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.

Well said Cogito.

I don't understand the mindset of these men or women but I'd be perfectly happy to limit state support to a set number of children. I'd be even happier to enforce sterilisation but what might be the solution to the problem would be to have a contraceptive clinic open and available where people sign on. No proof of contraception, no money. Sadly the male injectable contraceptive has yet to be invented so the onus would be on the women but it would be a very good start.

Do we actually know that there are more teenage pregnancies now than there were before Labour got in? Only I seem to remember quite a lot in the mid 90s, and similar blame gaming then. Wikipedia seems to suggest that the number of teenage pregnancies has actually fallen in the noughties, but I know that's not a reliable source. I assume the people who are suggesting the benefits system are responsible have some solid evidence for this, so I'd be interested to see it.

And at what point do taxpayers get to say "enough already"?

It ought to be a criminal offence to go around shagging and impregnating woman after woman after woman.

The sort of 'man' who fathers 7+ kids with as many women isn't likely to be the type to hold down a good job and have the ability (or will) to pay for what he's done.

No doubt people will say 'it's the kids who will suffer' if the taxpayer was to stop funding this sort of feckless lifestyle, but when it comes down to it if the money wasn't available the women who enable the feckless men's behaviour might think twice...

ShellyBoobs

"It ought to be a criminal offence to go around shagging and impregnating woman after woman after woman."

unless you are prpared for the inverse to be true, that has to be one of the silliest posts ever

Tax payers seem to be the least catered to part of society. Just pay up & shut up, no breaks, no benefits and generally an MP who doesn't think that tax payers have problems.

No voice basically.

Alouisee, DH and I are both taxpayers, and we'll get child benefit when DBump is born. I think you mean taxpayers with higher incomes, or do you not think people count as taxpayers if they aren't higher rate?

unless you are prpared for the inverse to be true...

The inverse?

To not impregnate woman after woman?

I don't understand your point.

To have a rant about the subject and make the rhetorical statement that I think it should be a crime, doesn't mean I actually think there should be a bill passed to outlaw feckless behaviour, you know.

Bloody hell FlangelinaBallerina, talk about putting words in my mouth. I said nothing of the sort!

I think some people do make mistakes though and learn from them. My brother had a brief relationship with a woman which ended in pregnancy and she has made it difficult as hell for him to have any sort of relationship with the child and us for that matter and he has always paid maintenance but the situation has always remained the same even into adulthood because the child has been told allsorts about him and us which isn't true :( My brother remarried and has three children with his wife and they have been together for nearly 20 years now. I don't think you should judge everyone, there are two sides to every story.

You said that taxpayers get no benefits, which is wrong. That isn't putting words into your mouth. Asking you whether you had a particular reason for saying something so obviously incorrect isn't putting words into your mouth, either. You post a lot about benefits and tax issues, so it's hard to believe it's simply ignorance that would make you write that taxpayers don't get benefits. I can't believe you didn't know that lots of taxpayers get child benefit.

With that in mind, why did you write it?

surely taxpayers pay maintenance to their children as well

I spoke to DH when he got back this afternoon. Told him I didn't feel comfortable about lying to the girlfriend, and that I'd rather not see him anyway. Turns out the girlfriend knows everything about his other kids, divorce not being final etc. I don't know why on earth she seems to think it'll be different for her FGS, he's done it so many times before. Also don't know how she can be with a man who has nothing to do with his other children and doesn't provide for them at all. I mean really? I suppose I shouldn't be surprised really, BIL's second wife (who he's still not divorced from) was the OW when he was with his first wife and encouraged him not to see his other kids when they were together.

Just wanted to add that I know not all fathers are feckless wastes of space. My DH had a 2.5 year old dd when I met him. He saw her several times a week and she stayed at the weekend plus he always paid maintenance. Until she was 8 when she moved in with us, (didn't stop his ex from still demanding maintenance though ). She's now 19 still lives at home and has a great relationship with her sisters (my dds).

Women think it's going to be ok for them because these men are sociopaths i.e. very good liars. I actually emailed my ex's 'other woman' to tell her that he was an emotionally abusive fucker who had dumped me when I was pregnant to go off with her, and she is still with him regardless because she has no self esteem. That's probably similar in all women who get involved with these men, they think they can't do any better (as many of the psycho neonazi eugenics posters here prove, as women who have difficult lives are treated as 'scum' basically by our culture).

It has been the case throughout history that men have been able to prey on poorer women e.g. rich people getting servants pregnant and sacking them for 'immorality', not caring what happens to the child, which was commonplace in Victorian times etc. Obviously there are several posters here who would like a return to that level of misogynistic culture, but luckily in real life they are a tiny minority who look extremely foolish with their forced sterilisation ideals (now illegal under international law, because all governments recognise that it is unjust and evil). It also has nothing to do with being married before conception as it's extremely easy to get a divorce now anyway. The only way to change it is to give women proper options (e.g. guaranteed permanent jobs after finishing education [for everyone obvs, not just women], childcare, acknowledgement of the genuine and economically valid labour done by single mothers and carers) and support (e.g. proper therapy on NHS to recover from childhood trauma, not just CBT and drugs when people complain of depression), rather than attacking them- it's going to be a long time before that happens though since there are still such backward attitudes openly kicking around!