Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Should men be allowed to "opt out" of parenthood?

999 replies

Jemimapuddleduckpancake · 20/06/2019 09:08

My friend has a child who was ultimately the result of a very casual, friends with benefits type situation. The father was immediately sure that he didn't want a baby and told her from the very beginning. He wasn't around and didn't help out for the first couple of years, but has now decided that he wants to have access to the child and start to build a relationship now he is older.

My friend doesn't trust him, doesn't like him, and is deeply hurt over all the things she has had to go through alone because of his previous lack of involvement and support. But she's worried that she is totally unable to prevent him from ever having access, and feels that he has put her in a horrible and stressful situation.

Which led us to think about this.

When a woman falls pregnant from a one night stand or casual-sex type scenario, she can choose whether to keep the baby, or go through an abortion or out the baby up for adoption. Thus ultimately "opting out" of parenthood.

A man in the same situation has no such right to opt out of parenthood. He has to accept the woman's decision and his life will be impacted by the woman's decision.

My friend believes that she was unrealistic during pregnancy. She firmly believed that the dad would "come round", that he'd see the baby and suddenly fall in love and want to be involved. But of course this didn't happen.

So we started to discuss, what if there was the option for a man to "opt out" of parenthood? It would, of course, have to be done very early on - before the baby was 1 month old, for example. Her idea is that this could be done by signing a legal document stating that he has no desire to be a part of the child's life in any way, will not ever be able to seek any type of access, and will not pay money. This move would have to be irreversible in order to be taken seriously. (Perhaps there could be some terms and conditions like the situation can be reversed but only with the mother's permission).

Now, i know a lot of women on Mumsnet like to say that if a man doesn't want a child then he shouldn't have sex or should use contraception. But I believe in total equality between the sexes and feel that this is unfair. Two people choose to have sex, two people choose whether or not to use contraception, but only one person can decide whether or not they will keep a child if an accident does happen.

I know so many people whose lives are made miserable by constantly battling men for money for their child, or by trying to encourage contact between their child and a man who just isn't interested.

Don't get me wrong - I think this is awful. But wouldn't it save the mother and the child both significant stress and heartache if they can live their lives without these battles? Surely knowing where you stand from the very start will stop all the disappointment and the emotional rollercoaster and stress that so many people experience.

And is it fair for a women to force a child (or the responsibilities that come from having a child, like maintainance) onto a man who knows immediately that he doesn't want a child?

My friend says that with hindsight, she just don't see how this current situation benefits anyone. Men can easily belittle women by claiming that they were "tricked" into having a baby. If there was this "opt out" system, they wouldn't be able to argue this!

The mother also wouldn't have to worry about a deadbeat dad who hasn't done anything for her/her child suddenly popping up deciding they now want to be in the child's life.

My friend says that looking back, although it seems harsh, knowing that this "opt out" system existed would his would actually have helped her. She'd have been much more prepared for single parenthood, much more prepared for being financially responsible for the baby by herself. She'd have been able to prepare better and not have the crushing blows and disappointment and feelings of rejection that come from his behaviour. She'd also not have to now worry about granting a man who is (now) a virtual stranger access to her child.

She thinks that if a man doesn't sign this before baby is month old, then he can't sign it at all, and will be fully responsible for the child in terms is maintainance and anything else, which should then be more strictly implemented (harsher punishments for not paying, for example).

(I thought maybe it would be better if the deadline for opting out was before baby's birth, but she says she still believes that some men will see their child at the birth and fall in love and therefore be given the chance to be involved.)

Of course there would have to be some regulations like if a women can prove that a baby was discussed or planned then the man can't opt out, for example.

What do the rest of you think? I'm really curious about this. On the one hand yes, if you don't want a baby then use contraception. But on the other hand, accidents happen and I can't help but agree with my friend that men should be allowed to opt out just as women can.

At first I thought this was a crazy idea but the more I think about it, the more I think it could help. The UK could issue MUCH stricter punishments to men who don't pay (because if they haven't opted out then they have no right at all, and no excuses, like they make now). It would in many ways protect the mother and child too.

Thoughts, anyone?

(Please don't kill me, I'm just curious to hear ideas from all sides, I'm not fully persuaded! Not that what I think really matters - and it won't happen anyway. But would it be better or worse for people if it did?)

OP posts:
CaptSkippy · 20/06/2019 13:07

I still don't understand this obsession with PIV. For many women it does nothing and for a significant number it even hurts. The same could be said for anal sex or blow jobs.

My point is that there are many ways to give your partner an pleasure/orgasm. If you don't like blow jobs, anal sex or hand jobs, then google some shit you would like. It's not hard. We have all the resources available to us.

Plus you could also use condoms in combination with other methods of contraception if you really want to do PIV.

There is no excuse for taking such a risk of pregnancy and then just say: "Screw it. I don't want this. You're on your own."
Such neglect of offspring should carry a prison sentence.

BiBabbles · 20/06/2019 13:07

While reports on the male birth control pill that was dropped emphasized men not coping with the side effects, last I read on it, 75% were happy with it - but multiple men tried to kill themselves, one who died, while on them which multiple reports say was the main cause of the study stopping.

It should be seen as a good thing that even if they weren't sure of a link that they paused to check before going any further, thankfully standards have improved since the original studies on female birth control pills.

CaptSkippy · 20/06/2019 13:10

Decomp, what do you mean what do women get out of this?

You think getting oral sex does nothing for a woman? I would not have sex a second time with a man who is unable or unwilling to tend to my needs in the bedroom, so to speak.

Jemimapuddleduckpancake · 20/06/2019 13:10

So many interesting comments and not enough time to reply to them all! (Just on break!)

In reply to the person who said my friends ex wants to be involved with the child 'now all the hard work is over' - exactly! Now the child is a child rather than a tiny baby needing night feeds, now the terrible twos are over, now the child is at an age where he can have a chat, follow rules, do activities which are more tolerable to an adult man who doesn't like children - now he thinks he can be bothered to be involved. But my friends main concern is what about the damage already done, and how can she possibly be sure that he won't get bored and bugger off again, thus leaving her innocent child broken hearted and feeling totally rejected (which could cause long term issues for the child and brutally affect the child's confidence and self esteem.) How can people argue that forcing a deadbeat to do a half-arsed job of child raising, popping in and out of life as and when they feel like it, is better than the alternative?

I honestly feel that a lot of those people who are playing the "think of the children!" card are actually thinking of the woman. A child deserves stability, routine, familiarity, comfort, security. They would be more likely to have this with ONE loving parent than with one loving parent and a deadbeat who pops up when he feels he can be arsed and then buggers off again, breaking the child's heart, when he feels like it.

If I'm really honest, I think that it's a lot about money and the mother being able to afford having the child that she wanted. And I totally get that. But I really think there's a difference between what's best for the child financially, and what's best for the child's actual emotional well-being.

OP posts:
JacquesHammer · 20/06/2019 13:10

BiBabbles

There’s a quote from the article suggesting:-

“There was one case of depression, one intentional paracetamol overdose, and one case of an irregular heart rate – all judged as being possibly related to the injection“

foryourown · 20/06/2019 13:11

GET RID? This is a fucking human being you're talking about here, not a piece of old rubbish! Yes, some women have abortions, but almost never without very carefully weighing up the options - it's usually a last resort and very much agonized over

Oh go away will you? Abortions are usually carried out before 14 weeks of pregnancy. I work for BPAS and I'd happily say most women are relieved and lots haven't agonised over the decision at all, they know they don't want to be pregnant and that's that.

What do you a last resort? As if women should have to agonise over the fact they're abortions 'a human being'.

Starlight456 · 20/06/2019 13:12

I find a thread that suggests women are too powerful in a world where women’s rights are been eroded currently , American state denying abortion , where is the equality in the workplace.

Man already do have the right to opt out of raising a child .

I have read enough threads on here for planned babies and dad changes his mind when conceived. My ex has no contact his decision , I do gain maintenance from cms guess why as I believe my Ds has a right to know if his dad is alive not because the £7 a week makes a difference.

Why do we not have automatic maintenance like other countries. Men walk. Away already leaving the women to carry it all .

I think as women we should focus on the rights of women and children not deadbeats who walk away without a thought.

Moralitym1n1 · 20/06/2019 13:12

You did see my post about having had a discussion with him regarding what would happen in the unlikely event of a pregnancy?

Don't even bother responding to the silky goadiness

DecomposingComposers · 20/06/2019 13:13

Thanks JacquesHammer for the link. But difficult to form an opinion because it was just a journal article but it does look like the trial was halted due to safety concerns rather than just that the men didn't like the side effects

The trial was eventually discontinued after an external panel of reviewers concluded that the risks to the study participants outweighed the potential benefits.

I realise that the OCP also has side effects but there are also benefits for the woman to so there is an argument for weighing risks Vs benefits. With a male contraceptive if there are a lot of risks Vs no benefit to the man then that's difficult for drug companies to justify.

Moralitym1n1 · 20/06/2019 13:13

*silly

LaurieMarlow · 20/06/2019 13:14

No I think that the right of born children to be supported by the people who created them is more important that the right of men to ejaculate without consequence

I haven't RTFT, but a million times this.

A woman's right to say what happens to her own body is also more important than a man's right to ejaculate without consequence.

Any sane person would see this. It's just that men are so unused to their 'needs' coming last that they can't cope with it.

JQBased · 20/06/2019 13:14

Opt out of parenting by not having children in the first place. This goes for women and men. You can't have unprotected sex and just wash your hands of the consequences. Don't want to be a parent, don't take risks! Otherwise, it's on you.

herculepoirot2 · 20/06/2019 13:14

Oh go away will you? Abortions are usually carried out before 14 weeks of pregnancy. I work for BPAS and I'd happily say most women are relieved and lots haven't agonised over the decision at all, they know they don't want to be pregnant and that's that.

This isn’t about that, though. This is about the casual throwing out there of the view that all women can just “get rid”, so they therefore have no right to expect the man who fathered the child to support it. Because abortion innit.

But actually, the right to abortion is linked to their bodily autonomy and right not to risk their health and lives with pregnancy and birth, nothing to do with a “right” not to become a parent.

CJsGoldfish · 20/06/2019 13:15

Doesn't sound like a great option for the woman involved, can't say I'd particularly like to be penetrated in the anus let alone unprotected
Then I suggest you don't Confused

JacquesHammer · 20/06/2019 13:16

DecomposingComposers

Obviously depression would be a serious side effect. Interestingly, I’ve just checked out the info leaflet that comes with my contraceptive pill. Depressive feelings are listed as a “less serious side effect”.

Starlight456 · 20/06/2019 13:17

I think also op you miss how many children are growing up in poverty and yes this does have a impact on the whole growth sometimes , physical and emotional . Yes men should pay for that.

I

DecomposingComposers · 20/06/2019 13:19

You think getting oral sex does nothing for a woman? I would not have sex a second time with a man who is unable or unwilling to tend to my needs in the bedroom, so to speak.

Not once has anyone mentioned women getting oral sex. They've only said about men getting blow jobs.

So, how is that really a valid option?

The argument here is that if men don't want the risk of an unwanted pregnancy then it is down to them to make sure that it doesn't happen. The options given are abstinence or blow jobs/anal.

My point is how many women would accept these options? If they don't want anal or to only ever have oral sex the only other option for men to be sure that a pregnancy won't happen is abstinence. Again, how many women would accept that?

IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 13:21

^
I think also op you miss how many children are growing up in poverty and yes this does have a impact on the whole growth sometimes , physical and emotional . Yes men should pay for that.^

If women want to continue a pregnancy over the objections of the man, they can pay for it.

JacquesHammer · 20/06/2019 13:21

Again, how many women would accept that?

They don’t have to accept it though. They can choose to end the relationship or discuss levels of risk with their partner.

DecomposingComposers · 20/06/2019 13:22

Obviously depression would be a serious side effect. Interestingly, I’ve just checked out the info leaflet that comes with my contraceptive pill. Depressive feelings are listed as a “less serious side effect”.

It wasn't just depressive feelings though - it was more than that.

Again, yes the OCP has side effects, some serious but that is weighed against the risks of being pregnant (OCP is safer than pregnancy, statistically) plus the positive benefits - lower risk of some cancers etc.

A male contraceptive obviously doesn't protect a man against the health risks of pregnancy so risks Vs benefits are much harder to justify.

CaptSkippy · 20/06/2019 13:24

For people who want even more options, I just searched for "sex tips" on google.
Came up with 3.1 billion results. Don't tell me there aren't options for sex without the risk of pregnancy.

herculepoirot2 · 20/06/2019 13:24

If women want to continue a pregnancy over the objections of the man, they can pay for it.

But why, Isabella? The man consented to sex. The child exists. Why does he get to force his objections after the fact? Why not object to parenthood at the point of putting his cock in her?

JacquesHammer · 20/06/2019 13:24

plus the positive benefits - lower risk of some cancers etc

But the increased risk of other cancers.

JoxerGoesToStuttgart · 20/06/2019 13:28

The message really isn’t getting across is it.

anyone who has sex with someone of the opposite sex, regardless of condoms or contraception, is accepting ALL the consequences of that. You could end up with an STD, AIDS/HIV. You could end up pregnant and not realise until you are 28 weeks pregnant. You could be extremely ill throughout the entire pregnancy, You could end up pregnant with twins/triplets/more. You could end up with a very ill baby. You could end up with two very ill babies and be very ill yourself. You could end up with a baby that will need full time carers for its entire life. You could end up coming home without a baby at all. Or you could end up being the man who helped cause all that for a woman and baby/ies. For 15 minutes of pleasure.

But that’s what you agree to when you have sex. Both of you. Man and woman.

DecomposingComposers · 20/06/2019 13:28

They don’t have to accept it though. They can choose to end the relationship or discuss levels of risk with their partner.

Of course they could end the relationship but realistically how many men don't want any or anymore children? I would imagine the majority of sexually active men. How then can posters on here argue that it is the responsibility of men to ensure that pregnancy doesn't occur, when men have very limited choices when it comes down to it?

Realistically, they only have condoms don't they which aren't 100% effective. Abstinence or anal aren't going to be popular options for many women I wouldn't think. So, why are posters so aggressive towards men when it comes to unwanted pregnancies?

I really think that men and women should take sex and its consequences more seriously and consider what will happen if pregnancy occurs. I don't see how only men are to blame.

Swipe left for the next trending thread