To not pay for an unwanted child?

[Anudawan]

Hypothetical.

it came up at work today.

if the pregnancy was a result of a one night stand, regardless of whether precautions were taken, if the man doesn’t want the pregnancy and the woman decides to continue, should he be able to opt out of child support?

my personal answer and I’m not sure on the nuance (ie do you have be on the birth certificate and thus can claim parental responsibility in order to be compelled to pay maintenance or a dna test to compel the man) my personal answer is no, he cannot or shouldn’t be able to opt out once the child is born. All sex (with a woman of reproductive age) carries the risk of pregnancy, you can lower the risk but never fully remove it. Abstinence is the only way to do that. To do the action you’ve got to be prepared for the consequences. It’s very easy to flippantly say ‘get an abortion’ but for some women that isn’t viable.

Some women do not want an abortion but also do not want to be pregnant or have a child. What would you suggest they do?

She could just abstain from having sex like the men who don't want to be fathers are supposed to.

So who pays?

Presumably the mother if she wants to raise a child on her own. Or both of them if the man wants to be involved.

What a shame that this comes out of their bodies when they want it to and in the place they want it to and then cause bodily harm to someone else. I think maybe those with this biological disadvantage should face consequences for harming the woman.

A trite answer. When the mother needs childcare to work to pay, and is disadvantaged by being alone, her option is to turn to benefits. I don't have a problem with that of course, that's what they're there for - but a man who chose to have sex with a woman which results in a pregnancy then gets off scot free. That doesn't work for me.

Do you really believe what you're writing? You must know that abortion isn't actually a possibility everywhere. Not all women have that choice. Furthermore, neither is sterilisation. It's far easier for a man to access a vasectomy (also a far safer, cheaper and less invasive procedure) than for women to access sterilisation. It's not just a case of popping to the GP and asking for one.

You're acting as if men don't actually know that it's not up to them what happens next.

1. Men (and women) both know that sex risks pregnancy. Even with contraception there is a (smaller but still existing risk).
2. Men, as women, know that they do not carry the baby, the woman does, and therefore it's not the man's choice what happens next. Maybe it is unfair in some ways, but they know what they're getting into.
3. If they can't accept that, don't take the risk.

It's as if some posters are missing a step - men don't only know there's a risk of pregnancy, they also know what happens after a pregnancy. That a baby is either aborted, or arrives and is kept or adopted. Among many other possibilities that include all sorts of risks to the mother. Pregnancy doesn't end with a positive test. That whole follow on scenario is part of the risk they accept when choosing to have sex. Not just the fact of a pregnancy, but the fact that there are further decisions and consequences too and the men aren't in charge. It's not as if they don't know this.

If men can't accept not only that

1. Sex can result in pregnancy and
2. They will not be the ones with options and choices in that case

then they can't risk having the sex. Yes, in theory the women 'hold all the cards' (not necessarily an enviable position to be in) at this point, but again given that the men KNOW ALL OF THIS going into the act of putting their dick into a woman's vagina, how is it then unfair?

Maybe boys, as well as girls, should be taught more about protecting themselves from these kind of consequences, not just that sex can mean pregnancy as if that's the end point.

You have the option not to have sex in the first place. If you can't accept the potential avalanche of consequences, fair or not, don't do it. It's pretty simple really.

By 'results in a pregnancy' you make it sound like something that just happens with the woman being a passive bystander.

I'm talking about cases where the man clearly indicates he doesn't want to be a father and the woman continues with the pregnancy against his wishes, possibly even having lied about the pill like happened to the guy I know. Basically, forcing him into a situation which a woman would never find herself in.

Why shouldn't the mother pay towards the upbringing of the child if she decides and wants to be a mother, especially if the man who doesn't want to be a father has to pay?

But it's pretty ridiculous really to suggest a person be celibate for life isn't it? That's like saying don't ever get married if you don't want the risk of marrying an abuser. Or don't have children if you don't want to face discrimination in the workplace/impact on your career.

One option is a kind of 'pre nup' where both parties officially state that they do not wish to have children at this point in their life. This would prevent the man from doing an about turn and claiming he didn't want kids when maybe he previously said he did.

Or alternatively it's made clear to the mother that she will have to financially support the child until it reaches adulthood, even if given up for adoption, unless the circumstances are extenuating like rape or medical inability to have an abortion etc.

There are so many humans on this planet that having a child is effectively a lifestyle choice at this point.

I don't see where anyone has suggested the mother shouldn't pay? The point is that the mother does pay - and not just financially but in so many other ways that the man doesn't. If he's prepared to take the risk of sex resulting in pregnancy, he has to accept that it can affect him financially - and if it's only financially then he's getting off very lightly!

if a man really doesn't want to be a father then he needs to take responsibility for where his sperm ends up, and not put it inside a vagina

he can still have sex and still orgasm, just not inside a vagina

he can control his desire to not become a father with 100% certainty by not doing that one thing

I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept for many men to grasp

are lesbians celibate?

they're having sex all the time with 100% certainty of no unwanted pregnancies

sex is more than just PiV

@Surf2Live well I'm not gonna become a lesbian just because I don't want kids and I don't expect straight men never to have sex with women. I mean this whole thread is about "biology" and yet posters seem to be forgetting that the reason the human race even exists is down to male sex drive. I think it sounds terrible being a man and thinking about sex all the time, I've often wondered how they get anything else done. But lets not pretend they're not hard-wired to want sex.

the reason the human race even exists is down to male sex drive.

😂😂😂

Aye it's not like there's a woman involved literally doing 99% of the work.

Thank fuck for men and their miraculous ability to orgasm.

@BrandNewHeretic Thank fuck for men and their miraculous ability to orgasm.

Not really. I'd be more than happy if the human race died out. But good luck getting pregnant without a man.

Good luck furthering the human race (not you specifically) with out a woman!!

My point is it requires both to procreate life and therefore both should be accountable

How on earth can you credit men (unfairly) with creating the human race while also absolving them of any responsibility for the life he creates?!

@BrandNewHeretic I'd hardly call it "crediting" them. If anything I'd curse them for keeping the human race going this long. It's just a fact that they're hardwired to want sex and saying they should just never have it if they don't want kids is not ever going to be practical.

Most contraception coercion comes from men. He is never forced into a situation. He has the choice to use a condom. If he doesn't then that is on him.

Unpopular opinion here but I have always said that I would rather struggle alone, than ask a man to give me money for a kid he doesn't want. I can't imagine anything worse than forcing money from a man whose baby I had against his will.

I think that if a man makes it clear that he does not want a child and the woman goes ahead and forces it on him anyway, she should be prepared to go it alone. Women have a choice, even if it was unplanned or unwanted, men don't.

But unwanted pregnancies happen. The woman has all the power in this situation. What about flipping it on its head. What about a man who wants the baby and the woman that doesn't. Should she NOT be allowed to get an abortion if the man wants her to keep it? In the same way that he would HAVE to pay if he doesn't want it but she has it anyway? Shoukd the father take the mother to court so that she legally cannot abort the baby in the same way that she can take him to court to make him pay for a kid he never wanted?

unwanted pregnancies happen when men ejaculate irresponsibly

if a man wants a baby and a woman does not, no, he does not get to force a woman to undergo 9 months of pregnancy and childbirth against her will

she should absolutely have access to abortion if that is her choice because its her body

do you really think men should have the right to force women to be pregnant against their will?

again, if men don't want to become fathers then they need to not ejaculate inside vaginas

they can still have sex and still orgasm, just not inside the vagina of a woman in her fertile years

my point about lesbians is they are having what we still call sex

they're having loads of orgasms (more than straight women too)

and yet no pregnancy results

it's not necessary to become a lesbian to have sex that is 100% guaranteed to not result in pregnancy

straight people can do it too

just don't ejaculate inside a vagina of a fertile woman

and again, that ejaculation bit, is nice for men, but not necessary for them to orgasm, and is not the thing that gives women orgasms anyway!

I absolutely admit there is a strong drive for humans to do it, it's how we procreate

but if men REALLY don't want to be fathers then they 100% can ensure they don't cause a pregnancy by being responsible with where they choose to deposit their sperm

but they don't, a great many of them don't care one bit

when I was younger and sexually active I was amazed at men who had no thought for using a condom, never asked if I was using birth control, just assumed I was and did not care at all of any consequences

So all of the responsibility is on the man to make sure it doesn't happen, but if it still does, it's completely up to the woman to decide to have a baby the man doesn't want and to then squeeze him for money for the next 20 years?

No, I dont think that a woman should be forced to have an abortion OR forced to have a baby, but we have a choice. I dont think a man should be forced to have one and then have to shoulder the financial burden of a decision he didn't make. Forcing a man to have a baby if a mistake happens is the same as forcing a woman to have a baby she doesn't want if her contraception fails.