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?

OP hasn't been back since page 2 - must be busy dealing with her kids conceived from some bloke(s) innocently leaving their sperm wherever.

@Pumperthepumper yes the 6 year old is worth more than the clump of cells up to 12 weeks - which is what I am specifically referring to.

Anyway, I agree that there is no practical way to overcome this - so the system we have: access to completely private termination and a vastly decreased stigma around this, that hopefully encourages women to make an informed choice when deciding to proceed with a pregnancy if the father of the baby is against it, is the fairest system we can have.

An abundance of access to contraception, plan B and termination is the fairest approach for both sexes.

But I do feel it’s morally unfair for a man to be saddled with a child for life when contraception fails with no “get out clause” that women have for termination however there is no fairer system I’m afraid!

But the same is not said about the woman who consented under the same circumstances

hahahahah. Is this your first day on the internet?

I have given "don't have sex" as a way of not getting pregnant even though i know that it isn't realistic in the way that abstinence only "sex education" is a crock of shit.

The simple fact is that pregnancy has the potential to affect women's lives in some extremely dangerous and life-limiting ways. And while i am 100% pro choice, and think that some women really should give abortion more consideration, it is entirely up to each individual woman what she does if she does end up pregnant.

Is it unfair? usually it is hugely unfair on women who often have the shitty end of the stick here. So I'm not crying in despair at the few men who can't keep their dick in their pants and don't want to accept the possible consequences of that. Because for the most part it really doesn't affect their lives in the hugely meaningful way it affects women's lives.

Some of the attitudes here are disappointing at best. There are so bloody few areas of life where women genuinely have the upper hand (and they really don't have it here either in so many ways) that i really really can't get too upset for men here. Even though i realise that if you really don't want to be a father, take all the precautions and you are "unlucky". Tough tits, basically.

@justustwoandmoo

I agree with you OP. A friend of mine made it v v clear that he didn't want a child and was told that she was on the pill. He even offered to used a condom on top of that but she insisted no. She wasn't on the pill but was desperate for a baby. He was devastated. She totally took advantage of him. How is that even remotely fair??

He's now paying maintenance and standing by his responsibilities but it's been a massive blow for him as he can't do any of the travel etc that he wanted do.

The mind boggles...

His child must be gutted to know they're such a drain on him.

I agree with you OP. I think men should have the right to terminate parental rights from the outset and not be involved at all. But there would be no ability to backtrack, and if he then tried to be involved he'd have to pay a backlog of child support.

Obviously a goady thread but I’ll bite.

Every man has the right to use contraception or abstain. If they don’t do either and a woman gets pregnant, tough shit. Everyone knows how it works, it isn’t some major mystery. The pregnancy happens in the woman’s body so of course it should be her choice whether the pregnancy continues or not. Men can and often do walk away from their child, that’s their choice and something they will have to live with. A woman can’t walk away from a pregnancy because it happens in her body. Biology sucks. The least a man can do after impregnating a woman is pay for the child they created but many men don’t even do that. Yes, they should be judged for it because they chose to have unprotected sex.

@TheHateIsNotGood

OP hasn't been back since page 2 - must be busy dealing with her kids conceived from some bloke(s) innocently leaving their sperm wherever.

@Allsorts1

OP I agree with you and it’s funny how some of these comments eg “they do have a choice, don’t have sex if they don’t want a baby!” are exactly the sort of things pro-lifers tell to women who seek an abortion.

In an ideal world, women would simply take into account whether the father wants involvement and if they are clear from the beginning that they don’t, then the pregnancy, if it proceeds should proceed on that basis (no involvement from father who becomes essentially a sperm donor) without stigma for the male.

In this day and age with contraception and readily available abortion (UK), and a loss of stigma around sex outside of marriage - all the previous societal rules about making men step up, aren’t really necessary like they were in the past.

But in a practical sense this just wouldn’t really work, say if a male could “opt out” before 12 weeks - what if the pregnancy is only discovered late? Is the onus on the woman to inform and get agreement in writing etc? I just don’t think it’s very practical.

But I agree that it’s a double standard.

So men should be able to have unprotected sex with zero consequences?

I agree with you OP. A friend of mine made it v v clear that he didn't want a child and was told that she was on the pill. He even offered to used a condom on top of that but she insisted no. She wasn't on the pill but was desperate for a baby. He was devastated. She totally took advantage of him. How is that even remotely fair??

my heart, as we used to say in the army, pumps purple piss. Tough. He KNEW he didn't want a baby and yet he left all the responsibility on her. If you don't want a baby, mate, the least - the VERY LEAST - you need to be doing is wear a condom. That you bought yourself and made sure was still in date. It is hardly rocket science.

OP hasn't been back since page 2 - must be busy dealing with her kids conceived from some bloke(s) innocently leaving their sperm wherever.

OP has an essay deadline of midnight and is feverishly writing this up

@user57639206 don’t know if you’re coming back to this thread. I see the point you’re trying to make, but I think you’re conflating two things. A woman is the only one who in theory can choose to have an abortion - clearly that’s right as it’s her body. Of course, this is only the case in places where abortions can be accessed.

However, having an abortion (if this is available) is not the same as walking away from a child who already exists. Any parent would be called an arsehole for doing that. And women would face far more of a stigma for that than men. You only need to spend five minutes reading mumsnet to see how many men can and do abandon their children. So, actually, when comparing like for like, men are at far more of an advantage, and are far more able to walk away from a child, with less stigma, than women.

@LittleGwyneth

I agree with you OP. I think men should have the right to terminate parental rights from the outset and not be involved at all. But there would be no ability to backtrack, and if he then tried to be involved he'd have to pay a backlog of child support.

Yeah, thats what my sperm donor did.

Let me tell you about the wonderful, enriched stigma free life of a young single mother, and even that of a fatherless child of a single mother, basking in all of those lovely benefits and rewards.

Oh the memories, rainbows and unicorns abound. #blessed

Og FFS. All of you that keep saying he should use a condom, he should use a condom, you do all know that they split, that they aren't 100% effective etc. Accidents happen. The only form of contraceptive that is 100% effective is a hysterectomy, because both a vasectomy and tubal litigation can both reverse themselves.

I agree with you OP. A friend of mine made it v v clear that he didn't want a child and was told that she was on the pill. He even offered to used a condom on top of that but she insisted no. She wasn't on the pill but was desperate for a baby. He was devastated. She totally took advantage of him. How is that even remotely fair??

Brefrugee: my heart, as we used to say in the army, pumps purple piss. Tough. He KNEW he didn't want a baby and yet he left all the responsibility on her. If you don't want a baby, mate, the least - the VERY LEAST - you need to be doing is wear a condom. That you bought yourself and made sure was still in date. It is hardly rocket science.

I completely agree with you Brefugee. If he was so so adamant he didn’t want a baby then he was an absolute idiot to not wear a condom just because she didn’t want him to.

@theweedonkey but presumably you also had a choice about whether or not to become a parent, and you chose to?

All this 'if you don't want to get a woman pregnant, use a condom' stuff is very odd. I would never, ever, ever say that to a woman who had an unplanned pregnancy. Why is it true for men?

Sex = at least the possibility of a baby unless the man has had a vasectomy or the woman had her tubes tied.

Otherwise, the man cannot presume there is zero chance of a pregnancy, or the right to demand an abortion should there be an unwanted one.

I also think someone should make it clear they do not want a baby ever before a relationship begins.

Hysterectomy as contraception????

Have you been sucking a exhaust pipe?

@RedCandyApple

Unpopular opinion op but I agree with you and I think pp are missing the point op is not saying the woman should abort she’s saying the man shouldn’t have to step up and play dad to a child he didn’t want or pay maintenance for them.

I don’t claim child maintenance from my ex as he decided he wanted nothing to do with our children, I’m not going to force someone who wants nothing to do with our children to pay for them.

You see I disagree.

There are two separate issues there.

• both partners can take steps to avoid a pregnancy. If either of them do not want a child, it’s in their own shoulders to ensure this doesn’t happen. This means the pill for a woman, a condom for man. No sex, vasectomy, tube ligature etc…. This should NOT be left to one partner to take on the whole of the responsibility.

So when a man has sex and hasn’t been using a condom (or even when he takes the decision to actually have sex), he is also making a choice. The choice of a potential pregnancy - even if the risk is very low. It’s at this point that a man is taking the decision to be a (potential) father or not. Not later on.

• then AFTERWARDS the decision of keeping the pregnancy is very much in the hands of the woman.

That decision is about the mother and in particular or her health, physical and emotional. She is also the one who is bearing the potential consequence of an abortion if she decides to go down that route.

But an abortion is not a method of contraception. That’s why deciding to keep the baby or not cannot be associated with a man’s involvement/responsibility in raising the child. That’s choice was made when he has sex.

I still don't see why the father's feelings should affect the rights of the child.

Should men who don't want children (but still manage to get someone pregnant) be able to insist that their unwanted children are killed at birth?

No, of course not. Independently of the mother, the child has a right to life. Independently of the mother, the child also has a right to financial support.

@Brefugee

Meh. Are we being asked to do someones A-level ethics homework for them?

Men already have the right not to want a baby. FWIW women also have that right.

Let's ignore unwanted sex leading to pregnancy and assume that this is a man and a woman who are in a relationship.

They want to have sex. Neither of them wants a baby. They don't know 100% for sure what the other one wants, and so the obvious choice for each of them is to use the most reliable contraception available. So they are doubled up. The chances -given that they use the contraception correctly - are very low that sex will result in a child are very small. But not zero.

Best case for both? no pregnancy
Best case for him? either no pregnancy or pregnancy and she has an abortion.
Best case for her? either no pregnancy or pregnancy and she has an abortion
Shitty case for both of them? pregnancy and she doesn't want (for whatever reason) to have an abortion. Neither of them has the right to walk away scot free. There is the adoption option and assuming they are on the same page with that, it's not the absolute worst case it is not entirely risk free in terms of her health, and the chance that having given birth she decides to hang onto the baby.

In that last case - there is no way that man should morally, ethically or legally be allowed to walk away with nary a backward glance.

So sure. Men should absolutely be allowed not to want a baby. But. The only way for him to be 100% sure that he doesn't get one is to not have sex.

So.... if the couple are in a 'relationship' and presumably the risk of diseases is assumed to be moot. I wonder how many couples continue using condoms if the woman is on the pill or using other methods (given that the man has no other option than using condoms). But I know plenty of women who HATE condoms and one of the benefits of being in a relationship vs having casual sex is not having to use condoms any more. Then the pressure is put on the guy not to use them, because after all the woman is taking the pill so why does he need to wear a condom now they are in a committed relationship? I guess the question is, when do these theoretical couples actually front up and put their cards on the table about wanting or not wanting children. My husband and I were very upfront about it, like we discussed it on our first date... it boggles the mind that people could be in a committed relationship and not have had this discussion. But then the problem is one or both could change their minds... I do wonder why more men don't chose to have a vasectomy though, if they are sure they don't want children. Honestly though, in this thread the idea that men can 'keep it in their pants' until they are ready to reproduce is laughable. Are women not entitled to enjoy penetrative sex without wanting children?

@justustwoandmoo

I agree with you OP. A friend of mine made it v v clear that he didn't want a child and was told that she was on the pill. He even offered to used a condom on top of that but she insisted no. She wasn't on the pill but was desperate for a baby. He was devastated. She totally took advantage of him. How is that even remotely fair??

He's now paying maintenance and standing by his responsibilities but it's been a massive blow for him as he can't do any of the travel etc that he wanted do.

The mind boggles...

Oh no, he can't travel! Should've put a sock on it, shouldn't he?

He can say no but he was a horny idiot and went along with it. Womp womp I say, glad the kid is being looked after.

Hes only classed as that if he takes that attitude after the child is born, not prior. As would a woman. Your twisting it

[quote LittleGwyneth]@theweedonkey but presumably you also had a choice about whether or not to become a parent, and you chose to?

All this 'if you don't want to get a woman pregnant, use a condom' stuff is very odd. I would never, ever, ever say that to a woman who had an unplanned pregnancy. Why is it true for men?[/quote]
I was the child LittleGWyneth

Like most of the weak male apologists here, you seem to forget there is a child that has to live through this too.

And yes, contraception is drummed into us from puberty.

Honestly if you think the worst consequence of thought free sex is unplanned pregnancy you need some sex ed classes.

Both a man and a woman are equally responsible for their bodies amd what happens as a result of their bodies.

Any PERSON who doesn't want a baby has the (very simple ) option of contraception, so op you are being ridiculous.

If you didn't want the babies that were conceived from your sperm, and didn't want to be criticised for that opinion, ....
Have a vasectomy, wear condoms EVERY time and you will never be criticised as there will be no baby.