Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 13:26

It sounds like the truth. The reason has been given to you about twenty times.

No it hasn't, you keep just harping on about abortion and terminations !!! And why a man shouldn't have and rights with that, which we all bloody agree on!!!!

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 13:27

Only if they both agree to have the child adopted, therefore both giving up all rights. If either parent wishes to keep the gold, the other must pay.

Not if they don’t agree to. They must chose to take on the responsibility. A woman doesn’t get to decide that for them against their wishes. She can decide for herself what she wishes to do - she can’t decide for him. That’s his prerogative.

Justanormallife · 21/06/2019 13:35

No

The biological parents should be held responsible unless another adult steps in to take over full responsibility (ie adoption)

Society should never allow parents to give up parental responsibility so easily. This attitude leads to devastating consequences for children.

But societies also need to support parents to care for their own children.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 13:37

No it hasn't, you keep just harping on about abortion and terminations !!! And why a man shouldn't have and rights with that, which we all bloody agree on!!!!

Again, no. It has been explained to you again and again that a man doesn’t have a right to opt out just because a woman has a right to an abortion, because the only reason a woman has a right to an abortion is because of the risk of pregnancy, which the man does not assume. The onus is on you to explain why you think he does.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 13:38

no it does not, but when bring them in and start using these experiences to form part of your argument and insinuating I wouldn't understand , it then does

No.

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 13:41

But societies also need to support parents to care for their own children.

Why is it always up to ‘society’ - other people - to support people in their attempt to behave decently? Are people so incapable and childish that they need a hand-hold and support in everything?

What sort of support do people bloody need? If your child is hungry and cold, you get off your lazy ass and do something about it and stop passing the buck to society to do something about it.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 13:41

Why is it always up to ‘society’ - other people - to support people in their attempt to behave decently? Are people so incapable and childish that they need a hand-hold and support in everything?

Looks like they do, from this thread.

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 13:43

A man doesn’t have a right to opt out just because a woman has a right to an abortion

Of course he does. They both decide whether or not to be parents. One can’t force it on the other.

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 13:45

because the only reason a woman has a right to an abortion is because of the risk of pregnancy

no it is not, it is because it's her body and she has a choice, wether she wants to give birth or not and put her body through that, thus becoming a parent.

The onus is on you to explain why you think he does.

I like your chance of tact, now you can't answer past she should decide it's her body. There is no onus on anyone 😂😂😂 it's a debate, both sides but their side forward, I don't have an onus to do anything.

The argument is that it would give both sexual partners the same rights to becoming a parent.

It would have be decided at a predetermined point, which would be earlier than the current rights of the woman.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 13:51

IsabellaLinton

No, he doesn’t.

😂😂😂

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 13:52

bourbonbiccy

It is categorically not about having a right not to become a parent. It is about the risk presented by pregnancy and birth. You can’t answer that, can you?

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 13:53

But societies also need to support parents to care for their own children.

Do you know, we already have the solution to this problem. It’s been around for thousands of years - an institution called marriage. Everyone used to know the rules - sex and children were contained within marriage, a legal contract that obligated a man to assume paternity and support his children. Women threw marriage away as though the legal contract meant nothing - this is the result. Men can walk away without a care. Is it so surprising?

DecomposingComposers · 21/06/2019 13:54

Can you imagine the uproar of tax-paying men who manage to use condoms if they were forced to pay for the off-spring of those who don't?

Err, what? Tax paying people of both sexes currently pay to support the children of people who chose to have them

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 13:54

@herculepoirot2

Yes, he does - and they do!

😂😂😂😂😂

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 13:55

And nobody answered my earlier question: what if embryos could be formed into babies outside the womb? Who thinks women would still have a right to “opt out” then?

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 13:56

Yes, he does - and they do!

Huh? It’s like the five o clock gin bell went off round here.

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 13:56

So woman can only have abortion based on health reasons, I know for a fact that is incorrect.

bourbonbiccy · 21/06/2019 13:59

I also know for a fact woman do not always have an abortion because they are a health risk, or they are scared of pregnancy, birth etc

They have abortions because they can't afford a baby, it's just not the right time, I don't want a child yet...so yeah not wanting to become a parent ....question answered

MirriVan · 21/06/2019 14:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

herculepoirot2 · 21/06/2019 14:01

They have abortions because they can't afford a baby, it's just not the right time, I don't want a child yet...so yeah not wanting to become a parent ....question answered

Nope. Would they still be able to abort the foetus if it was incubated outside their body?

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 14:01

Why do you think that a woman having the shit options of either pregnancy plys childbirth, or abortion, absolves a man of the 50% responsibility he has for the conception?

He may share responsibility for contraception, but so does she. So what if the options afterwards are shitty? It doesn’t matter - they’re options, she has them.

DecomposingComposers · 21/06/2019 14:03

Would they still be able to abort the foetus if it was incubated outside their body?

Which has zero to do with the OP because it can't happen!

IsabellaLinton · 21/06/2019 14:03

Moral of the story, kids - get married before you have children, and you won’t find yourself in this situation! Grin

Frequency · 21/06/2019 14:03

What sort of support do people bloody need? If your child is hungry and cold, you get off your lazy ass and do something about it and stop passing the buck to society to do something about it

It's not that simple. Single parents are often limited in which jobs they can do due to childcare issues. Plus, they still have all the same bills as a couple with the children but the earning power of a single parent.

As I said up thread, I work 60-70 hours a week. Sometimes more. I get no days off. I work long shifts in a physically and emotionally demanding job. It's not enough. Without tax credits we have to choose between heating and eating. We have no luxuries. My ex, otoh, works part-time and goes on frequent weekends away because he only has to pay £100 a month towards the cost of raising two, now adult sized, children.

He does not have the rawer end of the deal.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread