Should a man that didn't want the baby pay maintenance

[dillydallybub]

So as the title says, should a man that didn't want a baby pay maintenance?
Please give me your thoughts and opinions

How is any of that the babys fault?

Ah yes, just play that get-out-of-jail-free card - "but I didn't WANT a baby".. 🤦🏽‍♀️

If a man doesn’t want a baby he wears a condom or abstains. He needs to take responsibility for fix fertility, and his life choices..

Yes, if he doesn't want a baby, he wears a condom or gets a vasectomy if he doesn't ever want children.

No contraception is 100% effective, including the pill, so a man should always wear a condom. Millions of women have unplanned pregnancies and raise and support those children. The maintenance that an absent father/parent has to pay is in no way equivalent to what the resident parent is paying.

There's a WORLD of difference between the small chance of contraception failure versus being lied to and there being NO contraception in place.

What if a man had removed a condom without the woman being aware? Is that ok? It's no different from a woman lying she's on the pill.

People consent to sex based on what they've been told re contraception.

Yes he should. If he didn't want to risk a pregnancy then he had choices - none of which he used. Likewise yourself really!

Yes of course. Everyone knows how babies are conceived and how to prevent if desired and yes contraception can fail. You want the ride you take your chances as my late mother used to say.

It's not like any court in the land is going to force the dad to pay anything anyway regardless of how any baby came about.

So this man didn't want to take any responsibility for contraception and now doesn't want to take responsibility for the results of his ejaculate?

Should have kept his cock in his pants.

Without question.

When you're weighing up each individuals rights ...

Child's right to be supported by their parents

Mothers right to agency over her own body

Fathers right to consequence free shagging

its pretty obvious who should take a back seat here, no?

Look, I’m going a little controversial here. Of course they should pay maintenance, it takes two to make a baby and you know that’s a potential when having sex. But at the same time, I do sympathise in that situation. Women have the option to end a pregnancy, but men don’t have a say of whether a pregnancy ends or not (rightfully so, men have no rights to a woman’s body). But men can be raped by a woman and she could put him on child maintenance. If a woman is raped, they get to end the pregnancy if they wish, again - men don’t have that option.

Yes. The woman didn't miraculously get pregnant on her own. It's his responsibility too.

There is no such thing as women raping men under UK law.

What if a man had removed a condom without the woman being aware? Is that ok? It's no different from a woman lying she's on the pill.

If a man takes off the condom without the woman's knowledge then that is an offence. That action can lead to disease and or pregnancy. Pregnancy can lead to death and disability when it does wrong.

A woman lying about the pill takes those risks on herself. A man simply has to pay money for the result of his orgasm.

Not comparable.

What if a man had removed a condom without the woman being aware? Is that ok? It's no different from a woman lying she's on the pill.

that's rape

Exactly this.

if you have sex you have to accept you risk having a baby, if you aren’t prepared to deal with the consequences then don’t have sex.

Yep. To give a quote from a Wurzils song...twice daily... "My son, you'm had yer fun, tis the time to pay now."

Of course they bloody should. The associated costs of raising a child - food, clothing, nappies, school uniform, trips, childcare (the list goes on...) don't suddenly come for free because he didn't want it. If you don't want it then you put something on it, don't do it, or have the snip 🙄

Men can be sexually assaulted by women, of course, but they can’t be raped by a woman - the definition of rape is when a person intentionally penetrates another's vagina, anus or mouth with a penis, without the other person's consent.

A man removing a condom during sex is not anything like the same thing as a woman saying she is on the pill ffs.

That is rape. He has now put her at risk of STDs and he has now put her body at risk of pregnancy and the physical repercussions of that.

So what if you've done everything reasonable (and I don't agree that total abstinence or surgery is actually reasonable), made it 100% clear before the deed that you do not want a child...

And something has gone wrong, whether maliciously or not, and the woman chooses to have the child in full knowledge of the mans wishes...

I am not 100% convinced that the man should pay in that situation.

However... I can see that proving that beyond all doubt, in the sea of men who just didn't think, give a crap, said one thing but meant another... etc, is nigh on impossible.

It's not the baby's fault. The baby didn't ask to be made and born, needs love and care and if you are failing to provide these, at the very least you need to provide financial support.

Then you either still use a condom / have the snip as well or accept the chances that for whatever reason it may be (intentionally or accident) there is still a chance of pregnancy and be prepared to step up to the associated responsibilities of this if it happens 🤷🏼‍♀️

Yes.

If you don't want a baby you wear a condom, or better yet, you don't put your penis in a vagina.

Yes. Why should the kids suffer more? Already a bit shit being an accident and unwanted by a parent