Fair for him to oppose paying for dc in this context? (Please be kind)

[biwncs]

before I start I want to say I’ve NC as I am embarrassed by this and I know I do NOT smell of roses here. Please don’t post if it’s just to sling mud at me, i know I haven’t been perfect by a long way.

when I was 37 I panicked about wanting dc and my partner at the time was 40. He had pushed it back a year already but in fairness to him we hadn’t been together long, only two years. He would often make comments about wanting dc and where we would take them, what schools theyd go to etc. I came off the pill and didn’t say and although we also used condoms (we always have, we prefer it), I became pregnant. He was conflicted at the start but after a couple of weeks said it was up to me and he would support me either way. I asked if he wanted a termination a few times and he said no. So we carried on. Half way through the pregnancy I felt I had to tell him I had come off the pill. It was a horrible conversation understandably but we moved past it. A year or so later we broke up, since then my ex has refused to pay a penny and hasn’t spent any time with dc. He has no other kids and as far as I know not with anyone else. He tells me he shouldn’t have to pay as I made him have a dc. I now feel so conflicted about maintenance? I feel he was giving me all the signs he wanted us to have dc and I did openly discuss termination and he said no. But ultimately he’s right I came off the pill and didn’t say. I am so confused/sad as to what to do and what’s right. He doesn’t seem interested in dc either and i feel that’s on me, though I never ever had him down as someone who would abandon his child. I just don’t know what to do and feel he has a point regarding finance.

@NeverDropYourMooncup Dear God, what a horrible comment. You are seriously basing your judgment on what this woman says when she clearly has no morals! No one forced her to stay with him, even if this is true. Suggesting he deserved this is disgusting.

So many technicalities and semantics in this.

It would only be seen as sexual assault if he argues he was actively manipulated into having sex however he clearly consented to the act of having sex, and was not physically harmed by it. To be clear - the act itself is not defined by 'only if you are actually on the pill', it's only defined insofar as the act itself.

In this case, lying by omission (i.e having come off the pill and not being clear about it) isn't a crime, it's a moral responsibility that is a personal choice.

Google essentially says, the law on unwanted fatherhood is clear: If you play, you pay. Both parties are consenting to taking the risk of a pregnancy by engaging in the act.

ThatPirateLady

I think that it falls under 'sex by deception'

Oh, well. I'm sure I'll manage to live with the horror.

If you're not a bloke yourself, can I assume that you'll utterly believe a man when he tells you that he doesn't pay a penny towards his ex because she tricked him into getting her pregnant, then?

Not normally but when the woman in question is openly admitting that she tricked him, I feel no sympathy towards her and a lot more towards him. I’d certainly never suggest that he deserved it, especially based on her own account of what happened.

I agree with this. I just don’t think going from 2 forms of contraception to one form of contraception is that big a deal. He was
still protected, but all contraception can fail - in any combination. A poster above said condom+pill has a 1% failure rate - that still seems quite high! I definitely don’t think it’s sexual assault. It’s going from “protected sex” to “protected sex”.

He wanted her to keep the baby. He is just now trying to wriggle out the financial obligations when the relationship broke down, to spite her.

People have some funny opinions but legally they don’t matter at all. Those posters who think a judge wouldn’t grant CMS based on “your honour, the condom failed, but I thought she was also on the pill but she wasn’t!” are just making things up to suit their sense of outrage. CMS would be granted and OP should pursue it for her childs sake.

I think you should cut ties completely and get on with your life as a family of 2. It doesn't sound like he wants to be involved and he really shouldn't have to be.

@GrasstrackGirl

Here you go a prime example

Why not? He’s got a kid, an actual human being!

It may be harsh but it is still true. Op made the choice to con this man knowing that he didn’t want a child. Op made this decision without his knowledge, so Op went into this knowing her child may never have a present father. This was a conscious decision on her part. How can you even defend the op and her actions? Are you surprised this man wants nothing to do with her? Unfortunately, this also affects the child. It’s terribly sad for them and they are the main one who will be affected by this. I can’t imagine being forced to be a mother against my will. It’s the same thing. Op will have to live with the consequences of her actions and her child’s sadness will serve as a reminder of her selfishness.

And the sad child? Just a useful tool to upset the mother forever? Not worth being respected in their own right?

I agree.

People are being way too dramatic about this. She made noises about wanting a child. He made her think it wasn’t out of the realms of possibility. She was running out of time at 37 to have a child and they’d been together 2 years already. If he didn’t want one he should have left her. Not carried on sleeping with her. He was 40 ffs. Old enough to know not to piss about dating a 37 year old longing for a baby if they weren’t on the same page. Frankly I think he was more immoral to have carried on the relationship. It’s not fair to rob women of childbearing years. Not fair at all.
@biwncs Op ignore all these handwringers. If you want to claim maintenance do so. Your child is entitled. He sounds horrible so with that in mind the only reason I perhaps wouldn’t claim would be to further sever ties with this crap man and crap father.

Fully agreed with @Bobsyouruncleand

What if men said their wallet, their choice..?
It would certainly make some women think twice before they con men into becoming fathers against their will.

Currently the law does not favour men but those who believe women should be allowed abortions should also believe men should have the option to 'financially abort' their children.
After all women who do not want to become pregnant have a multitude of options available to them so pregnancy is very much preventable.
Yet when we have unwanted pregnancies we are not told to 'suck it up' like men are. Instead we fight for the right to abort. Men should be given similar (financial) rights.

The kid doesn't deserve it, but I'm not particularly sympathetic to either adult in this probably hypothetical to stir up posters situation.

One's found it a bit late to be upset that she needs to enlist CMS to get the kid what they are legally entitled to receive, the other's found that lying about wanting children can backfire.

Why? Women aren’t given the choice of abortion out of some kindness - it’s because they’re the ones who carry the baby, and deal with the associated pregnancy and birth issues.

Trying to even that out by giving men financial control is the opposite of fairness.

Of course the child is not a tool. Unfortunately, the child will suffer as a consequence of the Op’s actions. As I said in a previous post, Op should definitely file for cms, the child deserves to be financially supported.

Why would the child suffer though?

A lot of children with an absent parent experience negative feelings and sadness about the situation. The child may feel rejected or abandoned. This may not be the case for Op’s child but this is the case in many situations.

Why would the kid have an absent parent though?

The dad in this situation doesn’t want to be involved.

So if he chooses not to see the kid he created?

Yes, he has made the choice not to be involved as Op says in her first post he isn’t interested and doesn’t see the child.. His choice is as a result of being tricked into having a child he didn’t want to be a parent to. In an ideal world, he would put this aside and bring up a child that is his. I’m not quite sure what your angle is with your responses. If you think that the Op is correct in what she did, then you are delusional. You may not agree with the fathers decision, but many would understand it. The child’s suffering is fundamentally down to the Op being deceitful and selfish.

What is it if it's not a kindness? If a woman does not wish to get pregnant there are several methods of contraception.
None are 100% effective so why can't women abstain or get sterilised if they really don't want to get pregnant? After all those are the same options you said men have.

No. The child’s suffering is due to the father refusing to see his own kid. What you’re doing here is saying the kid deserves to be punished for their mother’s actions. Which isn’t true, or fair.