Should a father be able to disclaim a child if he doesn't want it?

ibarelycare

My friend has got a girl pregnant. Contraception failed. They're not in a relationship, they only slept together a few times. Girl told him she was pregnant, friend does not want her to have the baby but girl won't have an abortion.

This leads to my question. If necessary precautions against pregnancy were made, yet failed, and if the man is totally against the woman having the baby, is it fair that he should have to take on the responsibilities of being a father, and pay child support?

This is something I've been thinking about for the last few days since I found out. If no contraception had been used I would have said straight away that the man should own up and take responsibility, but since he 100% didn't, and still doesn't, want the baby, yet the choice has been taken out of his hands completely, I wonder whether he really should have to.

Mr.Crinklewood

He should take responsibility for his actions.

lazygal

If you're having sex, a baby is a potential outcome. A woman in Ireland without the means to procure a termination abroad has no choice but to have the child. Surely the same should go for men in equality terms?

ntlbell

Mr.Crinklewood wrote: »

He should take responsibility for his actions.

This is fair if he also has a decision in the abortion process but he doesn't.

You can't have the butter and the money for it.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

yes, but he should have to fly to england to do it

ibarelycare

lazygal wrote: »

If you're having sex, a baby is a potential outcome. A woman in Ireland without the means to procure a termination abroad has no choice but to have the child. Surely the same should go for men in equality terms?

FWIW they're not in Ireland, they live in a country where abortion is legal.

slarkin123

No he should still be responsible for the child. It takes 2 people to make a pregnancy, one shouldn't be able to walk away just because she won't have an abortion. Deciding to have an abortion is a very hard decision to make and a lot of people just wouldn't be able to handle it. There's enough dead beat dads out there without giving more a free pass. Why should one person be responsible for raising a child when it took 2 to make him/her? Accidents happen and everyone in the situation needs to face up to their responsibility whether they like it or not.

enda1

Yes of course he should. Of course this would mean he'd have no visitation rights and no possibility to ever raise a claim of paternity at any future stage.

On a simpler note however, can't he just say now that it's not his?

biko

I know it's easy to say but if he's not ready for a child the there is just one way to make absolutely sure, not having sex in the first place.
Or backdoor, if she'll agree.

But in this case, he was there and now he needs to man up.

haminka

Legally and morally he is responsible for the baby.
It takes two to tango and contraception can fail. If he wanted to be 100% sure he wouldn't be fathering a baby he should have gotten a snip or stuck his wingilingy into a bee hive instead.
It's his baby and his responsibility now, even if he doesn't want to do anything with the woman. The notion that if the man doesn't want a baby and relied on contraception which can and sometimes will fail is not responsible for the baby's upbringing now is ridiculous.

Sindri

Like.... leave them at the lost and found? Or in a pillow case beside the wheelie bin?

Dyr

Mr.Crinklewood wrote: »

He should take responsibility for his actions.

Unless he was responsible for manufacture of the contraception involved that's a load of bollix.

haminka

ibarelycare wrote: »

FWIW they're not in Ireland, they live in a country where abortion is legal.

While I'm pro abortion I completely understand if the woman decides not to go for it. It is not about spiting the man, at the end of the day she will be a single mum and that's not an easy position.
There are potential mental and physical consequences of an abortion /it could result in complications and potential infertility for a certain % of women/ that some women simply don't want to risk. Only a wimp and moron would force a woman to get the abortion because he doesn't want the responsibility. You don't want kids, get your balls cut off.

Cee-Jay-Cee

I dont think its right that he should get to walk away and so he should take some responsibility but on the other hand what sort of a father is he going to be if he doesnt or never wanted the child.

She's probably better off without him, take nothing from him and cut all contact and never allow him access to the child. If he is wrecked with guilt in later life then tough shít, that was the choice he made.

KittyeeTrix

Sindri wrote: »

Like.... leave them at the lost and found? Or in a pillow case beside the wheelie bin?

That kinda isn't funny..............like, at all:(:confused:

ibarelycare

enda1 wrote: »

Yes of course he should. Of course this would mean he'd have no visitation rights and no possibility to ever raise a claim of paternity at any future stage.

On a simpler note however, can't he just say now that it's not his?

Well he's asked for a paternity test as early as possible.

haminka wrote: »

While I'm pro abortion I completely understand if the woman decides not to go for it. It is not about spiting the man, at the end of the day she will be a single mum and that's not an easy position.
There are potential mental and physical consequences of an abortion /it could result in complications and potential infertility for a certain % of women/ that some women simply don't want to risk. Only a wimp and moron would force a woman to get the abortion because he doesn't want the responsibility. You don't want kids, get your balls cut off.

Oh I completely agree. Although I think abortion should be discussed by both parties, the final decision should lie with the woman. He'd never try and force her to have an abortion. He asked her would she have one, she said no. He asked was she sure, she said yes. That was the end of that.

silly

Bambi wrote: »

Unless he was responsible for manufacture of the contraception involved that's a load of bollix.

everyone knows that no contraception is 100% except of course abstinence.
He had sex with her. Now there is a baby on the way thats his.
So, I would think that he should take responsibilty for his actions.

expecting someone to abort a child is alot more damaging than expecting someone to support a child.

Dravokivich

I'd say no, but the harsh reality of it is, you can't force anybody to be someone they are not.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

silly wrote: »

everyone knows that no contraception is 100% except of course abstinence.
He had sex with her. Now there is a baby on the way thats his.
So, I would think that he should take responsibilty for his actions.

rofl
if a man said that about a woman who wanted an abortion there'd be sheer bloody murder

smash

it's pretty damaging to children growing up knowing they weren't wanted. Going by your friends attitude I feel the child would be better off without him in their life. It's very sad actually.

ibarelycare

smash wrote: »

it's pretty damaging to children growing up knowing they weren't wanted. Going by your friends attitude I feel the child would be better off without him in their life. It's very sad actually.

It is sad however it's very early days and I still think he's in shock. He's not exactly on great terms with the girl, which makes things a lot harder. Apparently she's a bit of a psycho (he says this only came to light after sleeping with her) and if it wasn't for the pregnancy he'd happily never speak to her again. Another huge issue is that they're work colleagues :pac: I do hope if the child is his that he will come around to the idea and take responsibility. He's a good guy and I think his head is just a bit messed up at the moment.

smash

ibarelycare wrote: »

Apparently she's a bit of a psycho (he says this only came to light after sleeping with her) and if it wasn't for the pregnancy he'd happily never speak to her again.

But he slept with her a few times...

At this point, the best he could hope for (and I really hate to say it) is that she has a miscarriage.

lynski

reverse the question; girl is pregnant she wants to terminate but he does not and wants to raise the child. should she have to go through with the pregnancy to give him a child he wants and she does not?
in this era it is an inequity that a man can become a father against his will while a woman can choose to terminate. unless they specifically decided to have a baby together she knew the risks also and took them with a man she barely knows.
i do not think men should be forced to become fathers against their will, she has a choice.
if they were in a relationship, living together having sex a few times a week for months on end different story, but a person he barely knows?

Dermighty

KittyeeTrix wrote: »

That kinda isn't funny..............like, at all:(:confused:

It is funny. You're too sensitive.

silly

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

rofl
if a man said that about a woman who wanted an abortion there'd be sheer bloody murder

Tbh, I don't think there would. There are cases where i think abortion is more aceptable than others, but getting pregnant because the contraception didnt work wouldnt be one of them.

Dyr

silly wrote: »

everyone knows that no contraception is 100% except of course abstinence.
He had sex with her. Now there is a baby on the way thats his.
So, I would think that he should take responsibilty for his actions.

expecting someone to abort a child is alot more damaging than expecting someone to support a child.

If I take part in a boxing match and the other lad winds up cabbaged then it's not my responsibility to be changing his nappies for the rest of his natural. We both understood the risks when we participated in the boxing match.

She understood the risk and the consequences, as she does now. She has a choice, and she made it but so does he and he's entitled to make that choice.

tbh if the shoe was on the other foot and yer man was demanding that she have the baby against her wishes he'd be getting short shrift

smash

lynski wrote: »

reverse the question; girl is pregnant she wants to terminate but he does not and wants to raise the child. should she have to go through with the pregnancy to give him a child he wants and she does not?

You can't reverse it like that. It's her body, why should she have to do that to her body if she doesn't want to?

silly

Bambi wrote: »

If I take part in a boxing match and the other lad winds up cabbaged then it's not my responsibility to be changing his nappies for the rest of his natural. We both understood the risks when we participated in the boxing match.

eh? That is a completely different situation!?? Where does a boxing match come into it?

ibarelycare

smash wrote: »

But he slept with her a few times...

At this point, the best he could hope for (and I really hate to say it) is that she has a miscarriage.

He slept with her twice, he SAYS the psycho-ness only came to light after all the sexing

Ugh that is a horrible thing to say, and my boyfriend said it too, but I know it probably would be a relief to him

Turtyturd

Sindri wrote: »

Like.... leave them at the lost and found? Or in a pillow case beside the wheelie bin?

No thanks yet.....keep trying though.

Nothingbetter2d

ibarelycare wrote: »

My friend has got a girl pregnant. Contraception failed. They're not in a relationship, they only slept together a few times. Girl told him she was pregnant, friend does not want her to have the baby but girl won't have an abortion.

This leads to my question. If necessary precautions against pregnancy were made, yet failed, and if the man is totally against the woman having the baby, is it fair that he should have to take on the responsibilities of being a father, and pay child support?

This is something I've been thinking about for the last few days since I found out. If no contraception had been used I would have said straight away that the man should own up and take responsibility, but since he 100% didn't, and still doesn't, want the baby, yet the choice has been taken out of his hands completely, I wonder whether he really should have to.

provided you can PROOVE he is the father by dna test he cannot run from his legal responsiblities (thus he will by law be required to pay maintenance)

as for playing an active role in the child's upbringing beyond financial support he doesn't have to if he doesnt want to.

NO contraception is 100% safe.... it even says it on the box. if you par-take in sexual intercourse you gotta be prepared to deal with the consequences.

haminka

Bambi wrote: »

She understood the risk and the consequences, as she does now.
tbh if the shoe was on the other foot and yer man was demanding that she have the baby against her wishes he'd be getting short shrift

Well, he had a choice as well and he decided to have sex with her so its his consequences as well. If yer man was demanding to have the baby against the wishes and was ready to bring the child up on his own, I wouldn't have a problem with it. How often does this happen though?
They are two adult people who had an intercourse and the result is a baby. Both of them should take their share of responsibility. This discussion should be about the baby and not about two immature morons.

Bipolar Joe

Dude should be able to disclaim it, yes. They both knew that contraception could fail, but they went at it any way. You don't use a rubber if you want a kid. Now he's basically trapped. Uncool.

lynski

smash wrote: »

You can't reverse it like that. It's her body, why should she have to do that to her body if she doesn't want to?

i meant to say putting aside the pregnancy, looking at the lifelong picture, a man cannot force a woman to become a parent, but a woman can a man, that is not an equitable situation.
yes they made a decision to have sex, they both knew the risks, and she has an opportunity to not become a parent, she is choosing to, why is he denied this opportunity?

eviltwin

Men can and so disclaim their children all the time.

Napper Hawkins

It's been pretty much said already, but why is it that a woman can walk away if she chooses but a man can't?

eviltwin

lynski wrote: »

i meant to say putting aside the pregnancy, looking at the lifelong picture, a man cannot force a woman to become a parent, but a woman can a man, that is not an equitable situation.
yes they made a decision to have sex, they both knew the risks, and she has an opportunity to not become a parent, she is choosing to, why is he denied this opportunity?

So what do you suggest? Forced abortion?

As I said above if he wants nothing to do with the child he can walk away but that says a lot about the kind of 'man' he is. I think as well in time when he grows up a bit he might regret turning his back on his own flesh and blood.

Drumpot

smash wrote: »

You can't reverse it like that. It's her body, why should she have to do that to her body if she doesn't want to?

She took the same risk he did and got pregnant. If a woman doesn't want a child because it doesn't suit her lifestyle she's more of a deadbeat mother then a deadbeat father who washes himself of his responsibilities.

I'm not totally against abortion in certain circumstances but taking responsibility for your own actions works both ways. There are plenty of people who can't have children and would kill to adopt. There are also plenty of fathes who would not want an abortion that the woman decides.

It's double standards to hold a man at one level and give a woman a "it's her body" free pass. If its not mediclally dangerous and it's not rape (or something like that) I have little sympathy for somebody who aborts due to a lifestyle choice. It's lazy, irresponsible, selfish and the actions of somebody who shouldn't be having sex if they don't understand what might happen if contraception fails. If you are that ignorant and want sex, have your tubes cut so you can't make the same mistake again!

Perhaps i feel this way because I'm adopted and wouldn't be around had my biological mother shown me the same disregard that some people seem to think is ok.

Dyr

haminka wrote: »

Well, he had a choice as well and he decided to have sex with her so its his consequences as well. If yer man was demanding to have the baby against the wishes and was ready to bring the child up on his own, I wouldn't have a problem with it. How often does this happen though?
They are two adult people who had an intercourse and the result is a baby. Both of them should take their share of responsibility. This discussion should be about the baby and not about two immature morons.

The consequence is that she's pregnant.. not him, she's making the decision to have a baby, not him. So no, it's not his responsibility

nice to see the equality bullsh** going out the window when it's Oprah time.

ziggy23

I really don't understand the mentality of someone who doesnt wanna know their kid:(

LittleBook

ibarelycare wrote: »

is it fair that he should have to take on the responsibilities of being a father, and pay child support?

Two different things.

Yes, he has to take on the responsibility of paying child support, the child deserves that much, even if the mother doesn't.

No, he doesn't have to take on the responsibility of being a father, that is between him and the child and that is what he will have to think about, regardless of his feelings towards the mother.

Napper Hawkins

ziggy23 wrote: »

I really don't understand the mentality of someone who doesnt wanna know their kid:(

Some people aren't as gooey eyed about kids as some others are. Simple as.

eviltwin

LittleBook wrote: »

Two different things.

Yes, he has take on the responsibility of paying child support, the child deserves that much, even if the mother doesn't.

No, he doesn't have to take on the responsibility of being a father, that is between him and the child and that is what he will have to think about, regardless of his feelings towards the mother.

Okay that I agree with. You can't force someone to play parent. Its not good for the child either and they would probably be better off without that person.

But parents should be financially responsible for their offspring. I don't want some man or woman getting off the hook and my taxes having to pick up the tab.

ziggy23

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Some people aren't as gooey eyed about kids as some others are. Simple as.

The situation I'm thininking of the guy has 2 kids already but doesn't want to know his third one. Has never met this child so maybe it's easier to disclaim if you don't know the child.

Drumpot

Bambi wrote: »

The consequence is that she's pregnant.. not him, she's making the decision to have a baby, not him. So no, it's not his responsibility

nice to see the equality bullsh** going out the window when it's Oprah time.

That is a pile of steaming ****e!

If you sleep with somebody you are taking a risk of her getting pregnant. I hope that's a troll post because this view is so stupid it's not funny. Don't even know where to begin!

I'm a man by the way (a real one, who takes responsibilities for my actions, not the deadbeat one would subscribe to this kind of attitude)

eviltwin

ziggy23 wrote: »

The situation I'm thininking of the guy has 2 kids already but doesn't want to know his third one. Has never met this child so maybe it's easier to disclaim if you don't know the child.

Are you for real? He already has two kids?? Inexcusable then. Is this woman the mother of his other two?

Crooked Jack

KittyeeTrix wrote: »

That kinda isn't funny..............like, at all:(:confused:

Yes it is. Give over.

haminka

Bambi wrote: »

The consequence is that she's pregnant.. not him, she's making the decision to have a baby, not him. So no, it's not his responsibility

nice to see the equality bullsh** going out the window when it's Oprah time.

I don't watch Oprah so you might want to explain to me what you meant.
I am all for equality, including parenting, i.e. if the man wants to have the baby while the woman doesn't, they should agree on her contributing to the upkeep and him bringing the baby up, have it sorted out through courts.
As for the abortion - there are no risks associated with it for the man. For the woman it can mean potential complications including infertility and this is only talking about the physical side of things. I wonder what would happen if the men who are pushing women to have an abortion were told no probs, but we will remove one of your testicles while she is getting the foetus scraped out of her uterus just to equalize the chances of future procreation.
She is making the decision to keep the baby, he made a decision on creating by sleeping with her. No contraception is 100%, you sleep with a woman, you can potentially become a father. If you do, carry the consequences. The same for woman.
As the OP says, the guy apparently doesn't even like the woman so much, yet he had sex with her. WTF? Every sexual intercourse can result in a potential pregnancy, if you don't know it and are not ready to carry the consequences, go and feck the sheep.

smash

Drumpot wrote: »

It's double standards to hold a man at one level and give a woman a "it's her body" free pass.

It's not a free pass but lets face it, for the woman it's totally different and if people don't understand it then there's something wrong. If she didn't want the baby and he did, then why should she be forced to endure 9 months of it and be possibly left with stretch marks and/or medical conditions as a result?

It's easy for a man because really we don't have to do anything after the baby has been conceived.

Legally should be be forced to play a father role and maintenance? Well not if he doesn't want to. But for the sake of his child, should he take responsibility for what has happened? That's a moral question and will say a lot about the person in how they answer it.

ziggy23

eviltwin wrote: »

Are you for real? He already has two kids?? Inexcusable then. Is this woman the mother of his other two?

3 kids for 3 different women:rolleyes: His family have just found out about the 3rd child and are disgusted with him can't believe his behaviour either.

ash23

At the end of the day the only obligation a man has to a child is financial. He never will be forced to see the child. He can set up a direct debit and that is his legal duty done. It is all the law requires of him.

Morally is a totally different matter.