Men should have the right to not want a baby

[user57639206]

NC as I've been shot down a few times in real life for having this opinion.

I find it bizarre that women can decide that they don't want a baby and opt for a termination (just to clarify, I completely agree with this. It's her right to choice) but when a man decides now isn't the right time, right partner or whatever the reason - he's labelled a arsehole, good for nothing or irresponsible.

Surely if a woman has the right to say "no, not right now/not for me" a man should have the same right? Without being labelled or judged!

I've seen it a few times in real life, be it from a one night stand or a not so serious relationship. The woman wants to keep the baby, the man says he doesn't (but doesn't suggest an abortion), and he's thrown under the bus.

I know there is a big difference in some sense because obviously, the woman goes through all the physical changes/trauma of having a baby - but when are men then taken to court for CA or have knives shoved in their backs for not wanting a baby?

AIBU?

@pumperthepumper

I didn't see the follow-up so I apologise for the snarky part of my reply.

But the obvious answer is probably not to guilt trip women but I also don't agree with just making it " nicer" to reiterate I believe in abortions but seeing posters say men have contraception ( which fails) celibacy if they don't want kids ( when they'd have to be in relationships with women who also didnt want sex until trying for a baby) and then saying theyre abandoning a child if they don't support the child whilst women have lots of other options on top of celibacy and contraception but not classing the pregnancy as a child just seems a little loaded to one side. Like vilifying the side with less options but making it " nice" for women who have more options

I think men need to take responsibility for their fertility. There was a drug trial for male contraceptives but they dropped it because apparently there were side effects 🙄.

Maybe some of the issue is we are all told how hard it can be to get pregnant and so some men think it takes more than one shag..

Yanbu. There should be some thing that men can go to court for to absolve themselves of any responsibility for a pregnancy as long as they do it within the right timeframe. But it has to be a permanent choice so these men don’t get to change their minds and decide they want the child back later in life.

This seems, frankly, a terrible idea. However, just to establish quite how terrible:

1. Is this something that would have to be done before a couple engage in sexual intercourse? Or is this an easy way for a man to back out AFTER the woman becomes pregnant?

2. If the latter, how late into the pregnancy can a man legally absolve himself of responsibility? Women get 24 weeks for an abortion. Longer with certain medical conditions- could the man get an extension on the time limit if it's found out later on that the child's likely to be seriously disabled?

3. If a couple are married, not initially planning children, and the wife decides to keep an unplanned pregnancy, can the husband still absolve himself of responsibility? After all, a woman can get an abortion without her husband's permission and we're all about the EQUALITY here.

4. If the child, when grown up, feels that their childhood has been severely adversely affected by only having one parent responsible for them (Lots are in this position, of course, but a judge hasn't usually signed off on it is thought to be in the best interests of the child), could they sue?

We should be striving for equality in rights as much as we can.

When men are able to get pregnant, I'll fully support their right to have terminations. As it stands, they have all the necessary reproductive rights pertaining to themselves and their bodies. They can access contraception, have vasectomies or abstain from sex altogether. Women have these equivalent rights, as well as the right to a termination. Because it is within the woman's body that a pregnancy is gestated. Not because we're being really mean to the poor ickle men.

YANBU

[quote FrustratedTeddyLamp]@pumperthepumper

I didn't see the follow-up so I apologise for the snarky part of my reply.

But the obvious answer is probably not to guilt trip women but I also don't agree with just making it " nicer" to reiterate I believe in abortions but seeing posters say men have contraception ( which fails) celibacy if they don't want kids ( when they'd have to be in relationships with women who also didnt want sex until trying for a baby) and then saying theyre abandoning a child if they don't support the child whilst women have lots of other options on top of celibacy and contraception but not classing the pregnancy as a child just seems a little loaded to one side. Like vilifying the side with less options but making it " nice" for women who have more options [/quote]
It’s because they have to have the abortion. Why make that more shit?

@blublub

I’m afraid by having sex they are consenting to have a child. It really is that simple. Otherwise abstain or have a vasectomy. Sex is a reproductive act. No one is forcing them but I don’t think they should have the right to abandon the consequences of actions they have chosen to engage in.

This is the same argument people use about elective abortions. Do you think it is valid in those circumstances?

It's interesting that when this topic arises, it's always after conception that is hotly debated, like the thought of a man not having sex if he wants to (but doesn't want to accept the possible concequences of that) is just not an option.
It's almost like some people think that men are entitled to have sex should they want to and argue the toss about responsibility later, not that not having sex, or acceptance of the risks associated with sex (and the reduction of those risks using contraception that is widely available to men) is even a possibility.

@Gynaesaur

Yanbu. There should be some thing that men can go to court for to absolve themselves of any responsibility for a pregnancy as long as they do it within the right timeframe. But it has to be a permanent choice so these men don’t get to change their minds and decide they want the child back later in life.

This seems, frankly, a terrible idea. However, just to establish quite how terrible:

1. Is this something that would have to be done before a couple engage in sexual intercourse? Or is this an easy way for a man to back out AFTER the woman becomes pregnant?

2. If the latter, how late into the pregnancy can a man legally absolve himself of responsibility? Women get 24 weeks for an abortion. Longer with certain medical conditions- could the man get an extension on the time limit if it's found out later on that the child's likely to be seriously disabled?

3. If a couple are married, not initially planning children, and the wife decides to keep an unplanned pregnancy, can the husband still absolve himself of responsibility? After all, a woman can get an abortion without her husband's permission and we're all about the EQUALITY here.

4. If the child, when grown up, feels that their childhood has been severely adversely affected by only having one parent responsible for them (Lots are in this position, of course, but a judge hasn't usually signed off on it is thought to be in the best interests of the child), could they sue?

We should be striving for equality in rights as much as we can.

When men are able to get pregnant, I'll fully support their right to have terminations. As it stands, they have all the necessary reproductive rights pertaining to themselves and their bodies. They can access contraception, have vasectomies or abstain from sex altogether. Women have these equivalent rights, as well as the right to a termination. Because it is within the woman's body that a pregnancy is gestated. Not because we're being really mean to the poor ickle men.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Women ARE stigmatised for terminations.

Also “walking away” from your offspring is different to having a termination.

@user57639206

I seriously want to clarify I am not saying a woman should be forced into anything. The complete opposite, there are a million and one reasons to abort or continue any pregnancy and each is so unique, so relative and completely down to the woman.

I'm just saying I think men should be able to walk away from an unplanned/unwanted pregnancy but everyone jumps down their throat.

Have only read the OP's posts so I'm sure I'm repeating what others have already said.

"I find it bizarre that women can decide that they don't want a baby and opt for a termination (just to clarify, I completely agree with this. It's her right to choice) but when a man decides now isn't the right time, right partner or whatever the reason - he's labelled a arsehole, good for nothing or irresponsible."

You are talking about unwanted pregnancies here. Not the wanted kind, where neither party is using contraception. The unwanted kind. Unwanted pregnancies arise, by and large, from a contraceptive failure. So I have to ask - was the man in your scenario taking contraceptive precautions? Or did he leave it all to the woman? Because I have to say, used properly a condom is pretty damned effective contraception, ensuring that the man has nothing to walk away from.

Women don't get to "walk away from an unplanned/unwanted pregnancy" either, y'know. They have to take action - either make the decision to continue and go through the pregnancy; or, make the decision to terminate and go through a termination. No walking away for her!

@user57639206, in your possibly not hypothetical scenario - did the man use contraception? And if he did not, do you still think he's entitled to walk away?

'If in doubt keep it out', and 'no glove no love' comes to mind.

@FrustratedTeddyLamp

In a theoretical world where the decision has no further consequences I agree but in the real world a man waking away from a child can disadvantage the child. It's not the same as an abortion where there would be no child.

I feel like the mentality he had sex means he has to live with a child mentality wrong as we don't say that to women who have abortions or put a child up for adoption but we shouldn't have abortions forced on women and there doesn't seem a solution.

I think the issue is though that the reality of life is that if you have sex you are risking pregnancy.

If a woman is absolutely adamant she doesn't want children, she has the choice of either not having sex or having an abortion. A man has a choice of not having sex. Yes the woman has one extra option than the man, but that's just the way it is, there's nothing that can be done about it and all parties are aware of this before having sex.

Plenty women have to put up with tirades of abuse for having an abortion, from family, friends, society. I think you are being a bit naive thinking it is a walk in the park even when it is their choice.
Yes men have the right to say they don't want the child. If the women carries to term, she couldn't claim from the "dad". But there is nothing to stop the child finding their male parent in the future. Answer every time, is use a condom or as someone else said, get the snip.
Never the same choice as the woman has to grow the foetus, men don't.

Noone is forcing them to raise a child that they don't want.

I think this is where society has gone so wrong.

I actually agree with OP but it’s pretty irrelevant as it’s so easy for men to not be involved once the baby is born anyway.

I think when a women gets pregnant there should be a proper conversation and almost a contract type document signed.

If a man says he doesn’t want the child - fine. But that removes all his rights towards that child.
The woman can then decide whether to go ahead with the pregnancy alone or not.

If a man says he does want a child - fine. But then he needs to stick by that for the rest of the child’s life. If he stops paying or seeing the child then there should be consequences.

Nothing infuriates me more than men who don’t bother turning up to see their child or go weeks, months or years without contact yet if a mother did that she’d be labelled the worst mother in the world.

(I still think this is maybe an undergrad ethics essay by crowdsourcing)

The argument that men should be allowed to walk away from a baby remind me of the arguments against making sure you have enthusiastic consent before having sex.

Yet again it is men not prepared to put in the legwork.

Also abortion isn't a reset button. It is a medical procedure that carries its own risks. Plus not every woman would feel able to have one for various reasons. Women don't get to walk away from pregnancy, it has to be dealt with one way or another.

@grey12

Yes of course!!! Men have the right to not want a baby there are condoms to start and reversible vasectomy as well!!!! Perfectly fine! I think there are even contraceptive pills!

Exactly.

It’s because they have to have the abortion. Why make that more shit? My quote function doesn't work so tried to use the emote that may seem less goady when talking about this subject.

Because most don't have to have an abortion it's a choice and admittedly I haven't been in that situation but reading others experience it's not something every woman dwells on or feels guilty about and in consensual sex they presumably were happy to have the same sex under the same level of protection as the man that would then be entered into a lifelong commitment if the baby was born

I believe that the father should have a voice - this is not an straightforward decision and as so often is the case depends upon the context.

I wonder how many men who find themselves in this situation were taking responsibility for their own contraception

@FrustratedTeddyLamp

It’s because they have to have the abortion. Why make that more shit? My quote function doesn't work so tried to use the emote that may seem less goady when talking about this subject.

Because most don't have to have an abortion it's a choice and admittedly I haven't been in that situation but reading others experience it's not something every woman dwells on or feels guilty about and in consensual sex they presumably were happy to have the same sex under the same level of protection as the man that would then be entered into a lifelong commitment if the baby was born

So the choice according to you is:

Choose an abortion but make it as shit as possible or
Choose to keep the baby but raise it alone with no money from its other parent?

I think this "debate" is slightly daft when men walk away from their children without consequence every single day and go merrily about their lives carefree.

@mikeyboo

It’s not an equal situation. There’s no way to make it equal. What we can do is choose the least worst option overall, which means woman aren’t forced to continue or terminate pregnancies, and children who are born receive financial support.

100% agree.

Both sexual partners responsibility to prevent a pregnancy.

In the event of an accidental pregnancy:

The woman’s choice to continue or terminate (her body, her life).

The man’s choice whether to be an involved parent, or an uninvolved parent who nevertheless pays child support for 18 years.

It’s blindingly obvious why we can’t just let men abdicate ALL responsibility.

It's a false equivalence.

While a woman is pregnant, she retains autonomy over her body. The man has bodily autonomy too. But he's not pregnant so 🤷‍♀️

When the baby is born, neither parent gets to just walk away.

So at all points, men have the same rights as women.