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

That's great, your partners a cunt.
You still have an obligation to the baby. You don't ever have to give the liar a penny or even look at them again, the kid is independent of that

Wouldn't that be great.
Unfortunately, in the real world, and mans right to consequence free shagging is treated as the only thing that matters.

He could have just paid for condoms 🤷🏽‍♀️

Yes.

100%.

We cannot give men free reign to 'spread their seed' without responsibility.

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.

So the woman's choice could be to either have an abortion that she may not want and so will possibly lead to life long mental health issues or she can raise her child in potential poverty?

Of course he should. Consequences of a shag.

Yes

Obviously this is purely my opinion on my own personal circumstances but as someone who fell pregnant by a man who didn’t want to have kids, I’ve never felt he has obligation to be involved.

In our case we had already discussed that he didn’t want kids and we were actively trying to avoid. I thought I was on the same page until I was actually pregnant and realised that my feeling had changed.
If it had been the other way round and his feeling on the situation had changed but I still didn’t want the child he couldn’t force me to become a mother so I don’t feel I can or should be able to force him to be a father in any way

However, if we hadn’t discussed it before and been actively trying to prevent a pregnancy I would have felt differently about it

The issue is it's still the child that suffers.

So even if a woman lies and tells a man she's infertile and it's completely physically impossible for her to have a child when actually she wants to "trap" him into a baby - that's awful, and I wouldn't defend it for a second. But you're still left with a child. And thinking the man should pay maintenance isn't defending the mother's actions, it's recognising that the child shouldn't be punished for it.

Yes, of course.
The payment is for the baby.. it is not a punishment for him. And it also applies the other way. Women who had kids and gave them up.. they also have to pay too.

His options:

1. vasectomy
2. withdrawal
3. condoms
4. mutual oral sex
5. outercourse
6. hand jobs

Mmm...

But she also had the choice not to have sex if the ultimate price - having a baby you do not want/cannot afford/don't want to raise by yourself/can't bring yourself to abort - wasn't one she wanted to pay?

So the solution is - only EVER have sex if you absolutely want, AND can support, a child.

As logical as that sounds, its really not practical given what we know of human nature.

@ThistleWitch because I had a baby by a man that didn't want a baby, he said he thought if I got pregnant I'd have an abortion (like it's a form of contraception) it was the only time we were not careful and I got pregnant, he is adamant he wants nothing to do with the baby and shouldn't pay

Yes. If you don’t want a baby there is equal responsibility to make sure reliable contraception is in place first. Sex isn’t just there for enjoyment, it’s for creating new life. Abortion shouldn’t be used as a form of contraception after the fact.

Yes. Maintenance is for the child, not the adults involved.

Parents have a moral obligation to support their children, even if they didn't want them.

Yes, obviously. Maintenance is just some money every month, often nowhere near enough. The mother will be dealing with the child financially, practically and emotionally for the rest of her life.

@StandDownCharlie this is the situation I'm in, got pregnant, he said he doesn't want a baby, will have no contact, ever! So he doesn't believe he should pay maintenance

It's not up to him.

I think hell find the cms disagree with him.

He’s about to get a hard life lesson then isn’t he ? Next stop CMS.

Women can only get pregnant a few days a month. A man, however, can get multiple women pregnant on the same day, every day of the month.

Mens’ irresponsible ejaculations are the primary cause of pregnancy. Women pay with the risks associated with pregnancy, the least a father can do is pay for his feckless spunking.

But she also had the choice not to have sex if the ultimate price - having a baby you do not want/cannot afford/don't want to raise by yourself/can't bring yourself to abort - wasn't one she wanted to pay?

Well no. It takes two people to create a life. It's not reasonable to expect to have to raise a child without at least financial help from the other parent.

A man knows he can't have an abortion. A man knows his choice ends at his decisions to ejaculate into a woman.

I suppose if a man really didn't want a baby he could always shag women that are well over menopausal age.

The law begs to differ and he is expected to pay child support. It’s very much his problem. Put in a claim and ignore his whinging.

OP - he can think that but whilst theres no obligation for him to be actively involved in the childs life, he does still have to pay maintenance (in theory anyway, unless he wants to spend the next 18 years pretending to be unemployed or broke).