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

My "girlfriend" stopped taking the pill without telling me and now she's pregnant

466 replies

imlookingforadvice · 11/06/2019 15:55

We were seeing each other for 3 months and were having sex.
We didn't use condoms as she didn't like them so she opted to start taking the pill.
I already have 2 kids (4 & 12) and so wasn't ready for more children so was pretty strict on using SOME form of protection!
Long story short she decided because the pill 'wasn't agreeing with her' that she would stop taking it.
4-5 weeks later, still having sex with me that whole time, she sent me a message to tell me that she stopped taking the pill a while back and has done 2 tests and she is pregnant.
Although, at the time she told me this, she kept saying "I'm sorry, I will fix this" that has gone and she has now confirmed to me that shes going to keep it.
What do I do??
I have read as many things as I can but it basically appears that I'm screwed and have no say in this at all and now I can either be a part of the child's life or not yet still pay child support.
Not being a part of the child's life isn't an option for me, its not something I can humanly do.
I suppose this has reached the point now where this is just a rant and I'm just looking for confirmation that i'm well within my rights to be angry\fuming with this or, if not, someone to explain why I shouldn't be angry, because i'm coming up empty.
I realise that when having sex there is always a chance of pregnancy, and that I suppose was the risk I consented to - with contraception. What I did not consent to was sex without protection.
So, AIBU?

OP posts:
herculepoirot2 · 12/06/2019 18:16

DecomposingComposers

I do. People tell lies all the time. They are entitled to do so providing they aren’t breaking the law. There is no law about this. Sorry.

LimeKiwi · 12/06/2019 18:20

She hasn’t done anything she wasn’t entitled to do

Jesus.
Some moral compasses are seriously fucked up.

herculepoirot2 · 12/06/2019 18:21

LimeKiwi

Well, no, it’s wrong. There’s just no law against it. Just like there’s no law against saying you’re single when you’re actually married, or childless when you have children to three different women.

boobirdblue · 12/06/2019 18:22

@QuinnMovesOn don't blame him, I did wonder how you'd overcome that!

TastingTheRainbow · 12/06/2019 18:43

@sergeilavrov I’d expect someone who appears to be so clued up on the law to understand that the legal definition of rape is non-consensual penetration by a penis. This is not in any way, shape or form rape and it’s insulting to actual rape victims to suggest so.

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 18:44

Your annoyance seems to be more with the idea than men and women aren’t treated exactly the same in relation to sex-resulting-in-pregnancy without ever acknowledging the reasons why.

Not to do with "sex resulting in pregnancy" at all

I do think that men and women should be treated equally in cases of sex resulting in pregnancy due to deception.

JacquesHammer · 12/06/2019 18:45

I do think that men and women should be treated equally in cases of sex resulting in pregnancy due to deception

When pregnancy treats men and women equally, I’m sure that will be the case.

PurpleDaisies · 12/06/2019 18:46

I do think that men and women should be treated equally in cases of sex resulting in pregnancy due to deception.

How does that work? He can’t decide whether she had an abortion or not!

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 18:46

There’s just no law against it.

Well there should be and in case, saying there's no law against it and saying she did what she was entitled to do are 2 very different things.

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 18:48

PurpleDaisies

No he can't decide that. But the law should provide some recourse in these cases.

PurpleDaisies · 12/06/2019 18:49

But the law should provide some recourse in these cases.

She pays him to keep her baby?

herculepoirot2 · 12/06/2019 18:50

DecomposingComposers

Should the law provide recourse against all liars?

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 18:50

No. Maybe he isn't made to pay child maintenance.

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 18:52

Should the law provide recourse against all liars?

Such as?

I do think where someone suffers harm, be that bodily or financially, as a result of deception then yes the law should provide recourse.

herculepoirot2 · 12/06/2019 18:56

DecomposingComposers

I gave examples above. There would be thousands of others.

There is already the civil law where you can sue for damages. He could do that. I suspect they would require proof, though, and I strongly suspect they would say he could easily have immunised himself against the harm by wearing a condom.

Pumperthepumper · 12/06/2019 18:58

I do think that men and women should be treated equally in cases of sex resulting in pregnancy due to deception.

Do you understand why they aren’t?

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 19:00

Do you understand why they aren’t?

I don't understand why there isn't some sort of penalty in law for women who conceive through deception, no.

herculepoirot2 · 12/06/2019 19:00

DecomposingComposers

Because there isn’t a penalty in law against men who conceive through deception? 😂

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 19:00

There is already the civil law where you can sue for damages. He could do that.

Then he should.

Drogosnextwife · 12/06/2019 19:00

No he can't decide that. But the law should provide some recourse in these cases.

If that was the case, there would be men all over the country claiming women had "tricked" them, so they dont have to pay cm.

herculepoirot2 · 12/06/2019 19:01

You know, stuff like “I love you and I’ll marry you”. There used to be. It went out with the Ark, when people were considered able to make their own decisions and protect themselves using individual contraceptive measures.

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 19:02

If that was the case, there would be men all over the country claiming women had "tricked" them, so they dont have to pay cm.

As long as they can prove it then where's the problem?

Pumperthepumper · 12/06/2019 19:05

Decomposing You shouldn’t worry though - even if this thread wasn’t fictional, the OP would still be fine. Minimal contribution to CS, the option to opt out of contact, the ability to walk away from a child he created. She’d be solely responsible for the kid with no money and no support (her choice!). Just the kid who’d suffer with no father and no money, but who gives a shit about that? Not you, as you said earlier. So hooray for feckless ejaculators everywhere!

herculepoirot2 · 12/06/2019 19:05

DecomposingComposers

And every woman in the country who wasn’t pregnant because a man has said he would leave his wife for her would be able to sue him sideways. You’ve created a monster!

DecomposingComposers · 12/06/2019 19:06

herculepoirot2

And say you're a married couple. Wife says she hates condoms and it's fine because she's on the pill (but she isn't because she wants a baby). So you're saying that the husband is unreasonable for believing what his wife says and should insist on wearing a condom even if they've been married for years or should refuse to ever have sex?

That is bizarre. How many relationships work like that? Nothing excuses either partner from lying about something so serious.