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

silly

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

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?

a woman "walking away" is a very ignorant way of looking at it.
its hardly an easy decision for any woman to make, and what she has to go through afterward her decision is made is probably something that will stay with her forever, whereas a man doesnt even have to think about it again if he chooses not to.

eviltwin

ziggy23 wrote: »

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.

No sympathy for him then. What age is he?

Napper Hawkins

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.

Much easier I'm sure.

silly

ash23 wrote: »

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.

this may be true, but there are no reprecussions if he doesnt pay.

ziggy23

eviltwin wrote: »

No sympathy for him then. What age is he?

Late 20s so old enough to know better. The woman of his youngest child just wants his father to get to know him but he told her 'you can't make me'. Very sad situation.

ash23

silly wrote: »

this may be true, but there are no reprecussions if he doesnt pay.

There are but it's hard to get it enforced and it's also easy enough for him to have the amount reduced to a pittance especially if he has other children to maintain.
How anyone would begrudge there own child a bit of time and a decent standard of living is beyond me but it happens.

Realistically a man can easily walk away from a child in this country.
And then it all falls on the mother. Who also deals with the stigma and snobbery of her status as single parent.

And men reckon they get the sh*t end of the stick :rolleyes:

fundlebundle

silly wrote: »

ash23 wrote: »

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.

this may be true, but there are no reprecussions if he doesnt pay.

I don't understand, how can there be no repercussions if he breaks the law, surely he is taken to court.

Drumpot

smash wrote: »

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.

I never said anybody should be forced to do anything. I'm just saying its a flaw in character if you choose to have an abortion for any other reason then genuine physical or psychological concern about the woman's well being.

Is it easy for a man who doesn't want an abortion and the woman goes ahead with it?

If it just wouldn't suit you to have to gothrough 9 months of paIn for a child you don't want, don't have sex. It really is that simple. Abortion has given woman an out, but I don't believe it should be used lightly.

If you decide a baby is just not your thing for lifestyle reasons then I don't see how this is any better from a deadbeat father who does the same. The only difference I suppose is that the deadbeat dad hasn't take away the child's chance of a good life!

It is a woman's body, but if the birth isn't a real threat to her , it's no excuse other then "just didn't suit" which is an irresponsible attitude at best.

Ok. So there is no medical probs and you got pregnant by accident after choosing to sleep with somebody. You can have an abortion because it doesn't suit. Your guilt is just and you can blame nobody else but yourself. Or you can sacrifice 9 months of your life for an accident you were part of and give other parents who can't have children the opportunity to have a family, including the unborn child. I know which choice I feel is more responsible and considerate.

Mr Bloat

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.

It's stuff like this that gives Dads everywhere a bad name and makes us out to be irresponsible and thoughtless. Tell your mate to man the hell up and take responsibility for his actions and the child and not to contemplate doing anything else. His life will change, yes. So will the mum's but they both have to realise now that there is a third life between them and they have to support that one.

At the risk of sounding mushy, for what it's worth you can also tell him that once he meets the child, he'll be happy he stuck around.

Crooked Jack

silly wrote: »

a woman "walking away" is a very ignorant way of looking at it.
its hardly an easy decision for any woman to make, and what she has to go through afterward her decision is made is probably something that will stay with her forever, whereas a man doesnt even have to think about it again if he chooses not to.[/QUOTE]

Bull**** bull**** bull**** bull**** bull****! I can see both sides of this argument because it's an issue I'm quite conflicted about myself. Personally i think whether to have an abortion or not should be an equal choice both people have to make, but the blatant double standards and hypocritical attitudes from women on this topic are disgusting.

Napper Hawkins

silly wrote: »

a woman "walking away" is a very ignorant way of looking at it.
its hardly an easy decision for any woman to make, and what she has to go through afterward her decision is made is probably something that will stay with her forever, whereas a man doesnt even have to think about it again if he chooses not to.

I went through it, you know exactly what goes through my head do you?

That's amazing, are you telepathic? If I recall correctly, it wasn't a pleasant situation for anyone involved. I also remember the way I (the evil man) was treated throughout. You don't forget that **** after a few weeks I can promise you that.

Stop acting like poor, precious women are the only ones who suffer when it comes to this stuff, that's ignorance.

Nothingbetter2d

ziggy23 wrote: »

3 kids for 3 different women:rolleyes:

thats the way nature would prefer us to reproduce... results in less inbreeding and more genetic diversity

eviltwin

ziggy23 wrote: »

Late 20s so old enough to know better. The woman of his youngest child just wants his father to get to know him but he told her 'you can't make me'. Very sad situation.

Well thats pretty pathetic if you don't mind me saying..its no longer just about him. What about the other children? This is their sibling and whatever about his wishes they have a right to know their brother/sister.

DERPY HOOFS

It may not be his.Get a test done.

Bullseye1

Woman gets pregnant doesn't want child but man does he can go **** himself.

Woman gets pregnant wants child but man doesn't he can go **** himself.

ziggy23

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

thats the way nature would prefer us to reproduce... results in less inbreeding and more genetic diversity

:eek:

eviltwin wrote: »

Well thats pretty pathetic if you don't mind me saying..its no longer just about him. What about the other children? This is their sibling and whatever about his wishes they have a right to know their brother/sister.

One of the other mothers was contacted and basically told the girl to **** off and that her child was an only child as far as she is concerned:mad:

hairyprincess

I'm not going to get too into this because it's too close to the bone for me but my daughters father has completely abandoned her. The only interaction we have with him is a direct debit every month which involved me taking him to court to obtain.
Every so often I send him pictures of her but I never get a response. It's a horrible despicable thing to do to your own child and the realisation that I choose this man to have a child with is something I have to live with every day.

WindSock

I think he should just head off and not give a hand in raising the child for the first few years, then come in and out into the kids life momentarily when he feels like it and demand his rights, then piss off again for a bit in a continuous cycle to ensure constant disappointment for the kid.

Peetrik

ibarelycare wrote: »

the choice has been taken out of his hands completely

Sounds like he should have stuck to his hands.

Obvious answer anyway. Its just another one of those 'Isn't it ok to cheat if..." threads where people are looking for justification to be selfish dícks.

Crooked Jack

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Woman gets pregnant doesn't want child but man does he can go **** himself.

Woman gets pregnant wants child but man doesn't he can go **** himself.

If he'd have ****ed himself to begin with he wouldnt be in this mess.

Bullseye1

Did he agree to the child and then walk away (dispicable) or did he not want to have anything to do with it from day one and you went ahead anyway?

smash

Drumpot wrote: »

It is a woman's body, but if the birth isn't a real threat to her , it's no excuse other then "just didn't suit" which is an irresponsible attitude at best.

Ok. So there is no medical probs and you got pregnant by accident after choosing to sleep with somebody. You can have an abortion because it doesn't suit. Your guilt is just and you can blame nobody else but yourself. Or you can sacrifice 9 months of your life for an accident you were part of and give other parents who can't have children the opportunity to have a family, including the unborn child. I know which choice I feel is more responsible and considerate.

And be left permanently scarred or with medical problems. It's not just 9 months.

silly

fundlebundle wrote: »

I don't understand, how can there be no repercussions if he breaks the law, surely he is taken to court.

yeah,you would think...
i have been in and out of court for 8 yrs, trying to get some sort of support. he doesnt pay, nothing gets done. courts are a waste of time.

Tow

ibarelycare wrote: »

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

If they are in the UK it is immiterial if he does not want the child.
If he does not pay maintenance to her directly, his employer will be required to pay it from his income.

hairyprincess

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Did he agree to the child and then walk away (dispicable) or did he not want to have anything to do with it from day one and you went ahead anyway?

The child was planned.

He then walked away after seeing her sporadically for the first two years.

upandcumming

If she doesn't want him to see the baby, then he has no obligation.

But I think a father should be able to disclaim the child if he wants.

I Heart Internet

ibarelycare wrote: »

My friend has got a girl pregnant. Contraception failed. They're not in a relationship, they only slept together a few times.

Oh - just a few times, well that's alright so. He clearly has the right to abdicate his responsibility for the child................

.........no, not really. The child is his and he is responsible for it along with the mother.

dvpower

Bambi wrote: »

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

He used the contraception in the full knowledge that it isn't 100% effective. He took a calculated risk and lost.

Who does he think he is? An Anglo bondholder?

What a weird world we live in so many couples want desperately to have kids and can't and yet here's is your mate fathering another child he now dosnt want .

Obviously not all contraception is 100% failproof but if you have sex take some responsibilty .

Your mate saying she is now a psycho etc dosnt explain his behaviour at all ! Ultimately it's the child I feel sorry for not him nor her .

Zulu

If abortion is legal, and she can abort without his permission (which I assume she can) then yes he should be able to legally walk away.

If a woman is enabled to physically abort a child, there's no good reason a man shouldn't be able to legally do so.

ibarelycare

DERPY HOOFS wrote: »

It may not be his.Get a test done.

Yeah he's asked for a paternity test ASAP.

Tow wrote: »

If they are in the UK it is immiterial if he does not want the child.
If he does not pay maintenance to her directly, his employer will be required to pay it from his income.

He's not in the UK, I'd rather not say where but I'm not sure on the laws where he is.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Oh - just a few times, well that's alright so. He clearly has the right to abdicate his responsibility for the child................

.........no, not really. The child is his and he is responsible for it along with the mother.

I wasn't saying that because they only slept together a few times he should have less responsibility, I was just trying to explain the situation i.e. there was no relationship or even friendship there, it was just a couple of shags.

eviltwin

Zulu wrote: »

If abortion is legal, and she can abort without his permission (which I assume she can) then yes he should be able to legally walk away.

And are you happy to pay the lone parents on behalf of him? I'm not, I find it hard enough to support my own children let alone other people's. Making him financially responsible might make him think twice in future about having casual sex.

slarkin123

[/QUOTE] 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.[/Quote]

Thought i knew some charmers. I'd gladly sterilize the likes of him.

silly

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

I went through it, you know exactly what goes through my head do you?

That's amazing, are you telepathic? If I recall correctly, it wasn't a pleasant situation for anyone involved. I also remember the way I (the evil man) was treated throughout. You don't forget that **** after a few weeks I can promise you that.

Stop acting like poor, precious women are the only ones who suffer when it comes to this stuff, that's ignorance.

i'm talking about a situation where a man wants nothing to do with a child and wants the woman to have an abortion..i cant exactly see a man having sleepless nights over it.

Zulu

eviltwin wrote: »

And are you happy to pay the lone parents on behalf of him?

HA! that's laughable. Like the fathers are being declared at the moment.

...but that's all moot: seeing as we don't know what country they are in, how do oyu know you'd be paying for their lone parents? Since we know it's not Ireland - I won't be paying.

token101

I don't think I'd be able to walk away in good conscience knowing that it's an innocent child's that's going to be impacted. But I'd still despise her. Absolutely and totally despise her.

slarkin123

silly wrote: »

ash23 wrote: »

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.

this may be true, but there are no reprecussions if he doesnt pay.

And that's one of the big problems on this country. I know a single mam with 2 kids, she has an awful life trying to get €30 a week from him. And he's constantly letting the kids down. He went 6 months without seeing them cause he was busy with his new family but phoned every week promising to take them out for the day. She's been to court numerous times trying to get him to pay his court ordered maintenance regularly with no success.

Drumpot

smash wrote: »

And be left permanently scarred or with medical problems. It's not just 9 months.

Please give over and read my post.

I said if there are no clear medical problems. Most pregnamcys work out fine so unless doctors raise concerns you are very unlikely to suffer complications.

Thy aside, if you are worried about scarring below then it's a cosmetic concern.

I also found it amusing that you picked out one sentence of my post and ignored everything else.

I don't believe having an abortion is an easy choice to most people whatever the reason. But I do believe that the reason is what defines the kind of person they are. I do believe in choice, but joint consented choice if both consented to sex.

A woman's physical body can be scarred no less then a mans psychological pain at a woman choosing to have an abortion against his will.

I always think fathers should be forced to be responsible for their children, irrespective of their views. I wouldn't be all about forcing woman to have children they don't want, I just don't think any better of them!

token101

silly wrote: »

i'm talking about a situation where a man wants nothing to do with a child and wants the woman to have an abortion..i cant exactly see a man having sleepless nights over it.

So you think someone about to have a child inflicted upon them without any consent would be OK with that?

haminka

ibarelycare wrote: »

I wasn't saying that because they only slept together a few times he should have less responsibility, I was just trying to explain the situation i.e. there was no relationship or even friendship there, it was just a couple of shags.

Maybe it's time for your friend's parents to have this little talk about bees and flowers with their dear son. Contrary to what some adults told us when we were very young and very curious, babies are not born because mama and papa love each other very much.

Napper Hawkins

hairyprincess wrote: »

The child was planned.

He then walked away after seeing her sporadically for the first two years.

He's a prize dickhead so. **** him, the kid is infinitely better off without him.

silly

token101 wrote: »

So you think someone about to have a child inflicted upon them without any consent would be OK with that?

he had SEX WITH HER!!!!!!!!!!!!! was he forced into it????ahm...NO.
If the child is his, then the child is his responsibility.

Bullseye1

hairyprincess wrote: »

The child was planned.

He then walked away after seeing her sporadically for the first two years.

That's dreadful and sorry to read that. There are some deadbeat dads out there.

smash

Drumpot wrote: »

I said if there are no clear medical problems. Most pregnamcys work out fine so unless doctors raise concerns you are very unlikely to suffer complications.

The medical problems I'm talking about are the likes of bladder issues, prolapsed cervix etc which present themselves afterwards.

Drumpot wrote: »

Thy aside, if you are worried about scarring below then it's a cosmetic concern.

Not just below, but across their stomach, breasts, legs etc. I'm talking about stretch marks. These can lead to psychological problems because of concerns over image. A lot of women wouldn't even feel comfortable wearing a bikini.

Drumpot wrote: »

I don't believe having an abortion is an easy choice to most people whatever the reason. But I do believe that the reason is what defines the kind of person they are. I do believe in choice, but joint consented choice if both consented to sex.

A woman's physical body can be scarred no less then a mans psychological pain at a woman choosing to have an abortion against his will.

It's never an easy choice but the fact is that it's a hell of lot more of a risk for a woman so she shouldn't be forced to term if he wants the baby and she doesn't want the baby.

Drumpot wrote: »

I always think fathers should be forced to be responsible for their children, irrespective of their views. I wouldn't be all about forcing woman to have children they don't want, I just don't think any better of them!

That's my point.

token101

silly wrote: »

he had SEX WITH HER!!!!!!!!!!!!! was he forced into it????ahm...NO.
If the child is his, then the child is his responsibility.

So every time someone has sex they want a child? :pac: Having sex with contraception usually means you don't want a child. So he didn't want a child. And now he's being forced into it by someone else. He's obviously not going to have much time for that person. And I wouldn't blame him.

Napper Hawkins

silly wrote: »

i'm talking about a situation where a man wants nothing to do with a child and wants the woman to have an abortion..i cant exactly see a man having sleepless nights over it.

I know what you're talking about. Stop generalising.

Drumpot

Zulu wrote: »

If abortion is legal, and she can abort without his permission (which I assume she can) then yes he should be able to legally walk away.

If a woman is enabled to physically abort a child, there's no good reason a man shouldn't be able to legally do so.

Interesting point but flawed.

Two wrongs dont make a right.

And despite my views, aborting a child is differant from choosing not to be in the child's life.

Choosing to have a child , whether you want it or not, for the right reasons should always be encouraged over having a lifestyle abortion. Choosing to be an absentee parent shouldn't be encouraged in any circumstances , unless you are a piece of ****e and the child would be better off without you.

I agree that abortion is on a differant level to deadbeat fathers but only because deadbeat fathers choose not to give children time and support because it doesn't suit them. Some mothers choose not to give the child life because it doesn't suit them.

silly

token101 wrote: »

So every time someone has sex they want a child? :pac: Having sex with contraception usually means you don't want a child. So he didn't want a child. And now he's being forced into it by someone else. He's obviously not going to have much time for that person. And I wouldn't blame him.

like i said before, everyone knows that no contraception is 100%
except.......abstinence!!!!! he had sex with her! i'm sure he "consented" to it....there is always a chance of pregnancy.

silly

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

I know what you're talking about. Stop generalising.

i'm not generalising. The OP has said that his friend doesnt want the child. So thats what i am talking about. A...Man...That...Doesnt...Want...The....Child.

haminka

token101 wrote: »

So every time someone has sex they want a child? :pac: Having sex with contraception usually means you don't want a child. So he didn't want a child. And now he's being forced into it by someone else. He's obviously not going to have much time for that person. And I wouldn't blame him.

Well, if she took contraception, she clearly didn't want a baby either but she got pregnant, she now decided to keep it.
No contraception is 100% except for not doing it at all!!!! The person who doesn't know it should get castrated/sterilized. My colleague's baby was born as a result of failed pill - they didn't even know she was pregnant till she was well advanced into her pregnancy because she wasn't sick and wasn't really showing till she was in the 4th month. And she is not a stupid ignorant woman but simply thought, OK, I'm on the pill, everything's fine. She wasn't on antibiotics or had any other medical problem that causes the pill to fail, it just did.