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:
IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 22:41

Why is it down to the woman?

Because she chooses the father. So she should choose well.

ReganSomerset · 20/06/2019 22:42

Also, abortion is not a viable option for all women. You shouldn't operate on the assumption that all women would do it, even if they didn't want the baby.

ReganSomerset · 20/06/2019 22:44

Again, Isabella, you're suggesting that all women who get pregnant set out to get that way. Many women didn't choose a father for their unborn child, they just chose a sexual partner.

BrainFart · 20/06/2019 22:44

For my part, thank you to all the posters who have presented views that tested my own and responded to my testing of theirs.

Having thought more about it, I am convinced that if one is to logically (or perhaps blindly) follow the doctrine of equality, then such an opt-out, with appropriate tinkering - regulations on who can / can't, a charge associated, a cut-off date - absolutely should be available to men.

However, in the real world, I think such an idea should not be enshrined in law. There would doubtless be unintended consequences, and I think that it would be better for all parties concerned, not least the eventual children, for men to accept that this is one of those areas were women, for whatever reason, benefit from an advantageous situation, and that they (men) need to assume responsibility for their actions (women too, but they have more avenues open in this case).

I would caveat that by saying that I would hope such recognition that the sexes are different would encourage assorted activists to tone down the "Biology / no such thing as Biological sex / sex is a social construct" and accept that there are other areas where the reverse is true without being determined to remkake society anew trying to ignore / overcome the idea that men and women have certain differences.

Pumperthepumper · 20/06/2019 22:44

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.

Not necessarily, it means she didn’t want to put her body through an abortion. I like Hercule’s analogy earlier - the reason she has this choice is because it’s her right to have autonomy over her own body. If there was no body available, if the baby was born in a test tube, she wouldn’t have a choice either. The choice exists because of her body. Once the baby is born, why is that baby her responsibility?

IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 22:45

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.

I didn't have that assumption in mind. But it’s sometimes the case.

Pumperthepumper · 20/06/2019 22:45

Because she chooses the father. So she should choose well.

Haha I see now, you’re on the wind up. I honestly never used to be this gullible.

IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 22:46

Many women didn't choose a father for their unborn child, they just chose a sexual partner.

They took a risk, they were unlucky. Still doesn’t mean they have to become a parent.

DecomposingComposers · 20/06/2019 22:48

Again, Isabella, you're suggesting that all women who get pregnant set out to get that way. Many women didn't choose a father for their unborn child, they just chose a sexual partner.

Surely if it's as easy for men not to get a woman pregnant as posters are suggesting, then it's just as easy for women to avoid getting pregnant?

IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 22:48

Also, abortion is not a viable option for all women. You shouldn't operate on the assumption that all women would do it, even if they didn't want the baby.

Don’t have sex then. If the risk is too great, abstain.

53rdWay · 20/06/2019 22:49

BrainFart, who are these ‘activists’ you’re talking about, and what is it you think they believe?

Because you’re kind of coming across like you’ve heard some feminists say something about equality and some other ones talk about social constructs, and after putting about 13 minutes of thought into this yourself you’ve decided you have mastered the subject enough to pontificate to the masses.

ReganSomerset · 20/06/2019 22:51

With all your talk about choosing a father for the baby and so needing to choose wisely, you do seem to have that assumption in mind.

Yes it is sometimes the case. But it is also sometimes the case that a male partner intentionally tampers with birth control to make a pregnancy more likely. A crime if caught and prosecuted, but hard to prove and I'd be surprised if the ones that get found out aren't vastly outnumbered by those who get away with it. Women aren't always, or even usually, villains. Mostly, I don't think unintended pregnancies are anyone's fault. Accidents happen and those involved need to deal with the fallout, in whichever form it comes.

IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 22:54

Surely if it's as easy for men not to get a woman pregnant as posters are suggesting, then it's just as easy for women to avoid getting pregnant?

Obviously. But seems others want all the rights over their bodies but none of the responsibilities. They have a responsibility to use contraception. They have a responsibility to a potential child not to lumber them with an absent, resentful, unwilling father.

ReganSomerset · 20/06/2019 22:56

Don't have sex then. If the risk is too great, abstain.

So, you'd agree with this argument for the men too, presumably? Good, we're agreed. If you take the risk, you are responsible for the resulting baby regardless of your sex and if this is unacceptable to you then you shouldn't have had sex in the first place. Marvellous. Glad you've come round.

IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 22:59

Women aren't always, or even usually, villains.

I certainly don’t believe they are! I didn’t intend to imply it. either.

Mostly, I don't think unintended pregnancies are anyone's fault. Accidents happen and those involved need to deal with the fallout, in whichever form it comes.

I don’t disagree with you.

IsabellaLinton · 20/06/2019 23:07

So, you'd agree with this argument for the men too, presumably?

I would. Purely because women still have a choice in whether to continue a pregnancy. A man has one chance, and if he takes precautions and they fail - he’s buggered. I’d counsel them not to have sex with anyone they wouldn’t want to risk creating a child with.

If you take the risk, you are responsible for the resulting baby regardless of your sex and if this is unacceptable to you then you shouldn't have had sex in the first place.

No, I don’t agree, for the reasons I stated upthread. Sorry to disappoint you.

pallisers · 20/06/2019 23:10

They have a responsibility to a potential child not to lumber them with an absent, resentful, unwilling father.

Ok so a woman is responsible for a man's inadequacies - right. And the man's responsibility..... is that not worth even discussing?

So many posters on this site seem to think men are inevitably useless gits who are fit for nothing and need a woman to be responsible for them/adult life/children/every damn thing. Have you never actually met a normal responsible adult man?

OccidentalPurist · 20/06/2019 23:12

I haven't RTFT yet as it's huge, but agree 100% with the OP's post!!

ReganSomerset · 20/06/2019 23:15

Purely because women still have a choice in whether to continue a pregnancy

Some women, maybe. Not all. And the complications can cause lasting infertility, so it's hardly a walk in the park. And as we've established, there's no requirement to be a parent (actually be involved in the upbringing of your child) at all. CMS payments are miniscule when you consider the actual cost of a child and many men don't pay them anyway. It seems to me that men have far more than one opportunity to dodge parenthood.

Frequency · 20/06/2019 23:31

I know of a chronically depressed fifteen year old girl who was raped recently. She is lucky enough to have the kind of relationship where she is able to confide in her mother and was given the MAP within 18 hours of the rape.

She told her mother yesterday she hasn't had a period since. They're going to the GP tomorrow.

Understandably, the already mentally fragile teenager felt unable to go ahead with pressing charges and after her initial two statements to police withdrew consent for the case to go ahead. The boy was never arrested. In legal terms he is not a rapist.

Under this absurd proposal if this mentally ill child is pregnant she faces the choice to undergo an abortion or be forced to raise the baby 100% alone while the father gets to opt out of all responsibility just as he got to opt of taking responsibility for the rape she has to live with it for the rest of her life.

Is the above worth it just so men can stick their dick where they please without having to face the consequences of their own choices and fertility?

And for the umpteenth time CMS is not to punish the father nor to reward the mother. It is the right of the child, who had no say in where its feckless father stuck his unprotected dick, to be financially supported and provided for to the best ability of both parents.

CJsGoldfish · 21/06/2019 00:15

Surely if it's as easy for men not to get a woman pregnant as posters are suggesting, then it's just as easy for women to avoid getting pregnant?
Of course. So if either feels strongly about NOT creating a baby they take the steps to ensure they don't. Or does 'personal responsibility' only apply to women?
Despite the influx of MRA's reciting from the handbook, it really does boil down to that. On a thread titled "Should MEN be able to opt out..." the answer should always be no. Want to take the risk? Your choice. Don't whinge when it doesn't go your way.
It's like the stupid "my mate was tricked by a woman.." Yeah, no, he wasn't. He did not protect HIMSELF. He left the contraception up to someone else, no doubt for his own pleasure. There's no 'tricking' Again, 'personal responsibility'

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 00:22

Ok so a woman is responsible for a man's inadequacies - right. And the man's responsibility..... is that not worth even discussing?

Of course she’s not responsible for his failings. But she’s responsible if she chooses that man to father her child and inflict his failings on a child who has no say in the matter!

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 00:26

Some women, maybe. Not all.

But the majority.

And the complications can cause lasting infertility, so it's hardly a walk in the park.

That’s a woman’s risk to take. Her body, her decision, right?

And as we've established, there's no requirement to be a parent (actually be involved in the upbringing of your child) at all. CMS payments are miniscule when you consider the actual cost of a child and many men don't pay them anyway. It seems to me that men have far more than one opportunity to dodge parenthood.

Woman can bear that in mind then when they make the decision as to whether to have a child with someone. If men have to accept that women ultimately choose whether to give birth, women have to accept that some men will not shoulder the responsibility, and they can’t force them to.

PregnantOnPurpose · 21/06/2019 00:33

If a woman left a family, and became estranged from her children, she would not have to pay for them. I think it should be the same for men.

I saw a thread of some crazy woman basically forcing a pregnancy on her 'boyfriend'. Boyfriend made it clear he does want it, didnt want her to continue the pregnancy. I dont think it's fair men should have no choice but to provide for their child that they didnt even want. If they were the pregnant one they would terminate, they should be allowed a say.

Dont speed me the 'keep your dick in your pants' because if some poor girls came on MN tonight with a 'my boyfriend wont have sex with me out of fear of getting me pregnant' you would all be screaming LTB.
Were so quick to claim a pregnancy as our own, but that balls of cells is half is and he has the right to it as much as you do. There has to be a compromise.

Man doesnt want child? Either terminate or agree and sign you're a single parent and he will not be paying for it.

PregnantOnPurpose · 21/06/2019 00:37

Condoms are 99% effective. What about the other 1%?
Even when used correctly a condom can fail to protect against pregnancy (and stds). No matter how rare, it happens, and when it happens, what then? The man took precautions, so did woman, if wlman agreed to use condom during sex then she too had intentions of not getting pregnant.. so when you accidentally fall pregnant how can we just say "oh well, the condom failed, I know it's not what you wanted, but this is your life now and I want your money"

I think it's disgusting the way the system works.