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?

@Brefugee

Male contraceptive pills have been developed. The men don't like the side effects which are comparable with the side effects for the female contraceptive pill. So the trials are halted.

Make of that what you will.

This.

I was on the pill for years and hated the side effects but it was better than risk getting pregnant … if a man really doesn’t want a baby there are ways to shag around and still avoid it.

Yes they are. Maybe there is less judgement than in times past, but the judgement and disdain a woman receives if she is vocal about an abortion outweighs what a man receives if shirks his parental responsibilities
The woman has the option to abort totally anonymously and not tell anyone.

I'm totally with you OP, there are 1000s of women who get it wrong each year and get the option to go back to how life was before, yet a man who gets it wrong is expected to step up to his error and live with it for at least 18 years.

I wouldn't judge a man who walks out when trapped by a woman whose mission is to get pregnant over anything when he said he didn't want a child and she assures him she is on the pill but is lying and of course refuse an abortion when he suggests it.

@Rosieposie101

I agree tjat je shojld be able to 'opt out' officially meaning he can sign a legal document and agree that he can never go back on it and never have anything to with the child/have any rights over or say in how the child is raised etc. In return he's legally not the father.

Seems logical to me but MN HATES it when people say this, everyone I've ever seen suggesting it has been absolutely flamed. Guess it's a sensitive topic.

How would this work in real life? Man doesn’t want to wear a condom or take any responsibility for ensuring no pregnancy occurs because, hey if it does, there’s this easy way out where all he has to do is sign a paper and freedom! I think it would actually encourage more irresponsible and abusive behaviour from men.

OneTiredMam
Condoms aren't 100 percent though.... hmm

Then abstinence is the other option. It's really not difficult to ensure that you either avoid sex or take shared responsibility for the consequences.

Pregnancy is the consequence, not a baby. If a condom fails and the woman wants to have the baby the man is expected to take responsibility for the woman’s choice.

YABU
A) Men have contraceptive options such abstaining from PIV sex, the snip or condoms.
B) men don’t have to grow or birth a baby so they don’t get rights over someone else’s body.

If you disagree with B) you are advocating forced abortion of wanted babies, with women being held down. Is that really what you are suggesting?!

Counselor It isn’t the woman’s choice. Then baby inevitably arrives once the woman is pregnant. The women has to make an active decision to go through an abortion to prevent it. See my post above for the legal reasons you are allowed to have an abortion. Nowhere does it say because you don’t want a baby.
Whether you believe a fetus is life or not it is the woman that has to live with that decision for the rest of her life. Men don’t have to.

The way that nature works puts the onus on the man to use contraception if he wants to reduce the chances of not getting the woman pregnant. If a man is in a casual relationship then it's the only responsible course of action anyway and if he's in a committed relationship then putting aside the fact that both partners should be discussing this issue, he should still be taking ownership over contraception. Once conception has taken place (and yes I realise that a condom is not 100% safe) then it's always the woman's decision. It's not even a debate really - that's how nature works.

I find it so bizarre that women on here think it's acceptable to dictate what a man does with his body i.e. get a vasectomy, but think it's outright appalling if a woman is told what to do with her body i.e. get an abortion.

Absolute hypocrites!!

@Didyousaynutella

Counselor It isn’t the woman’s choice. Then baby inevitably arrives once the woman is pregnant. The women has to make an active decision to go through an abortion to prevent it. See my post above for the legal reasons you are allowed to have an abortion. Nowhere does it say because you don’t want a baby. Whether you believe a fetus is life or not it is the woman that has to live with that decision for the rest of her life. Men don’t have to.

It’s not the woman’s choice what to do about an unplanned pregnancy?

@Emilyaparis

I find it so bizarre that women on here think it's acceptable to dictate what a man does with his body i.e. get a vasectomy, but think it's outright appalling if a woman is told what to do with her body i.e. get an abortion.

Absolute hypocrites!!

Exactly. like every thread on MN

If she is pregnant the baby will arrive. She has to go through having an abortion in order to prevent it. This is not a minor thing.
This can have many ramifications on her mental health as a consequence. Can you not see that? It isn’t as simple as saying she has a choice.

If a man doesn't want to have a baby and, more importantly, he isn't prepared to accept the responsibility of having a baby he just doesn't have sex.

That's the point at which the decision is made. Even with contraception there is a risk that sex = baby. If the woman he sleeps with falls pregnant then ultimately it's the woman's choice whether to go ahead with it, and whilst of course all things being happy and equal the bloke would get a say but life isn't always as simple as that. It's the woman who is pregnant and she gets final say.

Once the baby is born then it's parents have a responsibility to look after him/her. It stops being an argument about what is right for the parents and becomes about what is right for the child. If a man has a child he didn't want, so what? It still needs to be fed, clothed and looked after so man the fuck up.

"See my post above for the legal reasons you are allowed to have an abortion. Nowhere does it say because you don’t want a baby."

True. But if you didn't want the baby and you knew you legally couldn't get one by saying that, then you would just lie and say it's for some other reason such as it impacting your mental health/you not being able to provide a stable life for the child etc.

Surely people who are writing he does have a choice condoms or don't have sex are missing the point. Do we say women don't have a choice because they did use contraception or because they had sex? Disgusting double standards again mn.

@Johnnypiratesfriend

Surely people who are writing he does have a choice condoms or don't have sex are missing the point. Do we say women don't have a choice because they did use contraception or because they had sex? Disgusting double standards again mn.

Not really.

You might argue it's "not fair" that the woman gets the final say but that is the reality of the situation. It's the woman who gets pregnant. When men are able to get pregnant then they will get a vote in whether to have abortions or not.

Why are we focusing on men/women rather than children?

Children once born have a right to support from both their parents. It makes no difference whether they were 'wanted' or not. They exist and they have needs which their biological parents are morally and legally responsible for meeting.

If we shouldn't hold reluctant fathers responsible for their children, then who should be responsible? Just the mother? Almost half of single parent families are already in poverty (including many with a parent in full-time work). Should we plunge even more children into poverty just so men can walk away from their 'mistakes' without a backwards glance? The state? So the taxpayer should pick up an even bigger bill than it already does (diverting money from education, social care, health care etc.) just so a father doesn't have to pay out a relatively small percentage of his salary to support the child he was 50% responsible for creating.

Why should the man's rights trump the child's rights?

Indeed. Men get such a beating for not being responsible for preventing pregnancy.

Yet there's been over 210,000 abortions in the UK and Wales in 2020, the highest e era recorded number. This coat over £96 million to the nhs.

So how about focusing on how women should also take responsibility for contraception and stop costing the tax payers so much!

A) Men have contraceptive options such abstaining from PIV sex, the snip or condoms.
B) men don’t have to grow or birth a baby so they don’t get rights over someone else’s body.

Exactly this.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand there.

Walking away from a child conceived would negate that child's right to be supported by their parents, so no that's no acceptable either.

Basically the man's 'right' to a consequence free shag is quite obviously less important than women's rights to their own bodies and children's rights to be supported. Tough.

Ok I'm going to try and go along with your logic. The scenario is a woman gets pregnant but lives in a country where she doesn't have access to a safe and lawful termination (meaning she just like a man doesn't have a choice), so she decides to carry the baby to full term.
So if that woman like a man chose to conceive a child and is mentally/emotionally/financially well but simply couldn't be arsed with raising a child and put the child into the care system or let relatives take the child or let the father raise the child and not provide in anyway then YES there would be a stigma against the woman!! Which is exactly what a lot of men do but women don't, it's almost like out of sight out of mind

Basically the man's 'right' to a consequence free shag is quite obviously less important than women's rights to their own bodies and children's rights to be supported. Tough
Tough indeed....how about making any women pay for their own abortions?

how about making any women pay for their own abortions?

Whataboutery. Start a thread about that if you want to talk about it.

@ChocolateMassacre

Why are we focusing on men/women rather than children?

Children once born have a right to support from both their parents. It makes no difference whether they were 'wanted' or not. They exist and they have needs which their biological parents are morally and legally responsible for meeting.

If we shouldn't hold reluctant fathers responsible for their children, then who should be responsible? Just the mother? Almost half of single parent families are already in poverty (including many with a parent in full-time work). Should we plunge even more children into poverty just so men can walk away from their 'mistakes' without a backwards glance? The state? So the taxpayer should pick up an even bigger bill than it already does (diverting money from education, social care, health care etc.) just so a father doesn't have to pay out a relatively small percentage of his salary to support the child he was 50% responsible for creating.

Why should the man's rights trump the child's rights?

Great post.

@vivainsomnia

Basically the man's 'right' to a consequence free shag is quite obviously less important than women's rights to their own bodies and children's rights to be supported. Tough Tough indeed....how about making any women pay for their own abortions?

Why the fuck should they?!

It’s a medical procedure.

Are you going to charge for an appendectomy?