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?

And what about the child's right to be financially supported by both of their parents? Why does a man's right to walk away matter more?

Children don’t have that right. They have the right to have their needs met. We have a benefits system that financially supports children when their parents can’t or won’t, and that enables their needs to be met.

We have a benefits system that financially supports children when their parents can’t or won’t, and that enables their needs to be met.

The purpose of that benefits system isn't and shouldn't be facilitating arseholes who feel they should be able to have sex without any consequence

Does that only apply to men?

Both men and women have children they can’t afford.

Shagging around' is hardly conducive for bringing a child into the world anyway (if the aim wasn't to get pregnant).

It's a catch all term but there's many different scenarios. Man and woman in a relationship but don't want baby, pregnancy accidentally happens through contraceptive failure and the woman decides to go through with it. Should the man have been in a celibate relationship because he didn't want kids.

Why is that so difficult to grasp that if a man doesn't want to be a father right then, or ever then not having sex is the only way to ensure this?! And if they do have sex then pregnancy may result and there are ways men can reduce this risk themselves, but it will still be a risk, even in a committed relationship.

Or is it more that there's the belief that men should be able to have sex alongside the other basic human needs like air, food, shelter and warmth and the price that the child and the woman (the at times the tax payer) pay for a joint act is one worth paying because a) the men aren't paying it by and large and b) sex is considered a basic need for men and no one is allowed to suggest they go without?

It's not all just because some feckless loser shags his way around town but won't have anything to do with the children he fathers.

No, not always granted, but they're the most likely to claim they've been trapped by a woman while not even considering that they don't have to have sex or attempting to control their own fertility by using protection.

Both men and women have children they can’t afford.

Sure, but this thread is not arguing to give women carte blanche to wash their hands of their children with society's blessing.

Children don’t have that right. They have the right to have their needs met. We have a benefits system that financially supports children when their parents can’t or won’t, and that enables their needs to be met.

so you get to shag around and the rest of us can pay for your unwanted offspring?

@TerraNovaTwo

YABVVU

If a man doesn't want/is not ready for a baby he should be wearing a condom, using the male contraceptive pill or abstaining from sex. It's quite simple, really.

What male contraceptive pill?! You can't just make stuff up, there is no such thing yet. OTOH women DO have a pill and many other options not available to men so why are they still finding themselves in the situation of an unwanted pregnancy? Why are women not all abstaining? I am btw for now but I wouldn't expect anyone else to it's ridiculous trotting that out as if it's in any way practical for either sex long-term.

@FairyCakeWings

And what about the child's right to be financially supported by both of their parents? Why does a man's right to walk away matter more?

Children don’t have that right. They have the right to have their needs met. We have a benefits system that financially supports children when their parents can’t or won’t, and that enables their needs to be met.

Isn't paying child support mandatory if it's taken to the CMS? So that's not true AFAIK

Isn't paying child support mandatory if it's taken to the CMS? So that's not true AFAIK

Only where the CMS actually enforce it, and use the power they have to apply sanctions to a non payer instead of letting them rack up thousands and then deciding to write it off.
It should be dealt with as harshly as non payment of council tax, with bailiffs and attachments of earnings, or in fact any other debt that is owed to the state as such like tax etc, because it is the state that is paying when they do not.

Isn't paying child support mandatory if it's taken to the CMS? So that's not true AFAIK

I take it you don’t have any experience with them; my ex didn’t pay a penny for 3 years and cms told me they wouldn’t investigate because he “could be living off a partner” he wasn’t but they didn’t care

so you get to shag around and the rest of us can pay for your unwanted offspring?

Hypothetically, yes. I have the right to give birth to any child I might conceive whether or not I have a home or an income, right?

@RedCandyApple

Isn't paying child support mandatory if it's taken to the CMS? So that's not true AFAIK

I take it you don’t have any experience with them; my ex didn’t pay a penny for 3 years and cms told me they wouldn’t investigate because he “could be living off a partner” he wasn’t but they didn’t care

No, no experience personally. I looked it up and got the impression there were lots of loopholes, and they expect you to only use it as a last resort. Shame, should be enforced more.

@RedCandyApple

Isn't paying child support mandatory if it's taken to the CMS? So that's not true AFAIK

I take it you don’t have any experience with them; my ex didn’t pay a penny for 3 years and cms told me they wouldn’t investigate because he “could be living off a partner” he wasn’t but they didn’t care

Ha my ex 'moved too much' so they couldn't keep up with him, he moved 3 times. And I gave them each address. In 12 years. He paid intermittently and owed a lot. Apparently it wasn't 'feasible' for him to pay the amount he owed. They used the excuse they couldn't find him again when it came to paying while DD remained under 18 from the time the arrears were written off.

So it really is as easy as moving house or possibly having a partner and living off them to dodge payment.
I do find it odd though that if a man is living off a partner then they are not expected to pay CM, yet if a woman moves in with a partner that is not the child's father it is automatically assumed that he is contributing to the upkeep of the children and she is not considered a single parent any more and to claim as such is fraud.

It’s a joke and if someone really doesn’t want to pay maintenance then they don’t have to, there are no consequences what so ever for not paying. My ex wasn’t living off a partner I know exactly what he does and I told them but again they didn’t care. They said they would do a liability order but he was being charged arrears at the flat rate of £7 a week and they told me it had to get to £500 before they would do a liability order so I thought ok we might be getting somewhere, just as it was getting close to £500 he went on benefits so the liability order was cancelled and he was told to pay me £7 a week and arrears don’t have to be paid if the NRP is on benefits so none of the arrears mattered and then they wrote them off 🤦🏻

Sure, but this thread is not arguing to give women carte blanche to wash their hands of their children with society's blessing.

Having an abortion (thankfully) enabled me to carte blanche wash my hands of literally any responsibility I had to my unborn child (with society’s full blessing).

Having an abortion (thankfully) enabled me to carte blanche wash my hands of literally any responsibility I had to my unborn child (with society’s full blessing).

That was an unborn child. That's not what we are talking about here.

Given their radically different experiences of bringing children into the world women have different choices to men.

@TheKeatingFive the unborn child is exactly what the OP is talking about? No one is advocating that men should be able to wash their hands of babies who have been born!

the unborn child is exactly what the OP is talking about?

And the woman's experience of bringing an unborn child into the world is radically different to a man's, which is why they have different choices at that point.

The child that the man is demanding carte blanche release from would be a living child.

[quote Allsorts1]@TheKeatingFive the unborn child is exactly what the OP is talking about? No one is advocating that men should be able to wash their hands of babies who have been born![/quote]

OP is taking about an unborn child that is later born. Do you think pregnancies just last forever? No you can't 'wash your hands' of a born child, that's messed up.

Being an involved father is ideal. Financial contributions should be mandatory.

This isn't a game, it's real life for many people. (Other) women have abortions so your not entitled to any help. Right, ok then.

[quote Allsorts1]@TheKeatingFive the unborn child is exactly what the OP is talking about? No one is advocating that men should be able to wash their hands of babies who have been born![/quote]
That's exactly what people are advocating. A man should be free to walk away from any child he doesn't want to have been born, free of stigma. That he should not be held financially responsible for a living child, nor forced to have any kind of role in that child's life.

That's exactly what people are advocating. A man should be free to walk away from any child he doesn't want to have been born, free of stigma.

And he could only get that at the expense of either a child's right to parental support or a woman's right to bodily autonomy.

Which you think should be sacrificed for men's 'rights' to consequence free shagging?

Which do you think

@TheKeatingFive

That's exactly what people are advocating. A man should be free to walk away from any child he doesn't want to have been born, free of stigma.

And he could only get that at the expense of either a child's right to parental support or a woman's right to bodily autonomy.

Which you think should be sacrificed for men's 'rights' to consequence free shagging?

I think absolutely neither, if that question was directed at me. I can see how my post came across as in support of the OP there. It wasn't.

The mysogynistic comments on this thread… interesting.

Yes let’s make it easier for men to abandon their children! Let’s make sure men can create families all over the place without any consequences and leave children to suffer!

The Men’s rights activists would love this! And the handmaidens looking for a head pat from man are ok for women to be left alone with a child while men fuck off without having to look after the child he helped make. Pathetic!

It is shocking sometimes to see how much people hate women! And how willing other women are to punish women and children in order to make life easier for men. I expect men to be selfish and advocate for this nonsense… but not women.

If you’re a man who abandons his children or think men should be able to then you’re a dead beat loser and you should be castrated and your blood line should die out with you!

You don’t deserve to be able to even have access to a woman nor should your useless sperm be allowed to spill out anywhere except your old sock. And if you’re a woman ok with this foolishness then you’re a weak, lower than the low stupid woman who values the comfort of men over the well-being of women and children.