Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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:
Frequency · 21/06/2019 00:38

If a woman left a family, and became estranged from her children, she would not have to pay for them.

Yes, she would. CMS is paid by the non-resident parent, regardless of sex. If you're going to fight a ridiculous and misogynistic point at least do your research first.

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 00:44

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

Because it’s a woman’s body, so a woman’s choice. But a woman who makes that decision should be prepared for a man to tell her he’s made his choice to walk away and leave her to go it alone.

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 00:46

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

Sounds fair to me.

CJsGoldfish · 21/06/2019 00:52

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
The 'boyfriend' didn't want a baby yet failed to ensure pregnancy didn't occur. Clearly, the 'crazy woman' didn't feel as strongly as the 'boyfriend' about preventing pregnancy. It's not a hard concept to grasp..whoever (man or woman) feels strongly about preventing pregnancy ensures they are protected, whether that is one or both.

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
Which would be a perfectly valid option would it not? 'Some poor girls' have the choice to accept abstinence or not. What's the issue? I don't even think you need to 'keep your dick in your pants', you just need to protect yourself and make an informed risk assessment. Not difficult at all

Man doesnt want child? Either terminate or agree and sign you're a single parent and he will not be paying for it
No. Poor manz just ensures he doesn't create a baby.

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 01:03

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

No. Poor manz just ensures he doesn't create a baby.

No, silly little lady just ensures she doesn’t create a baby or continue with pregnancy.

Someone9 · 21/06/2019 01:05

It’s pretty disgusting how so many are acting like a termination is as simplistic as swatting a fly...

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 01:09

It’s pretty disgusting how so many are acting like a termination is as simplistic as swatting a fly...

Don’t have one then. Use contraception and make sure you don’t need one.

Someone9 · 21/06/2019 01:17

IsabellaLinton

You sound like a complete fuckwit.

pallisers · 21/06/2019 01:17

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

Sounds fair to me.

Seriously? I don't know anyone in Ireland or the USA (where I live) who would think or even express this thought. What is it with the UK and women?

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 01:20

You sound like a complete fuckwit

Another one who can’t tell my why I’m wrong, so resorts to mindlessly insulting me. So predictable! C’mon, have another go! Grin

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 01:23

What is it with the UK and women?

Maybe different people have different opinions? Is that even possible? Wink

Frequency · 21/06/2019 01:26

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

And if it is a vulnerable child or woman unable to proceed with a rape case? Or does it not matter that they have the potential to be caught in your utterly bonkers idea?

Have you any idea of the mental and emotional impact of an abortion?

Men have a choice. They have the choice to use a condom. They have the choice to only have sex in a loving and committed relationship where they can trust the woman to take the pill as well as using condoms. They have the choice to use a condom and withdraw. They have the choice to abstain. Their choices to prevent pregnancy are abundant.

If pregnancy occurs because they fail to act out any or all of the numerous ways they can prevent themselves impregnating a woman, then tough shit. It Is her physical and mental health that may suffer due to abortion. It is her choice whether to go ahead with termination. If she chooses not to go ahead with a termination the only rights that matter are those of the innocent child.

CJsGoldfish · 21/06/2019 01:33

No, silly little lady just ensures she doesn’t create a baby or continue with pregnancy
Pretty much what I said. 🤣
whoever (man or woman) feels strongly about preventing pregnancy ensures they are protected, whether that is one or both
Are you even reading the thread?

Another one who can’t tell my why I’m wrong
You've been told over and over why you are wrong but your 'listening' and comprehension skills seem to be a tad off.

BrainFart · 21/06/2019 04:05

@53rdWay

Off the top of my head, I would say :

  • any argument which says that the inequality in men's and women's pay stemming from pregnancies / maternity leave, which appears like this one to be an inequality based on an innate biological difference ;
  • the small yet voluble set of trans activists who insist that trans women have the right to compete in women's sports, despite what appear to me to be clear and obvious biological differences (also recognising that is an entirely separate can if worms to the OPs initial proposal and not one I want to divert the thread with or talk about elsewhere because it's a car crash that elicits serious emotional responses.
Amylight · 21/06/2019 04:23

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Amylight · 21/06/2019 04:33

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 06:35

What am I missing ? (This is entirely genuine, I honestly don't understand the reasoning and want to).

Because like I said above, termination is only allowed because the child is inside my body and it is MY body. If biology worked differently, say, two people had sex, An embryo was created and then - bear with me - the embryo was somehow passed out of the body and grew in an egg sac, there would be no right to termination under our current laws. Termination has the consequence of preventing parenthood, but preventing parenthood is not the logic behind it. It is about protecting bodily autonomy. That is not a consideration for a man, so he does get the right to sever his responsibility towards the life he has created.

A bit tough on him? Yes. But he knows this at the moment of conception. It is avoidable.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 06:37

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?

Because, as has been explained, the only reason she has that right is because of the risk to her health presented by pregnancy and birth. If that risk did not exist, she would not have that right any more than he would.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 06:41

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

But why? I don’t want a termination. I want a baby. Man made a decision to risk creating one. How does the natural outcome - his child - become my sole responsibility just because he is a fucking idiot who couldn’t think past the end of his dick?

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 06:46

Because, as has been explained, the only reason she has that right is because of the risk to her health presented by pregnancy and birth. If that risk did not exist, she would not have that right any more than he would

Yes and that right is not being violated and is still exactly the same - she still has that right as he is not having a say in whether she has the baby or not - he is just also getting the same right as the woman, up to an earlier point as the woman.

I think some people seem to be getting confused over the point of abortion and (as the OP is discussing) the hypothetical opting out.

It is not about taking a right away from a woman,it's about giving the man that right as well. The mans right would have to be earlier decided.

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 06:48

But why? I don’t want a termination. I want a baby. Man made a decision to risk creating one. How does the natural outcome - his child - become my sole responsibility just because he is a fucking idiot who couldn’t think past the end of his dick?

So does that make women who get pregnant by accident, fuckwits also ?

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 06:50

So does that make women who get pregnant by accident, fuckwits also ?

If they don’t use contraception in the full and certain knowledge they would walk away from a living child, yes, they’re fucking stupid.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 06:50

Yes and that right is not being violated and is still exactly the same - she still has that right as he is not having a say in whether she has the baby or not - he is just also getting the same right as the woman, up to an earlier point as the woman.

But there is no moral basis for an additional right to be created here. Their situations vis-a-vis pregnancy aren’t equal.

silvercuckoo · 21/06/2019 06:51

Where I am from, any parent, father or mother, can voluntarily abandon their parental rights and consequently lose responsibilities (there is a legal concept of parental "rights and responsibilities", quite intuitive - "rights" to see a child and make decisions about their wellbeing, "responsibilities" are financial support, ensuring they are safe, in education etc). This tie can be severed at any point, even with an adult child (there is also a reverse child support obligation, i.e. if the parent exercised parental responsibility towards the child, e.g. paid child maintenance, no matter how small, they can claim "old age" financial support from the children later).
And you know what, the number of deadbeat dads who DON'T sign off their parental rights, but still don't pay a penny towards their children is probably the same as in the UK (or even higher, because there are no enforcement bodies such as the CSA/CMS).

DecomposingComposers · 21/06/2019 06:52

So does that make women who get pregnant by accident, fuckwits also ?

Well, quite.

How can posters say that if men want to avoid a pregnancy they need to use contraception or abstain. It's their responsibility to ensure it doesn't happen etc but not apply the same to women? Lots of women start threads looking for advice when they are pregnant but don't want to be - why isn't the same message being given to women? Don't have sex if you don't want a baby?