Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

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

879 replies

NeedACleverNN · 02/08/2016 19:33

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!

OP posts:
KickAssAngel · 02/08/2016 20:31

I don't see HOW the father doesn't have equal rights.

Up until his physical input is over, he has full ability to choose. The mother has less choice as after a certain date she cannot opt for termination, So, actually, you're right - the father has a proportionally BIGGER amount of choice in the matter.

We should do something about that - make them pay child support AND buy some flowers for the woman?

NeedAScarfForMyGiraffe · 02/08/2016 20:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LobsterQuadrille · 02/08/2016 20:32

This is always going to be an emotional subject. Even 19 years and a bit later, I am still harbouring resentments ... ex H wanted a baby probably more than I did but, when the magic line appeared, decided he'd changed his mind and that I had to choose between him and the baby. He left and has hardly ever seen DD and has never paid a penny (and lives overseas so out of the scope of CSA or whatever it is now). So did he make his decision when we had unprotected sex to make a baby, or was he allowed to backtrack after the event? That's to those who said that the father should be able to sign away responsibility.

gettingtherequickly · 02/08/2016 20:36

Richard men do have to pay if they have 50:50 care.

CanadaMoose · 02/08/2016 20:36

We're clearly not going to agree on this subject, so there's no use debating. I feel that equality genuinely means equality, and you cannot force someone to pay for a child simply because they had sex, especially in a world where abortion is an option. Women are not saints for bearing children, it is simple biology. Equality means 50%. That means women get to choose whether or not they will have a child and men get to choose whether or not they will be a part of that (physically or fiscally).

Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost · 02/08/2016 20:37

If he doesn't want a baby. He shouldn't dip his chips in the source.

toptoe · 02/08/2016 20:38

Ok so if we go down the route of a parent walking away after they conceive a child who has rights to being supported then what should happen?

That parent should then be asked to give up the child for adoption. Then the step parent could adopt with birth parent. But if there is no step parent the state would then surely have to step in and support the child because only one parent would be supporting them. So that argument says that everyone in society who never had a hand in creating the child then has more responsibility to support that child than the person who created them.

Nah. The person who created the child should pay up, unless they have the child 50/50. If they don't, then society steps in and pays but that parent is then forced to do community service to pay for said child's suppport.

That might make people take some more responsibility over creating new life and also the child's right to not be neglected will be satisfied.

stitchglitched · 02/08/2016 20:38

I posted this on a thread the other day, that posters who advocate a man being able to walk away are actually saying that a man's right to consequence free sex is paramount, and more important than a child's right to be supported. Do these posters really believe that? A child can be living in poverty because its father wanted the right to ejaculate with abandon? Fucks sake.

LilacInn · 02/08/2016 20:38

It's too bad more couples don't have a serious discussion about what would happen in the event of an unintended pregnancy. Maybe if more men made it clear they had no interest in fatherhood, but found they were sleeping with women who could not consider abortion, they would be more careful.

I do feel it's reprehensible to force someone who's made a good-faith effort to avoid pregnancy into parenthood. But as legally women have the upper hand in this matter (heads I win, tails he loses) - were I a man these days I would freeze sperm in case the parenthood bug bit later in life, and then get a vasectomy. Problem solved.

TwatbadgingCuntfuckery · 02/08/2016 20:39

a father can opt out of being responsible for a child. its called having a wank, using a condom, not having penetrative sex, getting a vasectomy, abstaining until he meets the right woman... a man has options.

Its a case of his options need to be immediate and pre planned (buying condoms for example) and for a woman she has options after the fact. abortion and adoption.

Amy214 · 02/08/2016 20:40

What i don't understand is how some men get away without paying a penny in child support and might not get prosecuted. What would happen if i refused to pay for my dd? (whilst in my care) Would social services get involved? Would my child be removed from my care and placed elsewhere?

MrsTerryPratchett · 02/08/2016 20:40

Equality means 50%. It really really doesn't. Not in the context of sex. Because it can't be the same, we have different bodies. Equality according to your system would actually be that if I didn't want a baby and a man did, we teleported the baby into his nonexistent uterus. That can't happen so the alternative is that we get to make the decisions with bodily autonomy.

StealthPolarBear · 02/08/2016 20:40

Equality does not mean the same.
And where does the child feature in this?
And since we're talking about minorities, what about the women who are tricked into getting pregnant but would never abort?
Or does unfairness only affect men?

StealthPolarBear · 02/08/2016 20:41

You know the answer to that don't you amy. Some might say that's not fair on women. But you know, does that sort of unfairness really matter?

Original poster
NeedACleverNN · 02/08/2016 20:41

When it comes to babies Canada there is no equality.

It's the woman who has to carry the baby, give birth and suffer any ill health during it. It's the woman who would likely have a job affected by raising a child as a single parent. It's the woman who's life will change forever. The man should not be able to flitter from one woman to the next changing lives and not contribute.

OP posts:
StealthPolarBear · 02/08/2016 20:42

" a man's right to consequence free sex is paramount, and more important than a child's right to be supported."
Perfect summary

toptoe · 02/08/2016 20:46

Equality stops when it forces someone to have harm done to them. That's not equality. It's not the same thing to equate a forced abortion on a woman with a man being forced to support a child he created. They aren't the same thing.

Yes, some women may lie about contraception but the man is also responsible for it and must know if he's using contraception then it may fail.

If the woman cannot go through with the pregnancy then again the man cannot then force her to when it could harm her emotionally or physically.

His job is to decide before he has sex: do I want a kid with this woman? No? Don't have sex then. Because he can't force her to do anything when she's pregnant as that would be morally wrong. And if 'yes' he needs to ensure she is ready to have that child and wants it too.

If this doesn't happen and they conceive a child, tough shit. That child has a right to be brought up without neglect.

toptoe · 02/08/2016 20:49

stitch has nailed it. That's what is so sad. The child's rights are not at the centre and that is why we have this problem.

BuggersMuddle · 02/08/2016 20:51

I think someone people who argue for men's rights in this area forget that abortion terminates a pregnancy, it doesn't erase it.

Choose to have the baby or choose to abort: both of these carry some element of risk & consequence for the woman. There is no physical impact to a man in choosing to carry to term vs medical / surgical abortion. Damage from surgical abortion is rare, but a woman who would be happy to have a child at some point / soon may prefer to have it at 'the wrong time' rather than undergo a procedure.

Plus, how many couples (or casual hook-ups, even) actually have the conversation 'I really don't want a kid right now, so I want to ensure we're as protected as possible and understand any slip up will result in an abortion'?

I strongly suspect very few of the 'don't want a kid' men were vocal in their insistence on barrier protection (even if woman on pill) and totally upfront about wanting an abortion ahead of time. I don't think they should get to adopt that position after the fact.

Amy214 · 02/08/2016 20:51

StealthPolarBear it's unfair. Men who don't pay should be punished. I spent 2 years trying to get anything from my dds dad. He even went as far as working for cash in hand whilst claiming benefits (so we would only get £7 pw)

StealthPolarBear · 02/08/2016 20:53

Yes sorry but life's unfair (unless you're a man)
Seriously, sorry Flowers

Psychomumsucks · 02/08/2016 20:54

I believe that if both parties failed to protect and as soon as the guy finds oht if he instantly says he would rather she has an abortion, if she doesnt want one then she shoyld accept paying for the chuld. The man doesnt get a say if a woman doesnt want to keep a baby so why should the woman have the say if he doesnt want one. No man should have to pay child support if he asked her to abort and made clear he didnt want a child.

eyebrowsonfleek · 02/08/2016 20:54

The father has more than equal rights (in the UK at least). They can not pay or see the child with little judgement from society despite the fact that a child normally benefits from contact with their father.

Children deserve to have a decent standard of living and if you created the child then you need to pay up with time and money. Adults have to take responsibility for their actions. You can't treat the creation of a child like the hassle of selling the home after a break up. They are innocent people.

Men have access to contraception like vasectomies and should take responsibility if they don't want children.

There are many women who become pregnant as a result of a man making a unilateral decision to penetrate her. They don't need punishing.

StealthPolarBear · 02/08/2016 20:56

So psycho the man's right to sex is more important than the child's right to be supported?

Einna88 · 02/08/2016 20:56

So I'm probably gonna get everyone mad at me, but....

I actually think that if the woman doesn't use protection and the man does, and she falls pregnant anyway, then keeps the baby when he wants an abortion, he should be able to sign away parental rights and refuse to pay for the kid.

Whilst I agree that it's not far for taxpayers to ultimately pay for the baby either, I think it's a bit different putting a fraction of a penny from every taxpayer towards a baby than it is asking a guy who's just as unwilling to pay £50 a week or whatever towards it.

However, I also think that if the woman doesn't want the baby and the guy does, he should have every right to apply to court for her to continue to term rather than get an abortion, and then he raise the baby alone and she wash her hands of it. I hate the fact that a woman gets to choose whether the baby comes into the world or not regardless of the fathers wishes. If a child was born and then killed by dad because he didn't want it it would be a disgusting crime against both mother and child, but when a woman kills an unborn child who is loved and wanted by its father, it's all fine and dandy.

Ultimately yeah if two people bump uglies and a kid pops out then they should deal with it, but ultimately I think it's unfair that women have the choice to just cut away the problem and get an abortion if they don't want to have and pay for a kid, men don't have that chance and I don't think it's fair. Women have it both ways right now and I don't think it should be the case - either we have the choice to keep the kid against the dads wishes and we shoulder it alone, or the dad has the right to make us keep it against our wishes and we cough up equally for CSA.

Yes, I'm a woman, yes, I'm a mum. SorryNotSorry it's just how I see it.