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.

The same way every crime is investigated. Evidence. Probability. Like, if it's been discussed via text, for example. Obviously, prosecution rates will be low, but some will go through. How does anyone prove a condom was removed during sex without the knowledge of the other person?

That’s stealthing, which is already a crime.

As is sex by deception

That's a different thing. That's like how you can be prosecuted for purposely infecting someone with HIV without their knowledge. You are harming their body. But that's not what we're talking about. In the OP's situation, she didn't harm him physically. But what she did do is create life-long implications for the man. Which is also what happens when men intentionally gets a woman pregnant against her knowledge, along with causing harm to her body.

I know. I asked how do you prove it?

Except the difference is the man is then deciding what happens to someone else’s body. And you can’t say that he didn’t know there was the potential for life-long implications of a baby when he had sex, because he did.

I don’t know. This is your suggestion.

But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the life-long implications and her actions. Even women having sex with condoms accept there is still a chance of pregnancy, but you will agree it is still wrong for a man to intentionally impregnate her, not just because it affects her body.

But it’s worse for a woman, because of the biological complications. Which is why they’re not comparable.

Just because it's not physiologically the same, doesn't mean the life-long implications aren't comparable. In both scenarios, people become parents against their will.

But I know you won't agree. It is clear that you think that it doesn't matter how he became a father, because it might have happened anyway, so he has nothing to be upset about.

I didn’t say he didn’t have a right to be upset. It’s a horrible way to bring a life into the world.

But it’s still not comparable, because of the biological differences between getting pregnant, and getting someone else pregnant.

The most worrying this on this thread is the number of people who seem to find it hard to believe that someone can get pregnant while using condoms (unless they have somehow tampered with them). Even using them perfectly they are only 98% effective.

OP you should not have lied, but anyone who has sex must accept that there is always a chance of pregnancy - even the combination of pill and condom is not 100% effective. Whether they want it or not, once it happens the responsibility continues.. You asked about termination and he said no. So CMS, now - no other option. You can't force contact, but if you need financial support then get it. It's the child who will ultimately suffer if you don't.

Nobody on the thread seems to 'find it hard to believe that someone can get pregnant while using condoms'. Try to do better with your close reading skills.

We DO find it hard to believe that OP almost immediately became pregnant while using condoms after secretly going off the pill. The fact that she refused to respond to any queries as to whether or not her deception extended to tampering with condoms made this more suspicious.

Child support is for the existing child. Each of your behaviours doesn't come into it. He led you to believe he wanted children. You didn't communicate you came off the pill. Live with the guilt and put your child first. Go to CMS and put in a claim.

The most worrying this on this thread is the number of people who seem to find it hard to believe that someone can get pregnant while using condoms (unless they have somehow tampered with them). Even using them perfectly they are only 98% effective.

I have a postgraduate qualification in public health and health promotion, and an interest in research on contraception effectiveness. This is WHY I find it surprising that someone would get pregnant with no warning, while using condoms correctly. The failure rate of up to 2% from "perfect use" is, as far as I can ascertain, largely due to breakage or slipping off. Though note that nearly all research on contraceptive effectiveness is based on self-reported use; they don't generally go round checking that participants are using the condoms correctly, so take that "perfect use" with a pinch of salt as it cannot be verified in the way that IUD or contraceptive implant use can. Sperm cannot get through an intact condom, and research analysing condoms suggests "micro tears" which escape notice in use are vanishingly rare. A potential condom failure from a tear or slipping off would be something you'd usually notice happening and then would, presumably, seek emergency contraception for. Pregnancies from "perfect" condom use are not mysteries like the Virgin Birth. Therefore it is entirely reasonable to ask how someone became pregnant while using condoms.

I know on a thread as contentious as this one this isn't the most important point to some but it's just heartbreaking that an adult can walk away from a child after developing an emotional bond as a parent and just refuse his obligations-I'm in no way justifying the actions of the mother here but what's done is done no going back in time

I'm really surprised at some of the responses on this thread. Every sexual encounter carries a risk of pregnancy. And CM is for the child, not the mother. Regardless of the deception involved in the conception process, the child is here, the man is his father, and he should pay maintenance.

And every time you get into a car, you run the risk of crashing.

Getting into a car not knowing that someone has purposely cut the brakes presents an entirely different risk profile that you can’t access accurately.

^assess, not access.

I'm really surprised at some of the responses on this thread. Every sexual encounter carries a risk of pregnancy.
It does but consent should be freely given and informed.

If either party deliberately witholds information that would likely affect whether the other person would agree to sex then they're being immoral.

The standard Mumsnet line too often seems to be that men are either willing to become fathers, or they abstain, or they should have a vasectomy.
Aka live a sexless life throughout adulthood until you're happy to have a baby, only have sex if you're happy for a baby to arrive in 9 months, or you're ready to decide you don't want any children and have surgery to prevent it.

I'm really surprised at some of the responses on this thread. Every sexual encounter carries a risk of pregnancy.

Well you could also argue that every sexual encounter carries a risk of catching an STI too. Does that make it ok for someone to hide the fact they have HIV or herpes from their parent? By your logic, @YRGAM, if you consent to sex, you consent to the risk of an STI, so your partner cannot be held responsible for misrepresenting the size of that risk to you.

It's a very silly logic.

*Partner, not parent

Or, how about men taking a third option of the application of a little common sense?
If a man is adamant he doesn't want children, understands that sex can result in pregnancy (particularly where as appears to be the case here, he's not that great at using a condom properly) and knows his sexual partner is 'desperate' for a baby, so would be reluctant to terminate an unexpected pregnancy, he actually considers whether this woman is an appropriate sexual partner for him at this time?
There are many women out there who pose no risk of unwanted fatherhood to a man, because they can't or don't want to be mothers. Yet our vehemently anti fatherhood hero here continued to have sex with a woman who's own hopes couldn't have been further from his.
The sensible thing would have been for him to have ended the relationship and try to find a less 'risky' partner, rather than continue with the easy access to sex afforded by the relationship, then complain when his partner got what she wanted at his expense.

The sensible thing would have been for him to have ended the relationship and try to find a less 'risky' partner, rather than continue with the easy access to sex afforded by the relationship, then complain when his partner got what she wanted at his expense.

He might have done exactly that, had he been aware of the actual risk, which OP misrepresented to him. He thought they were being exceptionally careful* *by doubling up on contraception. He had no indication from OP that that was not true.

As for the correct use of condoms, you seem to conveniently ignore OP's own account that they were using condoms consistently. You are eager to blame their failure on the man, despite any indication from OP that that is what happened. There is nothing to say he didn't use them correctly and also nothing to sau OP tampered with them out of desperation. So these assumptions are equally likely.

I came off the pill and didn’t say and although we also used condoms (we always have, we prefer it)

also let me rephrase this part for you:

The sensible thing would have been for him to have ended the relationship and try to find a less 'risky' partner, rather than continue with the easy access to sex afforded by the relationship

the sensible thing for her to do would have been to leave the relationship and find a partner willing to commit to TTC or go through a sperm donor, rather than continue with the easy access to sperm and then moan about his reluctance to step up for the child he was tricked into.

works both ways....