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!

Sorry that was to Lilac (there weren't any other replies when I started typing!).

And it was supposed the say: It's not as if they leave them in the forest to be raised by wolves

"If I were sure I would not have an abortion, whether in a casual hookup, ONS, a few weeks into a "relationship" or five years into cohabitation, I sure as hell would make that clear up front and frequently remind him of it, so that he could remember that each time he was rolling the dice with his future. And I would be clear that in no way shape or form would my decision be swayed by his preference or opinion, and that is final. And that I would vigorously pursue maintenance and equal sharing of child rearing resposibilities for the next 18 years. How many of the women-wronged that you so vociferously defend have made it a point to have that conversation and reinforce it often?"

If I was a man, in the UK, who knew the law around abortion - ie it's not my decision - and child support - ie it is my responsibility - I would assume that any woman I had sex with might think as you have outlined and act accordingly.

The Abortion Act and child support requirements have been around a long time. If you've got a penis and you don't know about them and how they might affect you, you aren't enough of a grown up to put that penis into a vagina.

Lilac your misogyny is appalling and your arguments Ill thought

What about the men who for all intents and purposes are the ideal partner...and then just decide one day many years and children down the line that they can't be arsed anymore and run away at lightening speed from all and every responsibility? It happens far more than you think
Imo a sizeable proportion of men are simply inheritently more selfish and unfortunately give little thought to how children suffer through their actions

I agree that both men and women can be equally feckless in their choice-making.

However, nature/society is already far more heavily weighted toward making a woman face up to the consequences of her actions (regarding conception) than it is a man.

Scenario 1) 2 feckless people = conception results

Woman: Chooses an abortion (if this option is actually available to her), pays any money toward having it done, 100% alone deals with the physical effects of gestation until termination, and 100% deals with any physical/mental fallout afterward (not a risk-free procedure).
Social stigma and condemnation from certain groups of people afterward.

Man: Doesn't need to do anything. Effectively zero consequences.

Scenario 2) 2 feckless people = conception results

Woman: Has the baby. 100% alone deals with all the physical effects of full gestation and childbirth (up to and including death). Spends the next 18 years of her life nurturing that child into an adult human being along with all the physical, emotional, and majority of financial costs that involves.

Man: No physical effects. May or may not have to pay a small percent of his earnings for the next 18 years (depending on his circumstances/honesty). May or may not have any involvement in the child's life at his own whim.

These are just two scenarios, but even in cases where the man does suffer more than he usually would (ie. he really wanted the child), his mental suffering is still completely outweighed by the mental suffering, physical suffering, and physical risk (up to death) of forcing a woman to birth against her will.

Additionally, if you really wanted women to have 100% choice, 100% responsibility for the child after the birth, then they would be allowed to fully dictate any involvement the father could have (even if he wanted to be a fully involved father with shared caring arrangements, she could 100% deny this at her whim).

I don't think many men would want that or find it fair either.

If you think a termination even in the early stage is just a case of taking a pill, you really don't know anything about them.

And we weren't discussing early pregnancy, you made the point of 'men would have 24 weeks to decide' and alluded that termination wouldn't be as traumatic as birth, hence me using my example.

I know you're entitled to your opinion voyage but I think you need to realise how ridiculous it is for a man with no experience, and who will never have experience, to mansplain inform women of the traumas of abortions

A termination that the woman does not want to have will have a harmful impact whatever the gestation.

Just as a forced birth will, however easy the labour.

That can happen to a child at any time, sadly. Which is why your "I don't think its at all reasonable to let a man keep a pregnant woman hanging for 24 weeks. But a day or a week isn't." doesn't make any sense.

Men walk out at all stages of pregnancy and of a child's life. Some of those men later provide no or little financial or emotional support.

I am lucky enough not to be in that situation, but certainly know women who'd've preferred, for the sake of the child, the certainty of the father not wanting to see the child ever to contact cancelled at the last minute because something "better" came up.

Sorry voyage are you saying you think men should have a period of 'get out of jail free' time to decide, so effectively a woman is hanging around to find out if she either has to have an abortion or if she has to raise a child completely alone?

I personally don't see how deciding in the first 10 seconds would be easier or fairer on a mother and their child than deciding at 24 weeks

From what I read a person likely to experience negative phycolgical effects during a termination, will likely experience worse during birth. But I think some of the researchers might have been men ! Who know nothing obviously.

There's a difference between a medical researcher with professional knowledge and someone deciding the effects of something that the opposite sex will only ever experience with no prior experience or knowledge

Your statement was about "the harmful impact of growing up unwanted by a dad". Which I responded to.

No, the man doesn't get a day to opt in or out of paying for his child. His time to opt in or out is at the point of ejacualtion in someone's vagina. All men having sex are doing so in full knowledge of the woman's bodily autonomy and that, even if they've known her for years, she may not choose to undergo an unwanted medical procedure for his convenience.

If most men need just 10 seconds to decide, they can take that 10 seconds at some point before they come inside someone else.

As I said upthread, if you aren't mature enough to get that, don't put your penis into someone's vagina.

In years gone by we did let the father choose. That's how it always was, the man chose whether he'd marry her. Is anyone stupid enough to think that until recent years this prevented women and children suffering because some cunt decided not to face up to their responsibilities?

As for the harmful impact of growing up without a dad, when you break it down it's miniscule in itself. The harmful impact generally comes from either the poverty, because the father doesn't contribute 50% of the cost. Or because the father is a selfish arse, who wants to play at being a parent without proper commitment to the child. Or men who don't care about the child but play at being dad as a means of controlling their ex. Just not having a loving father involved without any of those factors isn't any more harmful than any of the other deviations from perfect that every family has.

I'd also be interested in any studies showing the lasting damage from having just one loving parent versus parents who believe a man's wishes should trump the rights of a woman and child. The latter would be by far the most harmful, both on an individual level and for society as a whole.

I'm saying that, if a man puts his penis into the vagina of a woman, a baby may result. That doesn't make sex solely about procreation, but it's a risk that can't be gainsayed.

The man can eliminate the risk of conception happening by having a vasectomy (or having other kinds of sex) and he can significantly reduce the risk of it happening by wearing a condom. He may also significantly reduce the risk by having sex with a woman using contraception, though of course there he has to decide whether his trust in her is enough not to take the other risk reduction options of condoms or non PIV sex. We all trust our partners to greater and lesser life changing effect - not to gamble away the rent money, leaving us homeless, for example - so humans are well used to this trust concept.

Women can also avoid PIV or be sterilised to have zero risk of conception. They can significantly reduce risk by making their own contraceptive arrangements. Again if their sexual partner will correctly use a condom, that also significantly reduces risk. So the options for prevention of sperm meeting egg are similar for both.

After sex, because of biology and bodily autonomy, women simply have a couple more decision points if they consider they may have conceived - the MAP/coil insertion before conception is confirmed or an abortion afterwards.

As I say repeatedly, any man having sex knows this, and it is up,to him to undertake his own risk assessment only on the options he can control, not to seek to remove, curtail or dictate a woman's options.

www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/nov/20/non-resident-dads-relationship-children

Of the 130,000 dads who never see their children, have you any idea of the number who decided not to do so within 24h of learning about impending fatherhood?

voyage where are the studies showing this in isolation?

Voyage I am NOT talking about abortion - I am saying that, wether a bloke decides he's pissing off after 10 seconds or 24 weeks, the consequences are still the same for women who keep their baby.

And if they don't keep a baby an abortion is horrific either way - although I am betting for most women, if they want to keep their baby they will keep it regardless of the fathers involvement