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

Yes, this

Yep.

As the law stands. We know this but that's not the question.

Of course he should. No question.

Men are not without agency. They are responsible for their own actions. Sex has consequences. Don't want to run the risk then don't have sex.

So I'm in a situation like this, because I was "stealthed" so the opposite of a woman "trapping a man ". Luckily I have evidence of this via phone call records and texts messages. I was on contraception (newly acquired) as well as the morning after pill to be very sure. However even after using the pill he continued to ejaculate. Told me he hadn't. Said don't worry it'll be grand. Then when I discovered two weeks later I was pregnant. Immediately told me it was my fault. I need an abortion and I had coerced him. Somehow. However I took the situation seriously, got a lawyer and now. He hasn't got anymore to add. He will have to pay maintenance. Our back story is we'd actually been together over the years, I decided I wanted a break as he'd not been entirely honest. However as we both had children from other partners and our children saw us as family I wanted to give it another go. So he then informed me over the phone at 5 months pregnant, "yes I purposely impregnated you. So you would not leave and if you did you would have my child ".

Unfortunately this happens even within relationships with a person you thought you could trust and love.

Block him. Tell the police about the threats.

Go through CMS after birth

You need to read @WiddlinDiddlin s scenario.

We all have choices.
If neither wants a kid. If both take precautions. If a pregnancy occurs and she changes her mind that of course is her right. If he doesn’t change his mind he’s sticking to the previous agreement and that is his right.

Each of us have to take responsibility for our own choices, we can’t force them on others because……we’ve changed our minds.
He cannot force her to have a termination
She cannot force him to want the kid

Hence why I agree with Widdlin.

Yes. Obviously?

No birth control is 100% - if a man isn’t prepared to meet the minimum obligation having created a life, then he should abstain.

NO, Reason is, if a woman gets pregnant but doesn't want to keep it the man gets no say in it, even if he wants to keep it, but if its the other way round men are told to suck it up, so if you get pregnant by a man that dosnt want to be a father and you know this, you got to suck it up and bring baby up urself.

CMS and file a report with police over any threats. Don't engage with him.

He chose to have sex with you. This is a possible consequence. Now he has to pay.

I love how you assume that I didn't.

No. There is no scenario, in which a father gets to abdicate all responsibility for his child on to the other parent or you and me because he thinks it's anyone's responsibility to provide him with consequence free sex. It's not fair that women get the choice of abortion but it's also not fair that they get periods, menopause and all the risks and consequences of pregnancy and we accept that reality. There are some things we can't change so we legislate to protect those who need it, not to satisfy some deadbeat shagger's sense of outrage at biological reality that still favours him at every step anyway. A woman needs bodily autonomy and not to be forced into pregnancy. A child needs to be supported by the two people responsible for creating it. A man does not need to be protected from the consequences of his choice to shag. If he wants it'll be nothing more than a small percentage of money anyway.

I know it's really hard to understand this in a world that doesn't usually put women's needs over men's wants, but that's a fact. It's his child; if he's not responsible for it, who is?

Incorrect. A man does get a say. He gets a say when he willingly puts his penis into a fertile woman.

Yes. Both sexes have to take responsibility for contraception. If a mistake occurs why should only one party bear all the financial fallout?

I simply disagree with you.
Everyone has a choice and if both people agree they don’t want a kid and take precautions and a mistake happens then if they’ve agreed they don’t want a kid an abortion is an obvious solution to their previous joint decision.

Any other choice by either of them is on them alone.
If they both want sex and both agree about potential outcomes that’s an agreement between them.

It’s takes two to have sex but only one to break an agreement.

So as I said I disagree with you.

This. Sex makes babies. Don't have sex if you don't want to ever risk babies.

I would say that he shouldn't have to pay maintenance if the baby was created because he was sexually assaulted.

Unless it’s rape a women gets her say too and willingly has sex.

Getting pregnant takes two, it’s not all the ‘fault’ of the man if a pregnancy occurs.

By that logic, I didn't want any other child in the world other than mine so why should my tax fund their food and housing?

Not my dna not my problem.

Except it is my and every other taxpayers problem because in a civilised society no child should be left to die because everyone digs into an entrenced position about it not being their problem. His sperm makes it more his problem/responsibility than mine.

The fact he is a useless cunt doesn't make a child that is 50% his dna, 100% of OPs responsibility. The taxpayer will pick up the pieces. Unless you actually want to bring in a "right to breed" policy, which would never pass in this country, we are where we are - in his case, a financially liable father.

Yes. He knows how they're made.

Are we at the "well I'm allowed my opinion" point now? You always know someone's flailing when the best thing they can say for their opinion is "well I'm allowed to hold it".

Yes, I know you disagree with me. You are also wrong and actually rather immoral. Supporting your own child isn't about an "agreement" between the parents, it's about one's duty to one's own child. You don't opt out of supporting your child because in your mind it isn't fair. It's not about what you want, it's not about you whinging aboit biology, it's about parental responsibility. Anyone who still thinks the world is responsible for giving the consequence free sex should not be having sex at all.

Yeah, obviously. That's why the woman also need to contribute financially towards the baby.

If the baby is his, he has to pay maintenance for it. If he doesn't want to be part of his baby's life, that's a pity but he still has to pay. Go to CMS.

Please let the police know about this

Yes. Of course.