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

[Jemimapuddleduckpancake]

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?)

Ooh OP ignore the MN twaddlers who can’t come up with anything but their man shaming inference that any accidental pregnancy is 100% the mans fault 🤔😡

I actually think this would be an AMAZING idea, but personally would be a lot better to make the cut off for signing it slightly shorter than the legal abortion limit, say 20 weeks. That way it protects women who find out ‘too late’ that they are pregnant which does happen.

Personally I also have several friends who ‘thought the dad would come around once baby was here’ so kept the child on that hope- it didn’t happen and now they are miserable.

Having a baby DOES NOT mean a man is obligated to love you or the child and a lot of women would be better served by knowing this up front!

Just like the ‘consent’ owness in modern society is put heavily on men (its very rare a woman is charged with any sexual assault or crime) the ‘protection’ owness is put on women!! If YOU don’t want a baby to grow in YOUR body then YOU need to take steps to prevent that. If YOU choose to keep a child that is YOUR choice.

🤔 Until we iron out the severe issues like this we’ll never have true equality between sexes, we’ll just continue on as we currently are, ‘feminists’ banging on about how ‘unfair’ life is, but arent actually willing to give an inch on the ‘unfair’ areas which benefit them! Then we wonder why middle aged white men still run the world 🤔

Sometimes ‘femenism’ really seems to me of that toddler in nursery who just hadn’t learnt to stare yet and wants everyone else’s cake as well as her own!

‘I WANT EQUALITY - but you know...not it it means giving up anything I currently have’

I doubt we’d see little change. Its pretty much the situation as it stands. It’s very easy for men to be entirely non existent (including financially) in their DCs lives

You genuinely believe that some women would not be a lot more cautious if they think a man could simply opt out of parenting completely. Ok we have to disagree on that one.

*feminism

What are you not understanding about the fact men can’t terminate a pregnancy that isn’t in their own body?

What are you not understanding, that I have never said that they should 😂😂

but arent actually willing to give an inch on the ‘unfair’ areas which benefit them!

Which part of men abandoning their children unfairly benefits women?

but their man shaming inference that any accidental pregnancy is 100% the mans fault

You might well look confused, nobody has said that.

Comprehension is a wonderful thing.

What are you not understanding, that I have never said that they should

Umm the fact that you said you want men to have the same choice as women have.

You genuinely believe that some women would not be a lot more cautious if they think a man could simply opt out of parenting completely.

No because that’s already the situation we have. Men can already opt out completely. So women will be exactly as cautious as they are now.

@JoxerGoesToStuttgart @MirriVan

Thank you, your examples helped me understand different ways of seeing the question.

However, why could the economic considerations in the situation you outlined, Joxer, also not apply to a man ? Maybe he could be out-of-work, suicidal etc... and not want the extra responsibility of a child ?

Because - let me say it SLOWLY - she is pregnant and he is not.

Because - again SLOWLY - when a woman decides to terminate, no child exists to be the responsibility of either of them, whereas if she doesn’t, a child exists. A child the man willingly fathered. So it is his responsibility.

Yes I'm so glad you said it soooo slowly ---- I have never said he should have any decision on the termination or not

my question was he chooses not to want to be a father, at the same point that the woman can decide.

So she can decide to terminate after willingly becoming pregnant and make the choice that affects both of them

She can choose not to terminate after willingly becoming pregnant and make a choice that affects both of them.

Why can't he make a choice. He is not choosing or making anyone have an abortion. He is choosing to not be a parent. She can go on to have the baby she willingly became pregnant with or she can choose not to?

Men can already opt out completely

But so can women. All they have to do is walk away, same as men. Wasn't there a film with Gemma Arterton recently where she does exactly that ? Both would still theoretically have the same obligations re: child maintenance.

Sometimes ‘femenism’ really seems to me of that toddler in nursery who just hadn’t learnt to stare yet and wants everyone else’s cake as well as her own!

These fucking women wanting their own bodily autonomy!

So weird how there are so many men who definitely do not want babies yet manage to impregnate women. So strange.

Umm the fact that you said you want men to have the same choice as women have

No my point was nothing to do with the choice of a woman's body. It was the choice of being a parent or opting out .....you know like the original post was about !!!

And I have never said it was what I want.

However, why could the economic considerations in the situation you outlined, Joxer, also not apply to a man ? Maybe he could be out-of-work, suicidal etc... and not want the extra responsibility of a child ?

They can absolutely apply to men. No reason they couldn’t. Personally speaking, I make sure I don’t get pregnant for the reasons stated above. I would imagine any man in the same circumstances would make sure he didn’t impregnate anyone. If the worst happens, CMS are pretty ineffectual so he could easily carry on his life as before tbh.

But so can women. All they have to do is walk away, same as men.

Yes. I wasn’t suggesting women couldn’t walk away from a child. I was responding to a poster asking whether women would be more cautious if it was made law that men could walk away. I said they already can.

If men and women have to always be equal regardless of Biology then it follows that men should have to take the negatives of childbirth too. They should be injected with extra hormones and medicines to make them sick 24/7, 2-3 stone of weight attached to them for several months, have their bodies inflated then deflated with incontinence and perhaps a birth injury to boot? Don't forget that pain relief will only be dished out if they are lucky and they need to be subjected to degrading behaviour which is sadly uncommon in UK hospitals like an internal being dished out without consent.
Of course this is wildly unreasonable.

Until the time that technology can slow a man to carry and birth a baby, women will be in control of their bodies. Some women like those in Northern Ireland and Georgia are already at the mercy of men and I wouldn't wish that on anybody.

@DecomposingComposers

I think you’re missing the point here getting all hung ip on the two doctors

My point is that certain ppl on this thread are talking about abortion or adoption for women as though those things are the same thing as clicking your fingers and vanishing the problem

My point is that they are not

There are already options for men who do not want their sperm harvesting by stealth or accident, vasectomy then subsequent ivf or reversal is one

Bit extreme for sure but then again have you ever had a coil or implant removed or fitted? Ever spent an hour vomiting because of a migraine caused by the pill? Ever had a pharmacist refuse to prescribe you the morning after pill?

Let’s stop pretending that the options available to women are some sort of walk in the park just because our word is final. We control what we do with bodies, that is our right. The only equivalent right men have is to control what they do with their own.

Not rtft, but I can imagine page after page of arguments about whether a man should have the right to relinquish all responsibility for a child he is the biological father of, and the woman's right to proceed with a pregnancy when the father has expressed his desire to relinquish all rights and responsibilities.

Every time I see this argument, I see reams and reams of narrative about what's fair for the father, what's fair for the mother, whose rights trump whose.

I suggest that if the child exists, their right to a relationship with their parents and their right to support, emotionally, financially and physically trumps either parents rights to step out.
The parents should take responsibility regardless of who decided what, because the child deserves the support of both parents !
Why should the child grow up without their father because he didnt feel like taking responsibility? Why does a fathers desire not to be responsible trump a childs need to have a father present in their lives?
Instead of making it all about what the mother wants versus what the father wants, what happens when you make it what the child needs versus what the parent wants?

MadameButterface

I don't think people are saying that abortion or adoption are interchangeable and surely if women don't want to take on the potential risks of pregnancy and childbirth then there are plenty of options available - different forms of contraception, tubal ligation, abstinence or, worst case, abortion.

So no reason for women who don't want to have a baby to have to have one (outside of rape).

To say that vasectomy is a realistic option for men is ridiculous. To say that they can plan on having IVF or reversal following it is just ridiculous. Men are told to consider vasectomy permanent - the fact that it might be reversible shouldn't be counted upon. And how invasive is IVF to any potential partner that these sterilised men might want to have children with?

As for asking me the most patronising questions - I've been on the pill, and had side effects, taken the MAP, had 2 high risk pregnancies and a miscarriage, so yes thanks I understand. I still don't agree that men have it easy or that pregnancy is the fault of men.

Bagofworries

Well the OP is about a mum who wants to exclude the dad from the child's life because he's a "stranger" so I guess you need to be lecturing her about what's best for the child rather than what's best for her?

Let’s stop pretending that the options available to women are some sort of walk in the park just because our word is final.

They may not be a walk in the park, but they’re available.

We control what we do with bodies, that is our right. The only equivalent right men have is to control what they do with their own.

Both have equal responsibility for contraception. If that fails - women have the choice - and right - to continue the pregnancy. Men have the choice - and right - to walk away.

Both have equal responsibility for contraception. If that fails - women have the choice - and right - to continue the pregnancy. Men have the choice - and right - to walk away.

But by that point there’s a third person - an actual human person with needs - in the mix. What happens to that child when one of the people responsible for his creation decide to ignore his needs because they’re not what that person wanted?

The parents should take responsibility regardless of who decided what, because the child deserves the support of both parents!

It’s very important who decides what. The woman chooses for the man and the child. She can’t be forced into becoming a parent and taking on that responsibility. But she can try to force that responsibility onto a man who didn’t want, and tried to prevent, a pregnancy.

A child does deserve the support of both parents, but it’s down to the woman to ensure that happens. She chooses who to have a baby with. She can choose a man willing to support a child, or try to force her decision onto an unwilling man. Her choice.

What happens to that child when one of the people responsible for his creation decide to ignore his needs because they’re not what that person wanted?

That’s what the woman responsible chose. That’s what she wanted. If she proceeded with a pregnancy knowing the man didn’t supply her decision, that’s on her. She wasn’t forced to.

A child does deserve the support of both parents, but it’s down to the woman to ensure that happens.

Why is it down to the woman? Do you believe the mother of any child has more rights, more ownership, of the child than the father?

You seem to be working off the assumption that the woman set out to get pregnant and the man set out not to get her pregnant, Isabella but that's often not the case.