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:
herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 06:55

why isn't the same message being given to women? Don't have sex if you don't want a baby?

It would be, if pregnancy was not a risk to health and life. That is the ONLY reason we allow termination.

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 06:58

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

Yes absolutely correct, both sexes are responsible but the point is only one sex has a choice (past fertilisation) on becoming a parent, and (what feels like the millionth time) I'm not saying he should have a choice of wether she has an abortion he shouldn't, but it just gives the man the same rights.

Same responsibility (in protecting against pregnancy) - same rights (up to a certain point in pregnancy )

JacquesHammer · 21/06/2019 07:00

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

Yeah. That thread where he didn’t wear a condom. Kind of illustrating the point beautifully here...!

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:01

Same responsibility (in protecting against pregnancy) - same rights (up to a certain point in pregnancy )

But it isn’t even the same right. The right to terminate a pregnancy is not the same thing as the right to abandon a child. Is it?

JacquesHammer · 21/06/2019 07:02

Don't have sex if you don't want a baby?

If only it had been mentioned on the thread, but if I don’t want a baby I don’t need to abstain. I can have an abortion.

PregnantOnPurpose · 21/06/2019 07:02

Contraception fails..

Couple have sex, condoms suggested and used, precautions taken to avoid pregnancy. If that contraception fails I dint see why the man inky should suffer a life long consequence that he, and she both took precautions to avoid. She didnt have intention of having a baby, unless shes a psycho who sabotaged the condom, then why should he have no choice to opt out?

I'm not saying terminate all pregnancies that men dont want, im saying if they dont want to be involved, they shouldn't be forced to pay for it.

We seem to have this crazy idea that 'if you put your dick in it then you suffer the consequences'

We dont have the same view on rape do we? What so 'well you got raped, it's your fault your pregnant you must suffer the consequences and keep the child, pay and raise it''

Absolutely ridiculous argument.

JacquesHammer · 21/06/2019 07:04

If that contraception fails I dint see why the man inky should suffer a life long consequence that he, and she both took precautions to avoid

Because they both know that contraception failure is a risk.

Are you really equating consensual sex and contraception failure and rape from which a woman gets pregnant? Confused

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 07:04

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

But there is that right for a woman, and (IMO) rightly so. The moral basis would be equal rights on becoming a parent ?
( again not the right to determine birth or termination the same right on becoming a parent )

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:04

*We seem to have this crazy idea that 'if you put your dick in it then you suffer the consequences'

We dont have the same view on rape do we? What so 'well you got raped, it's your fault your pregnant you must suffer the consequences and keep the child, pay and raise it''*

WHAT THE FUCK.

EL2019 · 21/06/2019 07:04

Sure.

He has to get two separate lawyers to sign to say he is of sound mind. Then a third lawyer to be present to witness the signing of the document. This third lawyer is a specialist one and you may need to wait a while to get an appointment. It costs minimum £500.

Oh and all must be completed before the woman is 6 weeks pregnant (so 4 weeks after sex) so she had time to organise an abortion before 12 weeks.

Fair?

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:06

But there is that right for a woman, and (IMO) rightly so. The moral basis would be equal rights on becoming a parent ?

Except that that isn’t the moral basis for the woman’s right to a termination, so why should it be a newly created right for a man?

If I am pregnant, I am pregnant because TWO people made a baby. So what if I don’t choose to clean up his mess? It’s still his mess. Morally, the child is his and he is responsible for it. I have no moral responsibility to terminate, so he has no moral right to walk away.

PregnantOnPurpose · 21/06/2019 07:11

Exactly. My point is if men had the same insides as a woman, and could get pregnant, they would have a choice. Just because men arent carrying the child doesnt mean it is also 50% them, 50% their decision surely?!

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:11

Exactly. My point is if men had the same insides as a woman, and could get pregnant, they would have a choice. Just because men arent carrying the child doesnt mean it is also 50% them, 50% their decision surely?!

It means exactly that.

DecomposingComposers · 21/06/2019 07:12

Because they both know that contraception failure is a risk.

So why all the threads on here from women "unexpectedly" pregnant then? Or upset because it's not the right time, not the right man, can't afford it etc? If everyone knows that contraception failure is a possibility the answer is that unless pregnancy won't be a disaster, don't have sex.

And yes, if you are ok with having an abortion then it's no problem (though I don't know how other women can know how they will react until it happens) but if you wouldn't consider abortion then you should think about how you would cope with a child, before having sex, if it's a fact that men should consider then women should too.

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 07:12

But it isn’t even the same right. The right to terminate a pregnancy is not the same thing as the right to abandon a child. Is it?

No it isn't, the right to terminate is solely with the woman (and bloody rightly so, as I keep saying) but that is a decision to "opt out" of parenting as there would be no baby. A very difficult decision made for a multitude of reasons mental health, financial or just because they don't want a child.

So why should a man not be able to opt out also when it was a joint venture in the initial pregnancy .

This would be an additional right given to create an even right to both sexes

floribunda18 · 21/06/2019 07:13

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

Fucking diddums.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:15

So why should a man not be able to opt out also when it was a joint venture in the initial pregnancy

Because it is not the same right, and it does not have the same moral basis. I cannot see why this isn’t clear. It’s just men whining like babies (“It’s not fairrrr”). No. It’s not fair that I could die in childbirth, or need counselling having felt forced into an abortion. Life isn’t fair.

DecomposingComposers · 21/06/2019 07:15

Except that that isn’t the moral basis for the woman’s right to a termination, so why should it be a newly created right for a man?

So the woman can choose to terminate or choose to have the child. Why can't the man choose to either be a parent, or not? Then the woman can make her choice but in full possession of the facts? She will know whether she will be parenting alone or with support and she can decide if she wants to under those conditions.

JacquesHammer · 21/06/2019 07:16

If everyone knows that contraception failure is a possibility the answer is that unless pregnancy won't be a disaster, don't have sex

And again....women have another option. There’s no need (unless abortion isn’t possible for you) to abstain. I could have unprotected sex tonight and go have the MAP tomorrow. Why would I need to abstain? Men can’t. If pregnancy is a disaster then they have to consider it.

but if you wouldn't consider abortion then you should think about how you would cope with a child, before having sex, if it's a fact that men should consider then women should too

Nobody has said anything other than this.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:17

And yes, if you are ok with having an abortion then it's no problem (though I don't know how other women can know how they will react until it happens) but if you wouldn't consider abortion then you should think about how you would cope with a child, before having sex, if it's a fact that men should consider then women should too.

Couldn’t agree more, particularly as the difference with a woman is that she is the one left with physical custody when the child is born. If you can’t countenance abortion, best not risk getting pregnant. If you do risk it, nobody is arguing that that isn’t pretty dim. But if you risk it with the sole intention of dumping the entire responsibility on the father, then you are a selfish twat AND an idiot. Likewise, any man who wants an “opt out” so he can have “consequence-free” sex, leaving little girls and boys with one parent.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:19

So the woman can choose to terminate or choose to have the child. Why can't the man choose to either be a parent, or not?

Because termination ends the responsibility to the child. Opting out doesn’t. There is still a child, who still needs feeding, clothing, loving. The biological difference between men and women is well-known, and no justification for behaving like a selfish little fucker.

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 07:19

So what if I don’t choose to clean up his mess? It’s still his mess
It's both of your messes surely ? You chose to risk getting pregnant just as much as he did (in the case the OP is talking about)

Morally, the child is his and he is responsible for it. I have no moral responsibility to terminate, so he has no moral right to walk away

No it's not a moral responsibility to terminate. It's a right that you have as a woman who chooses not to parent a child for whatever reason, as you have willingly become pregnant, So why should he not have a right to not parent a child ?

(Again he should never have a right to tell you to terminate or not, still the woman's choice )

DecomposingComposers · 21/06/2019 07:19

herculepoirot2

So once the child is here, you support both parents being given equal rights then? Both parents to have equal rights to bond with the child, raise the child, be a part of its life, make decisions about how it is raised etc?

I mean, seeing as you view both parents as responsible and having to financially support the child and the only extra right the mother has is over their own body, once the child is here both should have equal rights then?

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:21

It's both of your messes surely ? You chose to risk getting pregnant just as much as he did (in the case the OP is talking about)

Yes. And I will - if I choose to not to ‘clean up his mess’ just to save him the trouble - have to look after it, won’t I?

I have answered your question. You just keep asking it and ignoring the reply.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 07:23

So once the child is here, you support both parents being given equal rights then? Both parents to have equal rights to bond with the child, raise the child, be a part of its life, make decisions about how it is raised etc?

In theory, yes. But once the child is here, their interests come before either of ours. So if the father is a coke-sniffing buffoon who wouldn’t know the difference between bottle of milk and a bottle of bleach, no. Otherwise yes.

Swipe left for the next trending thread