To think father should pay csa even if he doesn't want the baby

[Bear45]

As title says!
He wanted me to have an abortion and I've not heard off him for 3 weeks now. I'm 13 weeks, obviously it's a way off but just wondering what peoples opinions are

The point where a man puts his penis inside a woman’s vagina is the point where he takes responsibility for any child that is a product of that act.

100% agree. Otherwise, who is responsible? A single mother and, unfortunately, often the tax payer. Not being right wing about it, it's the truth that a large proportion of those entitled to benefits are single mothers who have been left holding the bag by feckless sperm donors.

Without the full facts of any attempts by either of them to avoid pregnancy I would say it’s impossible to say.

If stringent contraception failed then it’s her call.

If they consensually had unprotected sex then it’s on both of them, and she is not being fair by expecting her joint recklessness to be upheld.

Although the whole idea is someone else taking responsibility. If he doesn’t pay, taxpayers will.

@getsanta the point at which a woman allows an unprotected penis into her vagina she implicitly accepts there may be a baby.

Unless he forced it or the contraceptives failed it is as much on her.

@Rabblesthecat You haven't heard of them because those who get pregnant and choose to terminate, do so quietly and without fanfare because it is seldom an easy or happy decision.

The incidents you hear about are normally when the woman chooses to keep the baby and the man expresses his outrage noisily and indignantly, tries to pressure her into terminating etc.

@TractorAndHeadphones

No contraception is 100% so there is still a risk of pregnancy. Even if they both agree prior to sex they do not want a baby there is still a risk of pregnancy. Even if the women says she will abort prior to sex, there is still a risk of pregnancy.

BOTH parties play a part here, BOTH contributed to creating the child, BOTH should take responsibility.

The focus should not be on what the woman wants, but on what the child needs.

And yes ideally I'd suggest to any woman who doesn't want any medical procedure to not have sex, because having sex can lead to just that! That does not negate on what the child needs though. The child is not to blame for any failings of its parents. And there are two of them!

@Bunnyfuller so men have no responsibility at all of contraception then? Unbelievable!

@Rabblesthecat

I go against the grain - no they should not.

Everyone (including the mother) has a choice up to 22 weeks. It may be a choice you don’t want to make but you are still making a choice the other way to keep it.

No baby conceived has to be born so I don’t see why they should have to pay if they have no say in its existence.

He had his say when he chose to have sex, that's the risk he took. If he absolutely didn't want a child, keep it zipped, simple.

I was in the same position and have chosen not to. Never even really considered it as, like you, I’m financially sound on my own, but also because my ex was abusive and I didn’t want to poke the bear (as they say).

That being said, I see no moral problem with you claiming it and if I was you (I.e. not afraid of my ex) I would do so and put the money aside for my child in later life or for emergencies for them. Ultimately even if he’s a low earner that maintenance money could go a long way in time and secure your child’s future.

‘No baby conceived has to be born’ what a horrible sentence.

Don’t worry little baby foetus you didn’t survive because your Daddy didn’t want to support you financially.

This is a difficult one because after eleven years of taking the pill it could be/would most likely be assumed all was OK.
If he asked her to have an abortion this means he did not want her to get pregnant and made it clear from the beginning his lack of interest.
The fact OP decided to have the baby was her choice and not his.

[quote WhatWhenWhoWhy]@TractorAndHeadphones

No contraception is 100% so there is still a risk of pregnancy. Even if they both agree prior to sex they do not want a baby there is still a risk of pregnancy. Even if the women says she will abort prior to sex, there is still a risk of pregnancy.

BOTH parties play a part here, BOTH contributed to creating the child, BOTH should take responsibility.

The focus should not be on what the woman wants, but on what the child needs.

And yes ideally I'd suggest to any woman who doesn't want any medical procedure to not have sex, because having sex can lead to just that! That does not negate on what the child needs though. The child is not to blame for any failings of its parents. And there are two of them![/quote]
Hmm I see where you’re coming from.
Legally - if the woman keeps the baby and someone has to pay then the father should be made to pay rather than the taxpayer.
Morally - the woman should abort the baby if she can’t pay for it herself and the father doesn’t want to.

However because you can’t force women to abort babies, or let children starve, the most efficient solution is to make the father pay.

My dp has always been adamant he wants no children (now, we both have them from previous relationships). When we first met, I was on the pill, he used condoms and usually withdrew as well. Over time that relaxed until it was just the pill but one night we were talking and I said I wouldn't have an abortion if there was a failure. He looked into and booked a vasectomy the following week. That is a grown up approach. Not having all the fun and then expecting someone else to bear the consequences alone, whether that be raising a child or aborting. It's really really simple. Men have several choices. Abstain (which is perfectly do-able, sex isn't some god given right or necessity unless you're an INCEL), take responsibility for own contraception, being aware it may fail, don't have PIV full sex or accept that you may become a father with a pretty fucking minimal cms contribution to pay.

‘No baby conceived has to be born’ what a horrible sentence.

Don’t worry little baby foetus you didn’t survive because your Daddy didn’t want to support you financially.

@numbertime it's true though it doesn't have to be born and a parent not wanting it is a good reason for it not to be. At that stage it is just a foetus, a collection of cells

Why does the moral solution never involve anything difficult for men?

@peboh

I do not agree. I think if a man makes it clear straight away in pregnancy that he doesn't want a child then he should be able to revoke parental responsibility. The same as if a woman was to not want a child, but the father did, she would be able to make the choice for both of them.

I also agree if a woman wants to keep the baby but the man doesn't, the man should be able to be absolved of duty prior to birth. It's not fair women can choose to keep or choose to abort but a man either loses a wanted baby or has to pay maintenance to an unwanted one. (It is, of course, fair that a woman has the say over their own body, just not fair for men in those two scenarios, they get no say but end up with the repercussions).

I don't think it's as simple as "you have sex, you pay for an unwanted child for 18 years" and I would never ask for money from a man where I have chosen, against his wishes, to keep his child. I just don't think it's fair.

[quote Bunnyfuller]@getsanta the point at which a woman allows an unprotected penis into her vagina she implicitly accepts there may be a baby.

Unless he forced it or the contraceptives failed it is as much on her.[/quote]
I think the issue is that everyone is busy playing the "blame game". It's not a competition or at least it shouldn't be.

There is a child that needs supporting.

I find men who walk away from their responsibilities morally repugnant.

@FabianK

I’ve always thought men should be able to opt out of parental responsibility including csa payments up to a certain time.

Women can make a choice and men should be able to also.

That is more than fair.

Men can make a choice. They can use a condom.

[quote Bunnyfuller]@getsanta the point at which a woman allows an unprotected penis into her vagina she implicitly accepts there may be a baby.

Unless he forced it or the contraceptives failed it is as much on her.[/quote]
And the man accepts the possibility of a baby at the same time. What on earth is your ridiculous point?

What was the relationship before you finding out you were pregnant?
Are you prepared to leave his name off the birth certificate?
Do you want him involved?

There is equal responsibility.

Having read the update it is a contraceptive fail, so they both have to put the baby first on all fronts

@PleasantBirthday

Why does the moral solution never involve anything difficult for men?

Because like it or not women are the ones who get pregnant. Any solution once she gets pregnant is difficult.

If you would like to fund research into a 100% effective birth control solution kindly go ahead

There isn't a "think"..... Legally he has to 🧐

@Woodmarsh

‘No baby conceived has to be born’ what a horrible sentence.

Don’t worry little baby foetus you didn’t survive because your Daddy didn’t want to support you financially.

@numbertime it's true though it doesn't have to be born and a parent not wanting it is a good reason for it not to be. At that stage it is just a foetus, a collection of cells

I’m not talking about one parent not wanting the child I’m talking about a ‘get out of paying’ abortion before 22 week clause that has been suggested.

If he's not going to be involved then I wouldn't want a penny from him, so much stress for abit of money, I would take no money no stress over trying to make him. Trust me I've been their.