How can some men father umpteen children and then just not give them a backward glance?

[TheFeministsWife]

I truly don't understand. (And yes I know women do it too, I'm just having a moan).

I'm very lucky that this doesn't effect me in any way, but I feel so very sad for those kids (and their mums as well really). I'm talking in particular about my BIL. He has on the last count had 7 children to 5 different women. And no he doesn't pay any maintenance for any of them. After his last marriage went tits up 2 years ago he disappeared, much to DH's dismay, (and my relief, I can't bloody stand the bastard). Him not being around has been great TBH, but I've also felt sad for DH as he missed his brother.

Anyway a month or so back BIL's eldest child messaged DH on FB to say he'd found his dad and been to see him. So DH started to message BIL on FB and they've been speaking. This weekend he's gone to visit him. Pleased for DH, but not so pleased he's back on the scene TBH but hey what can you do. Noticed DH has been tagged in some photos on FB earlier this evening by BIL (I'm not friends with him on there, but can see the pics DH is in). So I had a nosey at them and in the background of 1, is a little girl of around 14 months maybe. She is so obviously BIL's child (all his kids look exactly alike very distinctive eyes and hair). I knew from what DH had mentioned that he had a girlfriend but didn't expect him to have another child so soon.

He's probably spun his new girlfriend a load of lies and she probably doesn't even know he has so many other children, or that he isn't even divorced yet. I mean that's 8 kids to 6 different women!

You're probably wondering why I give a shit at all seen as I don't like him? Well apart from feeling really badly for his exes and other children, it means that now DH is back in touch with him, at some point I'm going to probably have to see him, and his new girlfriend and new baby. Which means I'm going to have to keep my mouth shut and lie to this poor girl's face which I don't want to do. Or I don't see why I should bloody have too either. He made his own bed he should bloody lie in it. If I do say anything it would mean BIL would stop speaking to DH again, which would devastate DH. I'm caught between a bloody rock and a hard place really. Wonder if I can just refuse to meet up with him and his girlfriend would that work? I suppose it would unless they bloody turned up here, which I really hope they don't.

YANBU... but a big part of the problem is that marriage is so out of fashion. 'It's just a piece of paper' people say, 'old fashioned', 'it doesn't mean I love you any more or less'... and it's been swallowed hook, line and sinker. Being a partner gives the remaining parent and their children (usually the women) no legal protection in the event of a split and no entitlement to financial support. Partners can walk away from a relationship far more easily than a spouse can, and far more cheaply. Time we all wised up to the truth and, even if we don't go the marriage route, protected our interests better.

Men (as my granny would have said) won't buy the cow if they can get the milk for free...

Op- I wouldn't be happy meeting up with bil.
Tell your dh that you do not approve and that the new woman should know the truth about bil.
Then if she knows the truth she can make an informed choice.

I don't believe that all women really do know the background of the men they have children with. My ex sil for one certainly didn't.

very well put Cognito. I think that is the problem. Men are allowed to get away with not marrying the woman and it is acceptable to have children out of wedlock now.

Also the married man's tax allowance has gone and been replaced with family credit.

Thereally Tilly

It really wouldn't matter bout the CSS the type of man who won't commit to supporting his children

Or can't see it's not a good idea to have kids with a women your barely know most likey dosent have a job

Also can I say one thing I work for ss and often don't understand how a man gets involed with a women who is the process of hovering her children removed good enough to have a child with

I seen so many times mums who are at the point of of proceedings to have a children removed will waltz into court pregnant yet again with their new partner in tow

And you must hin surely this guy dosent think this women is the right one to have Abay with

So it's not jus women who get sucked into having children with someone who is wanting

As long as there is no downside to either's behaviour nothing will change.

I would not want any of my children to ever get involved with someone like this.
It really does seem a cycle for some people, those that are aware of the circumstances that is.

maypole1 couldnt a better CSA take money directly from his earnings/benefits?

maypole1 and take a realistic sum for the cost of a child - not based no what he can 'afford'

This is the reason I would be disapointed if my children didnt wait to have children until they are married, and preferably married for a good few years first.

its just as much the womans fault as the mans

if you know someone is feckless and doesnt pay for the kids he has and has no intention of ever doing, and yet you still go ahead and sleep with him without protection, frankly you are a bigger idiot than he is. YOU are the one lumbered with an unwanted child. YOU are the one who will have to take the responsibility.

Why should the bloke care? it has no impact on his life and no consequence for him.

i just wish women would be more particular about who they procreate with sometimes

Maypole- as you know i carry out the parenting assessments on the parents in these senarios. I see a huge lack of self esteem and self worth. Patterns are being repeated. There is an air of inevitibility about people like this and they do not see themselves as being able to have choices, or take responsibility. I have never done a parenting assessment on someone who has had a "normal" childhood, or had a tragic event happen that has had the right services, counselling etc, put inplace.

For some there isn't any answers (they won't engage with services), all we can do is to have the threasholds inplace to break the cycle, education programmes etc. Some of the opinions on here certainly will not raise anyones confidence, caught up in this lifesyles, talked about.

We need to find away to bring back people's human worth and get them to see that they can acheive more, in reality for some they cannot, through poor education, limited employment opportunities. So they create what they think is a life, but they don't have the skills todo it properly. Stop welfare benefits and it will cost much more in child protection/looked after children.

OP- i wouldn't be part of a lie such as this, but you will probably find the partner knows his past, perhaps try to give support to the child?

Well put Cogito.

OP, if questions are asked about BIL then don't lie. If you do, you're being complicit in his actions and condoning them. You'll just be part of the cover up. Warn your DH that you won't lie to protect BIL if asked questions by the new gf, or anyone else. I also wouldn't hesitate in telling him what a low life shit he is.

For all the women-blamers out there, I was with my DS's father for 4 years, was engaged, had a house together and had planned my pregnancy. I was 4 months pregnant when I found out he was seeing someone behind my back (who I later found out knew about me, and that I was pg), so I told him to leave. He chose not to be involved in the pregnancy from that point on, chose never to see DS and didn't pay a penny for the first 3 years. Luckily I had a good full time job so just about kept our heads above water but it was bloody hard.

When DS was about one, I found out my ex had fathered two other children by two different women while we were together. I'd had absolutely no idea that he was leading a double/triple life and screwing around left, right and centre. It wouldn't surprise me if he's had more kids by now. I have no idea how I'm going to explain all this to DS when he's older . These 'men' don't think about the effect they have on those around them. It's not just about finance, or whether they are involved with their kids. It's also about the legacy these kids are left with, knowing they are just one of many kids that their father doesn't give a shit about.

All I can say is thank fuck for single parents like me, who despite being left literally holding the baby and getting slagged off by the media on an almost daily basis, do a bloody good job of bringing our kids up to be balanced human beings.

Warmkitty- yours isn't the typeof situation that the negative comments are about. I don't think that its because the men don't think of the consequences, i think that they don't see that there are consequences and that their actions are wrong. It started in the 80's when all the blame was put onto the single mother and not the father.

I see on MN all of the time that if a woman is asked why she became pregnant when she was already living in difficult circumstances that there is a backlash against the poster,not because it was unhelpful (which i agree it was) but because it is acceptable to not put any thought into why and who with, you are about to produce a future adult, with. The type of adult and what attitudes it is inheriting, that is being raised is not given enough thought to.

Soft kitty- for every woman like you who genuinely has absolutely no clue that her partner is living a double/triple life, there are probably quite a few who do- but it's easier to turn a blind eye and put up with it rather than step out of the comfort zone.

Sadly a lot of this is to do with low aspirations and low self esteem. If a girl leaves school never expecting to have a proper career or reasonable job, then she's automatically far more vulnerable, precisely because she feels she needs something- either a bloke or the state - to provide and look after her. Therefore if some bloke turns up who's willing to give her a baby, it seems like a relatively good deal- she'll be housed and fed and have a baby who will love her unconditionally and won't have any huge expectations of her- at least for a few years. It doesn't matter whether she's a bloody saint or a chain smoking jeremy kyle watching idiot- her children will adore her. Of course, once they get a little older, we all see the fall out... But why think long term if you've got a roof over your head and a baby to love? And when that baby gets older and more challenging, you can always have another. Of course, the older ones will get less attention and probably feel resentful, and become even more difficult.... It's really not hard to see the cycle.

Molly, i agree. I would be most disappointed if DS had children out of wedlock but hopefully he sees marriage as the norm and will grow up with similar ethics as his parents. If we ever had a daughter I would hope she would continue to work as well as having children as its important to have a fallback should the worst happen as insurance only covers so much.

Whilst the CSA probably does need stricter reforms it has to work both ways, why should it only by the NRP who is expected to financially assist, the PWC should also be working and providing. Given the amount of childcare now available and help with costs there is no reason not to work and support any children that they have.

Sadly as labour threw so much money at those having children without any thought as to how they would support them, many dont even give finances a thought before having a child. On here alone the many believe its a right to have a child even if you cant afford it or will give pointers to the ideal benefit scenario etc.

Women are adults too so make their own choices re getting pregnant, its not fair to just blame the man when the woman has so much more control over the situation.

Nice to see a lot of you putting the blame on the women

I share the blame equally between the two corlan

And you say Unfortunately, most of these men don't have 'I'm a feckless idiot' tattooed on their foreheads. (If we could bring in a law to do that - I'm all for it!)

But if people were more careful and not so quick to breed with people without being in a long established relationship of at least a few years, they wouldn't need a tattoo because they'd find out what a twat they're with before pissing on a stick.

But if people were more careful and not so quick to breed with people without being in a long established relationship of at least a few years, they wouldn't need a tattoo because they'd find out what a twat they're with before pissing on a stick

absolutely spot on, and maybe then there would be less damaged children about

no one forces women to breed with these lowlifes, they do it with their own free will. But then you even get wallies on here congratulating people who are pregnant with someone they barely know when really they should be crying for the poor little soul being dragged into such a sad situation

Happymumofone- increased benefits has mearly raised the living standards for the children, the birth rate is dropping. It wasn't Labours policy, it came from the EU, any potential government has to follow EU law, to end child poverty. Before the benefits were in place, the same sort of people had children, the children (and society) just suffered more for it.

but I think the benefits do make it easier to have this lifestyle. The bloke can walk off and go and set up home with someone else. he knows that the state will support his previous partner's offspring.

Also I agree with the lack of employment opportunities. Our benefits culture does offer a way out. I used to work with excluded students. They often came from backgrounds with broken homes, dad with someone else. It was hard for them.

However some of the girls did end up pregnant at 16. The only way for them to be housed is to do this. they have no earning power and have not been able to do well at school (whether lack of ability or not trying to work is debatable).

If the benefits are removed the girls wouldn't behave any differently, though. They might stay living at home with DV etc, but it certainly wouldn't help to break the cycle. Workhouses and mother and baby units cost more to run than the welfare bill. More judgement and action was needed against absent fathers at the begining rather than the launderies for unmarried mothers etc being in opperation.

I think it may help a bit especially if they parents of the young people had to have them living at home with them.

I think the kids use it as a way to get away from home.

I wouldn't want the workhouse or laundries either with nuns who were meant to be christians treating the girls appallingly but don't you think numbers of teenage pregnancies have risen because of our benefit system.

Not all of the parents are young, though. If the kids are getting pregnant to leave home, by making them stay all you are doing is inflicting the same upbringing onto another generation. Teenage births are falling, the pregnancies is rising but many are having terminations.

If that family hasn't given the girl a sense of self worth and a work ethic, leaving her in it isn't going tohelp anyone.

The failing families that i see (as a CP SW) wouldn't be helped by alackof benefits, they would just have the children shoplift etc. Most of the parents who have lots of children never thought about the finances,or what benefits would be in place. When we go in there isn't adequete clothing or bedding etc. Giving less would just bring back street urchins.

From a finacial point of view i would like the companies who aren't being asked to pay their tax, to be chased. If we are looking at this problem from a cost point of view and not a quality of life for those involved, POV.

Birdsgottafly sorry don't agree when my ex done bunk and I asked for some assistance he said

You know the goverment will give you money for the boy so what you asking me for

That is the attitude that sadly is live and kicking

And as a fellow ss worker you should know more benafits DO NOT equal better standared of living for children

I know plenty who on top of their benefits they get a top up form ss and the children are still dirty, have hardly any clothing and eat SAMs every day bargain box £1.20 more money means their just able to buy more fags, more drink

I can safely say if you gave a feckless parents 1k more a week the kids would be in non better situation than if their on £50 a week