Page 14 | Am I being unreasonable to give birth away from the child’s father because he doesn’t want to get married?

Donesomethingsilly · 2025-02-28T02:30:33+00:00

My partner has two children to a previous relationship, we have been together for a while. We have discussed getting married but he was reluctant as he wants to protect himself financially. I understood that, and took a risk and decided to have a child with him as we had a great relationship. Since getting pregnant it’s been rocky. I’m not a uk citizen, my family is on the other side of the world. I’m with family at the moment as I needed to get away. Am I being unreasonable to stay here and have the child with my support system around me? He can’t move here, or even visit because he has his children. I feel stuck between doing the right thing for all the children involved, or the right thing for myself.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 11:53

Naunet · 28/02/2025 11:32

Ahh yes, he is completely reasonable to protect his stability, but she's a terrible person if she wants to do the same. Why should she be content living there, paying half the bills, in the knowledge he can kick her out with no warning? You think thats reasonable to expect of her?

Show quote history

She has no stability to protect. She has brought absolutely no money to the relationship.

If she'd been saving money each month for the last three years of their relationship and now had a house deposit and wanted them to buy a place together and he was refusing, then she'd have a point. But then she'd be able to buy herself a rental property, as she suggested in one of her earlier posts.

It's not wrong to want financial stability. But she's an adult and the responsibility for creating that financial stability is hers. We are living in 2025. You can't demand equality for women and at the same time expect a man to set you up for life without you having to lift a finger to contribute to it.

diddl · 28/02/2025 11:59

If the dh won't support her when she has a newborn she should go where she can get support.

It's not known that this would have been the case though.

Op obviously decided that it was too big a risk to take.

If Op wanted marriage & he didn't the relationship was always likely to fail I would have thought.

Vinni8 · 28/02/2025 12:08

I don't know why (well, I do) many PP are trying to twist this into OP deliberately going into this pregnancy with the intent to end up pulling this ultimatum. It's really quite clear that OP had her rose-tinted specs on and went against her instinct by agreeing that she could continue without marriage, and only when it was too late realised the gravity of the risk she would take by staying in the UK to have her baby. It was short-sighted and naive of her to deliberately conceive this baby, sure, but the way many posters are twisting this into some evil masterplan is very indulgent.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:09

Vinni8 · 28/02/2025 12:08

I don't know why (well, I do) many PP are trying to twist this into OP deliberately going into this pregnancy with the intent to end up pulling this ultimatum. It's really quite clear that OP had her rose-tinted specs on and went against her instinct by agreeing that she could continue without marriage, and only when it was too late realised the gravity of the risk she would take by staying in the UK to have her baby. It was short-sighted and naive of her to deliberately conceive this baby, sure, but the way many posters are twisting this into some evil masterplan is very indulgent.

If you read her posts it comes across loud and clear. She admits that what she's doing is wrong.

ApricotLime · 28/02/2025 12:09

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 11:53

She has no stability to protect. She has brought absolutely no money to the relationship.

If she'd been saving money each month for the last three years of their relationship and now had a house deposit and wanted them to buy a place together and he was refusing, then she'd have a point. But then she'd be able to buy herself a rental property, as she suggested in one of her earlier posts.

It's not wrong to want financial stability. But she's an adult and the responsibility for creating that financial stability is hers. We are living in 2025. You can't demand equality for women and at the same time expect a man to set you up for life without you having to lift a finger to contribute to it.

Show quote history

OP can't go back in time. Suggestions about what she should have done in the past are unhelpful and sticking the boot in.
But she's an adult and the responsibility for creating that financial stability is hers.
Yes and she can do that better with a support network around her than as a struggling, isolated single mum with no support
We are living in 2025. You can't demand equality for women and at the same time expect a man to set you up for life without you having to lift a finger to contribute to it.
No and she's not going to do that. She's going to go home to family and set up on her own with their support. He's not family. He's not related to her.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:11

ApricotLime · 28/02/2025 12:09

OP can't go back in time. Suggestions about what she should have done in the past are unhelpful and sticking the boot in.
But she's an adult and the responsibility for creating that financial stability is hers.
Yes and she can do that better with a support network around her than as a struggling, isolated single mum with no support
We are living in 2025. You can't demand equality for women and at the same time expect a man to set you up for life without you having to lift a finger to contribute to it.
No and she's not going to do that. She's going to go home to family and set up on her own with their support. He's not family. He's not related to her.

Edited

Show quote history

But he is her baby's family. She is depriving her baby of half of his or her family. Probably for good.

There's absolutely no reason why she couldn't stay with him, get a job once her baby is old enough to go to nursery, and start saving money of her own. They could also talk about how to protect her financial position now she is the mother of his child. There are other ways of doing this. It doesn't have to be, "marry me or put me on the deeds to your house or I'm taking the baby to live in Australia".

ApricotLime · 28/02/2025 12:14

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:11

But he is her baby's family. She is depriving her baby of half of his or her family. Probably for good.

There's absolutely no reason why she couldn't stay with him, get a job once her baby is old enough to go to nursery, and start saving money of her own. They could also talk about how to protect her financial position now she is the mother of his child. There are other ways of doing this. It doesn't have to be, "marry me or put me on the deeds to your house or I'm taking the baby to live in Australia".

Show quote history

You can't force her to stay with him. The relationship hasn't worked out. He can throw her out at any time. It's best she sets up on her own where she has a support network

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:18

ApricotLime · 28/02/2025 12:14

You can't force her to stay with him. The relationship hasn't worked out. He can throw her out at any time. It's best she sets up on her own where she has a support network

Edited

Show quote history

He hasn't thrown her out. She has stropped off to the other side of the world because he won't give her half his house and now her baby won't get to have a relationship with their father or paternal family.

Auldy · 28/02/2025 12:20

ApricotLime · 28/02/2025 12:14

You can't force her to stay with him. The relationship hasn't worked out. He can throw her out at any time. It's best she sets up on her own where she has a support network

Edited

Show quote history

And she would go back to him if he did as he was told.

She clearly stated -

"He knows what he has to do"

Which is quite chillingly controlling.

ApricotLime · 28/02/2025 12:21

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:18

He hasn't thrown her out. She has stropped off to the other side of the world because he won't give her half his house and now her baby won't get to have a relationship with their father or paternal family.

Show quote history

I didn't say she's thrown him out.

ApricotLime · 28/02/2025 12:23

OP, I hope you make a decision which is best for you and the baby and are able to protect your best interests as the dad is doing.

Inertia · 28/02/2025 12:23

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:11

But he is her baby's family. She is depriving her baby of half of his or her family. Probably for good.

There's absolutely no reason why she couldn't stay with him, get a job once her baby is old enough to go to nursery, and start saving money of her own. They could also talk about how to protect her financial position now she is the mother of his child. There are other ways of doing this. It doesn't have to be, "marry me or put me on the deeds to your house or I'm taking the baby to live in Australia".

Show quote history

There is a very solid reason, and that is that she has to put her baby first, not the father. The father has shown absolutely no willingness to work together as a family, and the relationship began to break down as soon as the OP became pregnant.

There would be a very real chance of him throwing the OP out of his house while she is either heavily pregnant or caring for a newborn. She would be unemployable, and possibly not have any recourse to state support.

By returning to her home country, where she will have support and perhaps a better chance of returning to work with that support, OP is taking responsibility for herself and her baby.

There is no reason why the father should get to wash his hands of his responsibilities to his baby and then get to demand that the OP hangs around and does what she’s told.

Auldy · 28/02/2025 12:32

Inertia · 28/02/2025 12:23

There is a very solid reason, and that is that she has to put her baby first, not the father. The father has shown absolutely no willingness to work together as a family, and the relationship began to break down as soon as the OP became pregnant.

There would be a very real chance of him throwing the OP out of his house while she is either heavily pregnant or caring for a newborn. She would be unemployable, and possibly not have any recourse to state support.

By returning to her home country, where she will have support and perhaps a better chance of returning to work with that support, OP is taking responsibility for herself and her baby.

There is no reason why the father should get to wash his hands of his responsibilities to his baby and then get to demand that the OP hangs around and does what she’s told.

Show quote history

You are making some mighty assumptions about the dad.

As far as we know the OP would be happy to return to him if he puts her on the deeds to his home. Why would she be happy to return to a dead end relationship or a bad dad?

She has explicitly told us he is a GREAT father. And his children who are co-parented by him are amazing kids.

Your narrative of a feckless man who would have her out in the streets is not supported by what the OP herself has told us.

Why is it only the Ops support network that is taken into account. Why not his? Op could easily hand baby over to dad. She would find it much easier to work etc with no child care problems. She won't do that though because she understands how utterly devastating it is to be separated from your child. It's just that she would rather that happened to him than her.

SwingTheMonkey · 28/02/2025 12:33

Only in mumsnet could you find people rushing to defend a woman who has openly admitted to using her unborn child to blackmail the child’s father. Unbelievable!

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:35

Inertia · 28/02/2025 12:23

There is a very solid reason, and that is that she has to put her baby first, not the father. The father has shown absolutely no willingness to work together as a family, and the relationship began to break down as soon as the OP became pregnant.

There would be a very real chance of him throwing the OP out of his house while she is either heavily pregnant or caring for a newborn. She would be unemployable, and possibly not have any recourse to state support.

By returning to her home country, where she will have support and perhaps a better chance of returning to work with that support, OP is taking responsibility for herself and her baby.

There is no reason why the father should get to wash his hands of his responsibilities to his baby and then get to demand that the OP hangs around and does what she’s told.

Show quote history

I don't know where you're getting all this stuff from.

Her baby's dad made it very clear that he did not want to get married or put her on the deeds to his house.

She decided to go ahead and TTC with him anyway. The baby was planned by both of them.

Now she's pregnant and he hasn't changed his mind about getting married or putting her on the deeds to his house, she's gone off to have her baby on the other side of the world where he or she will be unable to have any kind of meaningful relationship with their father or paternal family.

She did not need to do this. She is the one who ended the relationship. She did have somewhere to live: his house. The same place she was living until recently. Whilst he technically could have thrown her out of it and made her homeless, there is absolutely no indication that that is what he was planning. And if he had done so, she would be homeless and pregnant or homeless with a newborn, and considered high priority for emergency housing. But that scenario seems very unlikely. What is much more likely is that she could have continued to live with him and as soon as she was able to go back to work she could have started saving.

From his point of view, he made it clear that he didn't want her to own any part of his house and wouldn't be getting married or putting her on the deeds, and she said, "OK, let's TTC anyway." Now she is pregnant she's decided to raise their baby on the other side of the world and he won't get to see them grow up.

From her point of view, she took a gamble that he would change his mind about the house thing, the gamble didn't pay off, but what has she lost? Nothing, really. She's got her baby and someone else putting roof over head.

She admits in her own posts that she has done a shitty thing by depriving her baby of a father and her baby's father of a relationship with his child, but she's decided to put herself first. Not her baby. Herself.

LiquoriceAllsorts2 · 28/02/2025 13:00

Inertia · 28/02/2025 12:23

There is a very solid reason, and that is that she has to put her baby first, not the father. The father has shown absolutely no willingness to work together as a family, and the relationship began to break down as soon as the OP became pregnant.

There would be a very real chance of him throwing the OP out of his house while she is either heavily pregnant or caring for a newborn. She would be unemployable, and possibly not have any recourse to state support.

By returning to her home country, where she will have support and perhaps a better chance of returning to work with that support, OP is taking responsibility for herself and her baby.

There is no reason why the father should get to wash his hands of his responsibilities to his baby and then get to demand that the OP hangs around and does what she’s told.

Show quote history

She has to put her baby first, you are 100% right there.

How is alienating it from its dad (someone who has shown himself to be a good dad) putting it first?

LiquoriceAllsorts2 · 28/02/2025 13:07

The op does not have a house in her own country, any savings or a long term job (she mentions part time job but must be very new) so probably no income during maternity leave. She hardly seems in a great position to bring up a child whereas the dad seems to have financial stability.

diddl · 28/02/2025 13:10

Even marriage doesn't always mean that you'll be in a great position post split as many threads on here would attest.

Half of what may be not that much equity for a deposit & you need to be earning well enough for a mortgage should you wish.

CrispieCake · 28/02/2025 13:13

LiquoriceAllsorts2 · 28/02/2025 13:07

The op does not have a house in her own country, any savings or a long term job (she mentions part time job but must be very new) so probably no income during maternity leave. She hardly seems in a great position to bring up a child whereas the dad seems to have financial stability.

We don't take kids from parents for being poor.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 13:14

CrispieCake · 28/02/2025 13:13

We don't take kids from parents for being poor.

Show quote history

The only person taking this child away from their parent is the OP.

LiquoriceAllsorts2 · 28/02/2025 13:15

CrispieCake · 28/02/2025 13:13

We don't take kids from parents for being poor.

Show quote history

No we don’t. But when weighing up what is in the best interest of the child … mums home country versus uk it should be taken into account.

MimiSunshine · 28/02/2025 13:17

Donesomethingsilly · 28/02/2025 05:56

I sent a text saying I’m not coming back. He can come and visit if he wants to, but I can’t come back.

No point sticking the boot in now about past (stupid) decisions made. That sounds like the right one for you now.

CrispieCake · 28/02/2025 13:17

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 12:18

He hasn't thrown her out. She has stropped off to the other side of the world because he won't give her half his house and now her baby won't get to have a relationship with their father or paternal family.

Show quote history

The relationship either has failed or is already failing. Assuming she can live with him indefinitely is not a sensible option for the OP.

The only sensible course of action is to plan for being a single parent either where she is or in the UK.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 13:18

CrispieCake · 28/02/2025 13:17

The relationship either has failed or is already failing. Assuming she can live with him indefinitely is not a sensible option for the OP.

The only sensible course of action is to plan for being a single parent either where she is or in the UK.

Show quote history

She has left him. Because he hasn't changed his mind about giving her a share in his house.

CrispieCake · 28/02/2025 13:20

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 28/02/2025 13:14

The only person taking this child away from their parent is the OP.

Show quote history

What if the OP spends money she doesn't have on a return flight to the UK and then he turns round and says to her "It's over. I want you out". What is she meant to do then?