Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Forced Parenthood AIBU?

883 replies

FP22 · 30/04/2019 16:29

First off I completely acknowledge that this will divide opinion, i may be criticised but I’m looking for genuine thoughts and feedback.

The situation is this, the beginning of last year I was casually seeing a girl. We were both of the knowledge it was casual. She told me she was on the pill and that she was allergic to condoms and never wanted kids, everything seemed fine. 3/4 months in she tells me she is pregnant and I find out she was never on the pill and that now she wants a relationship with me.

This came as quite a shock to me and I felt betrayed, used and tricked into something I never wanted and to that point I was clear about. I made it clear I wanted to have nothing to do with it now or in the future and she decided to go ahead.

Fast forward and I’m now being chased for child support and being told to take responsibility.

I consider myself a good person. I have a 3 year old who I fought to have 50/50 custody of who I absolutely adore and would do anything for. I work hard, I’m a firefighter and consider myself to be a socialist. I care about people and I have actively sort to improve the lives of women in my industry in my role as a union leader.

My over arching question and battle I’m having with myself is why should I be held responsible for something which I was effectively tricked into and something I then had no control over?

Help!!!

OP posts:
Happyspud · 30/04/2019 22:33

SciFi so are you telling me that a woman whose sexual partner removed a condom secretly during intercourse was not assaulted?

He had sex with a woman on contraception. That was the agreement.

SoupDragon · 30/04/2019 22:35

he chose to participate in unprotected sexual intercourse.

No he didn't. He chose participate in sex he was told was protected by the contraceptive pill.

SciFiScream · 30/04/2019 22:36

@Happyspud if it was removed without the persons knowledge then the conditions of consent change. The woman consented to sexual intercourse with a condom for it to be removed without her knowledge of course that's assault.

I don't think you understand consent

The op consented to unprotected sex.

JacquesHammer · 30/04/2019 22:36

No he didn't. He chose participate in sex he was told was protected by the contraceptive pill

It was certainly unprotected in terms of STDs

Erythronium · 30/04/2019 22:36

A man who takes off his condom exposes a woman to the risks of STDs and pregnancy.

A woman who is not using contraception does neither of those things to a man. He can't get pregnant. He can wear a condom, she's not stopping him.

OP congratulations on becoming a father for the second time. You say you fought hard for your first son, why is this child different?

SciFiScream · 30/04/2019 22:37

Unprotected on his part which is all he really has full control over and never mind pregnancy...what about STDs?

The op made a naive, immature, irresponsible choice for him to continue (consent) without a condom.

Happyspud · 30/04/2019 22:38

The OP is not having an issue with the STD risk. I’d have zero sympathy for him with regards that.

He did not consent to have sex with a woman who was not on contraception. He had confirmed that she was.

Such double standards.

JacquesHammer · 30/04/2019 22:39

Such double standards

I can see how it would appear so for an MRA. It’s been very clearly explained on the thread why it isn’t.

Happyspud · 30/04/2019 22:40

Sci-fi, again so by your reasoning any woman who isn’t on the pill and only uses condoms can’t really complain when the man lies and takes it off and she gets pregnant?

janetforpresident · 30/04/2019 22:40

SoupDragon this debate could go.on and on. Of course if he truly believed she was on the pill it's a dreadful thing she did, I havent seen anyone dispute that but surely you accept that he took a risk here and was naive as he had no way of confirming she regularly took her pill, hadn't been sick or had a stomach upset and wasn't on antibiotics. She was a casual sexual partner.

None of this makes the child any less his responsibility.

SciFiScream · 30/04/2019 22:41

OPs penis, OPs brain, OPs hands he could have, at any time, arranged to wear condoms that were suitable for his sexual partner.

He repeatedly chose not to. The only method of contraception that protects against pregnancy and STD is abstinence. That was not a CHOICE the OP made.

My DH and I still use multiple methods of contraception to prevent pregnancy because that's the grown up thing to do.

DecomposingComposers · 30/04/2019 22:45

SciFiScream

Which is a valid choice. Do you apply this to women and men equally?

So no woman can complain about an unwanted pregnancy because she chose to have sex ultimately?

I do think the lesson to take away from here is for no man to ever have sex unless for the sole reason of procreation.

SciFiScream · 30/04/2019 22:46

HappySpud if the woman CONSENTS to the condom coming off, then no she can't complain about getting pregnant.

If the condom is removed by stealth - then that's assault

If the condom breaks then she needs to take the morning after pill if she does not want to get pregnant.

HappySpud - do you understand its about the consent?

Also - he was very naive to trust this women that 'she was on the pill and allergic to condoms' that would set alarm bells off in my mind.

Any sensible man would take precautions then. It was immature to do otherwise. He had a choice, he didn't take it.

He could have avoided putting his penis in her Vagina entirely.

JacquesHammer · 30/04/2019 22:47

I do think the lesson to take away from here is for no man to ever have sex unless for the sole reason of procreation

Do you? I rather think the lesson is (a) wear a condom (unless as part of a long-term relationship where a decision has been mutually made) and (b) sex can equal pregnancy.

If they’re happy with that they can fuck around as much as they like

Happyspud · 30/04/2019 22:47

I understand consent very well. But it seems you think consent is only the right of women. That’s what I disagree with.

Trebla · 30/04/2019 22:49

I think what the big issue is here is your sense of loss of control and agency and your outrage at being 'deceived'.

It's a crap situation and a life changing one and nor one you would have chosen for yourself. But it's happened. The child is innocent and in some aspect you are now tied to the child's mother for life. I think that this is one of those times where acceptance rather than anger would be better for both your mental health and the child. Take what you can learn from it and potentially be a force for good in your child's life. If their mum is that damaged/devious they probably need you. Its up to you what kind of relationship you have with your child, and up to you what sits well with you morally in terms of your ongoing relationship. But if you are having to pay you might as well be involved. Your child will be happier to knowing they are loved by you, like your other child. Essentially although it's not a choice, it's a consequence. One you have to deal with.

DecomposingComposers · 30/04/2019 22:50

SciFiScream

Just to clarify your view is

Woman lies about taking the pill and gets pregnant- that is the man's fault

Man lies about using a condom - that is the man's fault plus assault.

So never is the woman to blame?

Also consent - yes it is an issue of consent. The OP consented to sex on the understanding that the woman was on the pill and that he did not want children. He didn't consent to sex without contraception.

SciFiScream · 30/04/2019 22:50

HappySpud the OP did exercise his right to consent. He consented to not wearing a condom on HIS penis.

There are so many ways they could have had sexual intimacy without a condom and without pregnancy - STD always a risk though.

The OP did exercise his right to consent and with a casual sexual partner he was naive in his choice. I

Kaleela · 30/04/2019 22:52

Not sure about the UK but I have heard that if you can prove that you have been clear from the get go (and show her agreement) that you did not ahree with nor want the pregnancy and were tricked/manipulated into it, that a court would go in your favour. I would find a lawyer, do your research and compile all evidence that you have for your version of events including statements from friends and family you have discussed this with. Whilst I agree you have been quite naive I think it is cruel that women have this over men. If you have nothing in writing it will end up a "he said she said" and (I don't agree with this) she has the end result as proof of a liaison between the two of you and can twist it any way she wants to

DecomposingComposers · 30/04/2019 22:55

I rather think the lesson is (a) wear a condom (unless as part of a long-term relationship where a decision has been mutually made) and (b) sex can equal pregnancy.

What difference does being in a long term relationship with a mutual decision make? The mutual decision is not to have children and that the woman is on the pill. How is the man protected here? The only way that he is is to abstain surely?

Many married couples decide to not have any or any more children - the only way that the man can be sure that this happens (according to this thread) is to abstain because if the woman lies then it is still his fault and something that he agreed to simply by having sex.

janetforpresident · 30/04/2019 22:55

1)It's her fault she lied about the contraception . It makes her a bad and selfish person. OP has a right to dislike her and a right to feel duped.

2)He could never have been 100%sure that the sex he was having would not result in a baby regardless of contraception used. No contraception is 100%effective. It's always advisable to make sure you are in control of the contraceptive method used in a casual relationship.

  1. The baby exists now. The baby is entirely faultless and has two parents who chose to have sex. No-one was forced to have sex against their will.
SciFiScream · 30/04/2019 22:57

It doesn't really matter if the woman was on the pill or not, if she lied or not (though we can all agree she behaved badly) the only person that the OP could be sure of was himself. He should have worn a condom, to protect himself from STDs...never mind pregnancy.

If a woman lies about taking the pill and has unprotected sex with a man then they are equally to blame. There's no way for a man to check about the pill (especially with a casual sex partner) which means he will always have to accept responsibility for his penis. It's not just about the pregnancy though...what if no pregnancy had occurred, but he'd got syphilis/herpes/gonorrhoea? The pill doesn't protect against that.

If a man lies about using a condom or removes it with stealth then yes, that's the man's fault and yes it is assault.

janetforpresident · 30/04/2019 22:57

DecomposingComposers it's not that it's his fault at all. It's that it's not the baby's fault.

I don't think this thread is on the woman's side at all, it's on the baby's side.

DecomposingComposers · 30/04/2019 22:58

Trebla

How does the OP get to be a part of the child's life or have any influence in its life given that the mother has moved away?

So not only has she deceived the OP into a fathering a child she now makes him pay for the child and then removes the ability for the OP to have a relationship with said child.

How can anyone defend that?

JacquesHammer · 30/04/2019 22:58

What difference does being in a long term relationship with a mutual decision make?

Because its a reasonable caveat to the point.

The mutual decision is not to have children and that the woman is on the pill. How is the man protected here? The only way that he is is to abstain surely?

Or use a condom...

Many married couples decide to not have any or any more children - the only way that the man can be sure that this happens (according to this thread) is to abstain because if the woman lies then it is still his fault and something that he agreed to simply by having sex

Of course the only way he can be SURE is to abstain. If he wants to be as sure as possible whilst still having sex then he uses a condom.

If the woman lies she is morally reprehensible. But he’s still had a choice to use a condom. It’s the safest way to be as sure as possible you’re safe whilst still enjoying sex.