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!

A young baby can't have 50/50 residency

And would so many men also take time out from their careers to do so

Why is money always seen as such an issue the most important issues are the child's emotional and physical welfare two parents are not needed to provide that

A 50/50 residence is ridiculous for a tiny baby. Unless men start to breastfeed?

Also Theo none of that is actually fair on a child and would lead to a disproportionate number of men than that of women abandoning children.

Can we all please remember that these circumstances of disinterested fathers are common and very real, and that the one person whose feelings, welfare and care should be put before all others is the innocent child that's being brought into the world. Why should a baby ever have to suffer due to its parent's fuck ups?

Rather than a Golden Penis Act (as a pp suggested it be called) I think things should stay as they are, but perhaps with criminal charges for extreme offenders, both male and female, and a drink-drive style national campaign to make NRPs who don't fork out being a stigma rather than droves of people clamouring for excuses for their behaviour

"that the one person whose feelings, welfare and care should be put before all others is the innocent child that's being brought into the world. Why should a baby ever have to suffer due to its parent's fuck ups? "

YY to this.

IIRC, and I may recall incorrectly, forcing birth or abortion is a largely theoretical question for Mr Theoretician.

Why we would even discuss men taking less responsibility when women are already taking so much more baffles me. AND women earn less as well. Maybe we could sort out the pay gap before we heap even more child-related costs onto women.

Exactly MrsTerryPratchett. I've read most of the thread (dipped in and out) and I have to say that I find voyage's stance distasteful. There are some men who just can't stomach the idea of things shifting in women's favour - even if the state if affairs has been hugely and chronically biased against women and the shift is fairly minor. It reminds me of those instances in which someone points out some horrifying statistic about racial prejudice, and somebody pipes up with the fact that white people get attached too. It's just all wrong.

We all know that there are thousands of children abandoned by their fathers. We all know there are men that weasel out of paying maintenance. We know that countless women are pressured into abortions or left penniless.

The fact that most men don't behave like this and that many, many men are excellent fathers (voyage included, I am certain) is not a reason to start punishing women for seeking what they need from the other, feckless group. Why make this a reason to encroach on women's hard-won rights? Very petty.

*white people get attacked not attached

I'm wondering what people would make of my situation, being 8 months pregnant with a dp thats flip flopping like a carp on a river bank.

Dp, dps father and dp's ex all confirmed he was infertile, due to an accident at birth he had a hernia in his gonads and one of them was removed and drs told his dad that dp would never have children due to the damage. Dp tried for 2 years with his ex to get pregnant, and ended up taking him to a fertility clinic and tests confirmed that all of his sperm had defective tails and were 99% dead and so he would require medical intervention to be a father. She went and got pregnant by someone else and he left her and met me.

I am 32 with only 1 prior serious relationship and had been single 8 years, i had already decided motherhood was not for me due to the difficulties i had with getting a partner at all let alone someone to parent with, hence i ended up with someone 10 years younger because i was not looking for maturity , just someone good in bed really, he tearfully explained the above story prior to sleeping with me, i assured him all was good as i had reconciled myself to childlessness a while ago. We proceeded to sex with no contraception straight away and as i said at the beginning i am now 8 months pregnant.

Dp was disbelieving when i told him i knew i was, but once proved with 4 tests and a missed period was overjoyed and happy that i hadn't cheated given that we worked together and had spent every night together or on skype so wouldn't have be able to be unfaithful. (My mum thinks he lied, his dad thinks it must be someone elses)

After a while he got scared and decided to ask if i wanted an abortion, despite not wanting children before, and having no objections to abortions, i found i did not want to have one, i was quite happy to have the child even if i ended up a single mother, the choice has been his since. He has expressed a fear of the csa, says he doesnt want to pay for a child he never sees and would rather hide than allow that to happen. In the last 8 months he has nearly walked out on me at least 3 times and i did break up with him for about a week - when we fight he says he didnt want the baby and he is only with me because he does not want csa after him, but most of the time he really wants the baby and is happy to be with me.

OK - I'm going to bang the same drum again.

Whether for evolutionary reasons or social ones, moral, legal or financial ones, here's the deal.

Any consenting adult who has sex should be aware that this can lead to parenthood. All adults who have consensual sex should be willing to live up to the possible consequences of their actions, and this includes supporting a child who is conceived.

NOT doing that is causing huge problems in the UK.

This isn't about 'he said she said' or who should do what. This is about vulnerable children who have the right to grow up in the best conditions possible, and that means BOTH consenting adults living up to their responsibilities. If an adult isn't able to provide loving, nurturing support then the very least they can do is provide some money instead. That's a shitty basic minimum to give to the child.

Is there really anyone who thinks it's OK for children to grow up in poverty because a consenting adult 'didn't mean' to create a child, but had sex anyway? Anyone happy with the huge cost to the govt. in benefits that subsidize those children after the NRP fails to support them? Does anyone think it a good idea that children and their supporting parent suffer not just financially but also socially and emotionally?

Because no matter what convoluted arguments people think up, the bottom line is that sex can lead to babies. Old enough to have sex = old enough to face the consequences.

Every other argument is just a smoke screen of bullshit.

He has expressed a fear of the csa, says he doesnt want to pay for a child he never sees and would rather hide than allow that to happen.

Muse LTB. He's an immature little twat, the fact he didn't think he could have kids is irrelevant now, you are pregnant and all the pretending won't make that go away. Sorry you are in this situation wouldn't surprise me if when the baby is born he pulls out the DNA test card.

If the Golden Penis Act was enforced like so many (mainly women) here desire, he could have fucked off long ago with not a care in the world, getting his way by never having to pay a penny. If people really can't see the inherent damage that would do I can only conclude they are a tremendous idiot

Well said KickAss. I've noticed on nearly 800 comments there's been scarily little mention of the welfare of children in all this. Why people tie themselves in knots to excuse men's bad behaviour - even if it massively disadvantages babies and children - is beyond me. The fact that so many women do it is utterly depressing

Pinky, his dad has already insisted on dna, dp is contantly changing his mind about that too, sometimes he wants to prove to his dad that it is his and sometimes he thinks his dad doesnt care enough so it does not matter, but he never in all the fights we have had has ever thought it was anybody elses.

Only because he CANT say it was someone elses because you were Skyping every night or whatever.

The cunt has pulled every other trick in the book though. He lied. He wanted sex without condoms/or wanted a chance to "prove his virility"

Why the fuck is he still there especially after the "im only staying cos i dont want the CSA after me " comment.

Fucking arsehole. You and the child deserve better.

After a while he got scared and decided to ask if i wanted an abortion, despite not wanting children before, and having no objections to abortions, i found i did not want to have one, i was quite happy to have the child even if i ended up a single mother, the choice has been his since. He has expressed a fear of the csa, says he doesnt want to pay for a child he never sees and would rather hide than allow that to happen. In the last 8 months he has nearly walked out on me at least 3 times and i did break up with him for about a week - when we fight he says he didnt want the baby and he is only with me because he does not want csa after him, but most of the time he really wants the baby and is happy to be with me.

Save yourself years of misery and drop him now. Seriously. Do you really think this is how a committed or even a half way decent man behaves? Just dump him immediately.

He will probably be a shite father and not pay you anything or do much with your child but at least you won't have to live with the fact that you are a woman who will put up with any old shit at all from a man - because that is what you will be if you stay with him.

Move on, have your child, deal with the loser who fathered him/her but go on to to have your own decent life - not the crap one you will have living with a man who is already trying to minimise his responsibilities to his unborn child.

utter loser. lose him. why would anyone want to be with him? jesus on an evolutionary level, women would avoid him.

Canyouforgiveher, the times when we argue its because he does not like the attitude of my family and gets upset when someone says that he wont be a good dad - the things he says come from what his abusive dad has told him, that i will only be after money and wont let him see it. His dad is very controlling and disapproves of any decision not dictated by him. Dp is very fond of children and has a nephew he loves to bits, i want to give him the chance to prove himself rather than writing him off because he is only 22. He is really really scared and get upset at the thought of not being able to see the child hence the comments about the csa.

Musereader, I am probably going to go against the grain here. I understand why you have not LTB yet. You say he is 10 years younger than you, right? That would make him 22. This basically makes him a child in modern terms, and his behaviour can be explain by the lack of maturity and growth.

However, the fact that his brain is not quite fully developed yet is not a very good excuse because clearly his parents have not taught him the necessity of "doing the honorable thing" in a difficult situation and he did not manage to acquire a degree of honour, decency and responsibility himself. He is also being super inconsistent as he tried to get his previous partner pregnant for 2 (!) years, and that I assume was at the tender age of before 20. Who wants to make a child while being a teenager himself?

So he does sound like a frightened, silly, immature and super irresponsible muppet. At the same time, I do understand why you have not kicked him out yet. His age is in his favour. If he was 32, there would have been no doubt - LTB. But at 22 things can go different ways, and I assume this is what you are hoping for. He may remain a muppet, or he may be swept off his feet by the actual sight of his child, see the light, realise what an idiot he was, and then become a committed father who would be doing all night feeds and using only the finest cotton wool to wipe his baby's bottom. And there are probably more chances of this happening if he is living with you after the birth and having an opportunity to experience his child first-hand.

Your situation is shit, but you have only a month to go before things become clearer and you can make a decision. Good luck. I hope you have an easy birth and friends to help you in case your partner does turn out to be a certified runner (but if he does, I do hope CSA will get him).

Hmmm a lot of posters want the men to be responsible, yet when I suggested they have automatic 50% residence from birth the response was that a man cant look after a little baby. Of course they bloody can.

When it comes to the CSA, I have known several mothers who have lied deliberately 'engineered' situations to reduce contact so they get maximum maintenance. Even when the father wants more contact, its very easy to manipulate the system and deny the nrp.

You see it on AIBU, posters wanting validation of their refusal to let the nrp see their DC more.

But what about the man/woman that doesnt want to share care and walks away when i was pregnant like my ex did? He certainly wasnt interested in any care

mathsmum314, many babies breastfeed pretty much constantly for the first few months of their lives and also refuse any sort of bottles. Many women struggle with expressing milk. Exclusive breastfeeding is recommended until babies are six months old. How on earth do you expect 50/50 shared residency to be practical at this stage? What is your priority - the welfare of children or the rights of grown men?

StarsandSparkles If a parent walked away from a child that's neglect and should be persecuted criminally. Removing driving license & passport, electronic tagging, and eventually imprisonment until parent stops neglecting DC or agrees contact/maintenance.

mathsmum i wish that the above measures were in place so that arseholes like my ex were made to face up to their responsibilities and not be able to hide

A baby can be bottle fed from birth, I know that from experience. Recommendations are for an ideal situation but this is not an ideal situation. If this allows fathers to be more involved in a babies care from birth then isn't that good for the baby?

mathsmum314, a good father will always to what is best for the baby. A good father can put his own desires to have 50/50 residency on hold for a year or so for the sake of his child and get involved in other ways instead. Tearing infants from women who have just given birth and forcing them to bottle feed when they do not want to and when the infant may be having great difficulties with bottles/formula is plain sadistic. There are plenty of other ways of being involved.

"Hmmm a lot of posters want the men to be responsible, yet when I suggested they have automatic 50% residence from birth the response was that a man cant look after a little baby. "

Nope, that wasn't what was said - breastfeeding is the issue. Care is important as well as money. However, as the start of the thread was about men being able to opt out (or not) of the bare minimum that is financial support, it's not too surprising that this is the focus.