is the father allowed contact or to make decisions on the child and no way he can even go to court to gain any sort of rights to that child.

Ultimately the mother will have 100% say about the child where she will never have to worry about the ex turning up as a bonus if she meets a suitable partner who is willing to adopt the child then it will be an easier process.

i raised my son by myself, not a penny from his real dad....i worked and did not get any benefits (except child benefit) at all....this was early 80s....it was hard....but then i met my husband and he helped raise my son to be the man he is today....my husband is my sons dad (my son has contacted his dad for his own reasons....twat still doesnt want to know despite my son being better off than him and not wanting anything off him...(twats loss!! i am secretly pleased)

eve My DCs father didn't put his name on the birth certificate. He has to pay CSA but he dosent get any say in schooling, medical care, where I live and no judge would grant PR because he hasn't been present at all. I don't even need to get his permission to change DCs surname or for a future partner to adopt.

So if a father fucks off pre birth the mother already has some protections against this and it will be looked at case by case. As it rightly should.

People are really showing their true colours on this thread aren't they?

• If the man doesn't want the baby the woman should abort.
• Only solvent, employable couples should have babies.
• Men are being 'forced' into having children.

All sexist bullshit. Where are all these women 'forcing' men into fatherhood? How do you 'force' a man to stick around once a baby is born? I wasn't aware that was possible. I am aware, however, of the many, many, many men that the CSA are chasing who don't pay a penny towards children that they've walked out on.

As for the 'man-haters' on this board.

First off, this is AIBU. Since when is this 'man-hating'?
Secondly (and I'm tired of saying this event time someone trots out the man-hating nonsense) I have a Dad, two brothers, a BIL and two sons. I love them all dearly. Because they're all decent people. I don't love men who won't pay for their children. This does not make me a man-hater.

This has been such a depressing read. Women making all the excuses under the sun to ensure fathers don't be involved in their own children's lives. Do you not have children, or daughters?

Fuck me no wonder the CM outstanding debt in this country is a whopping £4billion. For every deadbeat dad there's a gullible woman supporting him behind the scenes

Agreed pinky. Came back to check in, though gut instinct told me not. You go, girls! Keep supporting the men who have walked out on women and continue to reproduce with no responsibility! Blame it on the females! You did biology at school, right? You know it takes a man and a woman to make a baby? Mumsnet & it's fervent male apologists. I for all of you.

Yes if the man doesn't want to be a father he should pay towards the cost if it's a private termination. At least then the couple would be doing the decent thing, not bringing a child into the world that isn't wanted by both parents.

Ok Littlemoonbuggy what do you suggest I did when my husband with whom I'd planned a baby with decided at 30+ weeks that actually he didn't like the way pregnancy impacted our life and decided that in actual fact he didn't want a baby?

'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

It does come with slightly more responsibility. The responsibility to have an abortion or to carry the pregnancy until it ends in miscarriage or birth. It's pretty hard to get more responsible than that.The bit about there being some expectation of the father attending a woman's private medical procedure was grossly unreasonable though. Fuck that.

Not quite read the whole thread but just wanted to make the point that I don't think men fear unwanted pregnancy like women (for quite understandable reasons, not their body) and until they do many will feel it's their entitlement to have unprotected sex if they want and not feel that they need to face the consequences.

Before I was about 25 and in a stable LTR with the man I eventually married, I was so scared of getting pregnant that I always insisted on condoms and was militant about taking my pill because I did not want a baby not one little bit. Boys and men don't grow up with that inate fear some of us have/had (and that I definitely had from losing my virginity at 17 until, as I say, mid twenties) of pregnancy. That's the problem. It's too easy for it to be something that, even if it happened, wouldn't ruin their lives.

Wouldn't go so far as to say virtually all, but it has the potential to happen often enough that the cost to the taxpayer might be quite significant. I propose, therefore, that those wishing to enforce the rights of men like the gentleman upthread who elected to have condom free sex with a woman who'd just asked him to fertilise her and then was upset when the outcome was a baby, can be the ones to pay for it. Put your money where your mouth is. We'll have a special tax, funded exclusively by you.

Depressing that people are suggesting that life isn't worth living unless a man wants you. This isn't true for adult women and it's not true for children.

Probably Pearlman, but I don't think you can say it would be virtually all men except the married ones. Lots of babies are planned and wanted by both their unmarried parents. I should imagine stable cohabitants make up a significant minority of couples TTC.