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

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:
BrainFart · 20/06/2019 15:28

how women's careers and earnings are negatively impacted due to pregnancies / maternity leave

herculepoirot2 · 20/06/2019 15:29

And who pays for that?

They do, their wife does, they both do. It’s what happens when you get divorced.

Deadringer · 20/06/2019 15:31

Yes that's what we need, more rights for men. Choosing whether to continue with a pregnancy or not is about the only biological advantage that women have. And it's not much of a prize is it, considering the emotional, physical and financial impact abortion can have on a woman.

Xmr1986 · 20/06/2019 15:31

Men have that right already, it's bluntly called 'not sticking their dick in someone'.

That is their final say in it. They don't want the risk, they don't have sex. That is their last chance saloon.

When it comes to a child, children hold the rights, not the parents. Parents don't have rights. There are only the rights of the child.

And the UK should do much, much more to chase men who do not pay their way. It needs to be beaten back in to the mindset culturally that you do not abandon your kids. They are legally and monetarily your responsibility, whether you wanted them after you impregnated their mother or not.

herculepoirot2 · 20/06/2019 15:32

I don't think anyone should have strings-free sex - men or women.

Then what are we arguing about?

JoxerGoesToStuttgart · 20/06/2019 15:36

So a man walks away because he doesn't want sex to prevent further pregnancies, and gets stung for CS for any existing kids.
A woman walks away because the man won't have sex to prevent further pregnancies and the man gets stung for CS.

“Stung for CS” Grin

You mean, continues to support his children after separation. There is no stinging. It really isn’t a punishment to have to pay a legal minimum amount so your children can continue to eat and wear clothes after their parents separate. Their other parent will also be providing food and clothes. Do you refer to that as “being stung” too? Or just a parent, umm, parenting?

JoxerGoesToStuttgart · 20/06/2019 15:44

theoretically at least, it would be fair and reasonable to allow a man to do the same via the "opt-out" proposed by the OP.

Except it’s not the same decision is it?

If the woman opts out at 12 weeks pregnant there is no child to support, no burden left on the man to support the child alone, no expectation of financial support from the state, no child with a gaping void and permanent sense of rejection. If she opts out, the whole situation disappears and the world remains unaltered.

If the man opts nothing disappears except him. The child still needs to be raised, the mother still has to care for them, alone, in every aspect.

You are not asking for men to have the same choice as the women have because it isn’t possible. They’re two different decisions. With vastly different consequences.

pikapikachu · 20/06/2019 15:47

Why do these once-married men not want to pay for their children?!

Out of sight out of mind? To punish their ex? They think that tax credits and child benefit is more than enough for their kids to live off? Because they want to use their money for their own selfish reasons like wooing new women?

pikapikachu · 20/06/2019 15:53

So a man walks away because he doesn't want sex to prevent further pregnancies, and gets stung for CS for any existing kids.

If he gets 50/50, no child maintenance is payable. Most men would rather pay their ex to look after the child(ren) as it's usually cheaper than childcare and they don't have to take a hit career-wise.

Child support can be as low as zero-£7 if Dad becomes a SAHP to his gf's kids or fiddles his self-employment earnings. How is that being "stung"?

AlaskanOilBaron · 20/06/2019 15:54

I don't think anyone should have strings-free sex - men or women

In what sense?

I'm a woman and not only have I had an abortion but I know I could easily do it again, it's really not a big deal to me. Women like me can have sex 'free of strings' can't we?

codemonkey · 20/06/2019 16:04

Poor fucking kids. Anyone who 'opts out' of parenthood once a child is actually born simply because it's not what they fancy is a cunt.

When I think about my late husband and what he'd have given to have one more day, just one more fucking hour, with his little boy it really grips my piss that he died and the useless ones who 'opt out' get to live.

The internalised misogyny on here is shocking. If you're a father you man the fuck up and parent. You don't whine about how hard done by you are and how you should be better protected legally, FFS. You put the kid first.

DecomposingComposers · 20/06/2019 16:10

In what sense?

I'm a woman and not only have I had an abortion but I know I could easily do it again, it's really not a big deal to me. Women like me can have sex 'free of strings' can't we?

In the sense of, have casual sex without a thought to what the consequences might be until they happen.

Like the mum for example in the OP who doesn't want to co parent with a stranger. Well, really she should have thought about that possibility before she had sex with a stranger or before she decided to continue a pregnancy fathered by a stranger, shouldn't she? How can you give birth to a child and then want to exclude it's father because he's a stranger?

herculepoirot2 · 20/06/2019 16:11

Women like me can have sex 'free of strings' can't we?

No. You might not catch the pregnancy in time. You might have an ectopic pregnancy. An abortion might cause you harm, physically or mentally. I don’t think that is “strings-free”.

LaurieMarlow · 20/06/2019 16:16

In the sense of, have casual sex without a thought to what the consequences might be until they happen.

Jesus are you for fucking real? Hmm

Pregnancy, birth, abortion, miscarriage - have they all escaped your notice? And the mental and physical impacts they can have?

MirriVan · 20/06/2019 16:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

pallisers · 20/06/2019 16:28

If a child needs two parents to love and support it (as some are saying) and it's clear from the very beginning that it will NOT have this, then is the women thinking of the child's best interests in proceeding with the pregnancy?

So it is a woman's responsibility if a man decides to feck off and leave his child without support. Is there any way men's behaviour can't be made the responsibility of women??

It is depressing how often this "should men be able to opt out of parenthood" comes up on a website primarily populated by women and mothers. The reality is many of them opt out anyway - read the threads on here - but that isn't enough. Some women want them to able to abandon their children and it be socially acceptable/a reasonable choice/the mother's fault.

Awful stuff.

JacquesHammer · 20/06/2019 16:29

I don't think anyone should have strings-free sex - men or women

Why on Earth not? Confused

As long as both parties are on the same page there’s no issue.

Beechview · 20/06/2019 16:31

Maybe we should all go back to basics. No sex before marriage.
That way, men will only father children once they’re in a committed relationship and choose to have them.

JacquesHammer · 20/06/2019 16:33

Maybe we should all go back to basics. No sex before marriage
That way, men will only father children once they’re in a committed relationship and choose to have them

That’s sarcasm, right? Grin

Beechview · 20/06/2019 16:35

Grin maybe.

BrainFart · 20/06/2019 16:36

@JoxerGoesToStuttgart

That's a reasonable point, that the outcome is not the same, which is why other posters have suggested it would have to be before the abortion cut-off point. Which would then put a responsibility on the woman to find out early and inform him. In case she finds out to late then no opt out. If she finds out early but withholds then some form of punishment for her.

I was wondering more about this is the car on the drive home. I'm against the idea because I worry it would lead to men doing whatever they want, pushing unprotected sex and then walking off grasping their opt out in their hands.

What if the opt-out were paying ? Say it would cost the man opting out a one-off payment of, say, £500, payable to the government and ring-fenced for child support payments and other such programs to help single parents, to try and guard against abuse. The woman can then make a more informed decision about whether she wishes to proceed. Opt outs would not be available for, say, couples who already have children together.

BrainFart · 20/06/2019 16:38

@MirriVan

But it's a difference in the situations of the participants based on irreverocable biological differences.

herculepoirot2 · 20/06/2019 16:41

£500

😂😂😂😂

BjornAgain81 · 20/06/2019 16:49

OK. Now apply that to the arguments surrounding how women's careers and earnings due to pregnancies / maternity leave. Does it become right to just shrug your shoulders and say "that's it, it's biology, men don't have this so it is normal that they earn more"?

This is pretty much what I was going to say!

Not sure yet what my opinion is, but as you say I don't think it's quite as simple as saying "biology innit".

FWIW, one of my mates was 'tricked' into fatherhood by a woman who stopped taking the pill. He only found out afterwards that she was pregnant and had been wanting a baby for ages (she dumped him as soon as she found out). He's actually not unhappy with the situation but is having to financially support whether he likes it or not.

JoxerGoesToStuttgart · 20/06/2019 17:00

which is why other posters have suggested it would have to be before the abortion cut-off point. Which would then put a responsibility on the woman to find out early and inform him.

The only acceptable cut off is before insertion of penis to vagina. After ejaculation is too late to have the “Youre on your own if you end up pregnant” chat. Men have tongues in their mouths and know their own minds before they have sex, not just after.

What if the opt-out were paying ? Say it would cost the man opting out a one-off payment of, say, £500, payable to the government and ring-fenced for child support payments and other such programs to help single parents, to try and guard against abuse.

£500? You have children right? So you know how far £500 will go in terms of raising a child, yes? And did you type that post with a straight face?