Choosing parenthood - Women vs men

[MsKABC]

OK, I confess I was watching daytime TV, Dr. Phil to be precise. The show today was about men who have fathered children and wanted to opt out of taking any part in the child's life and/or paying child support. Their argument was that they made every effort to ensure a child was not created. They'd also made it clear to their partner beforehand that they didn't want to be a father and therefore they were under no obligation. They pointed out that no-one forces women to become parents against their will as they have the option of termination or adopting out (in many societies at least). Why should men be forced to take responsibility if women aren't?

I'd never really looked at it this way, and they do have a point. It's quite a double standard in many respects.

Thoughts?

[McDuck]

:dodge:
<hdhghg>

[The Pastor]

Im agaisnt abortion, but for killing babies.

You lose, i win.

[MsKABC]

Im agaisnt abortion, but for killing babies.

You lose, i win.

I asked for thoughts, not brain farts.

[Maha]

On one hand, I can see thier point, no wait, thats a callus, anyway as I was saying.....Being an American show, its a wonder couples dont have legal documents drawn up before fucking each other to ensure that neither life is screwed. Seems to me, that if a female gets pregnant, the guy involved did not cover up before penetration, and the ejaculation that followed did its job wonderfully! He will soon be a dad, deal with it if the above document was not signed by both parties.

[Monobrow]

<snip>Their argument was that they made every effort to ensure a child was not created.<snip>

Sounds to me like they didn't make every effort, every effort would mean no kid.

You can't force a woman to have an abortion. Contraception is never 100% failsafe.

Sounds like they need to htfu, take responsibility for their actions and learn not to rely on someone else to take care of the contraception.

[klingon]

OK, I confess I was watching daytime TV, Dr. Phil to be precise. The show today was about men who have fathered children and wanted to opt out of taking any part in the child's life and/or paying child support. Their argument was that they made every effort to ensure a child was not created. They'd also made it clear to their partner beforehand that they didn't want to be a father and therefore they were under no obligation. They pointed out that no-one forces women to become parents against their will as they have the option of termination or adopting out (in many societies at least). Why should men be forced to take responsibility if women aren't?

I'd never really looked at it this way, and they do have a point. It's quite a double standard in many respects.

Thoughts?

Hmm... well if it really is true that they made "every effort to ensure a child was not created" (presumably every effort except abstinence), then I would like to know whether the woman also took "every effort."

If they both did their best to avoid it and she got pregnant anyway, then they are both equally responsible for the baby/child. If his idea of making sure it didn't happen was just to leave full responsibility for contraception up to her, then he also has some responsibility for the result.

But if he made "every effort" and she somehow tricked him into fathering a child in the hope that he would change his mind after the event, then it's her responsibility to deal with the consequesnces, not his.

I think each case would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. MsKABC, do you have an example for us to consider?

[Tank]

Even with a condom there is always a change of a pregnancy.


If it does the absent (in the scenario above) fathers life is impacted signifantly - he cops financial responsibility for the next 18 years!!!

But - He gets off pretty light in comparison to the woman.

What you are proposing (or Dr Phil is) is that the woman take full responsibility for any pregnancy where the guy didnt want a baby? yeah right that would work.

[Disco Dan]

Their argument was that they made every effort to ensure a child was not created. They'd also made it clear to their partner beforehand that they didn't want to be a father and therefore they were under no obligation.

Okay - male no longer responsible.


They pointed out that no-one forces women to become parents against their will as they have the option of termination or adopting out (in many societies at least). Why should men be forced to take responsibility if women aren't?


Woman however now has responsibility of both parties in her hands. A rather 'unfair advantage' that was unfortunately contributed to (NOT caused by) the male.

If two consenting people agree beforehand that neither or one wants a baby the responsibility should lie in the hands of the person not wanting the baby ie man does not want a baby, female become pregnant - decision lies with male not female to terminate or not.

If two people have intercourse they are technically giving consent for a baby to be born. Unless - one or both object and every reasonable measure is taken (ie contraception).


I am sure the feminist liberal women on this forum will strongly disagree - tough, it's MY opinion!

[EatOrBeEaten]

Having had to make this decision (and yeah, we were careful. Looks like Mr. Durex was on an off-day) a few years ago, I told my then partner that the decision was ultimately mine, and as such I should have to bear the responsibility of that decision.

As much as I hate the idea of men knocking women up and doing a runner, in a situation like mine the decision rested solely with me as the responsible adult I am (and given it was my uterus, it should be my call). The idea of having a sprog against the other partner's wishes then making them pay for what was a joint creation seems like double standards to me...

[Stirts]

To be perfectly honest guys do get a pretty shitty deal.

If a girl decides she wants a baby....she can bloody well do it without the consent of a male! And yes there are plenty of psycho females out there that do this!!

And if I am not mistaken these psycho girls can even put the fathers name on the birth certificate to legally bind them into taking responsibility for a child they didn't want!!! WTF!

How would prove/dis-prove "every effort" to esure a baby is not created?

Sure use the birth certificate as a legally binding agreement, but get both mom and dad to sign it stating that they are to jointly assume care for the child.

No daddy signature = no daddy responsibility

[Mom]

Personally I have ALWAYS taken control of my fertility, I dont want a child ergo I take steps to prevent it from happening. Common sense really. In the years away from chemical intervention that meant, no condom, no sex, simple easy and effective contraception.

Of course accidents can happen, nothing bar abstinence is 100% fail safe, in this instance I think it is a case of hard luck to the pair of you, you both did the deed and took steps to prevent unwanted baby, but you still managed to create one. Therefore you both have to take responsibility. Termination is not something that can be demanded from a woman, nor is adoption. The baby did not ask to be conceived and has the right to be, just as the mother has the right to want to raise it herself.

Takes two to make a baby afterall. Just because he says I dont want to be a father, it is still his problem too!

[MsKABC]

He will soon be a dad, deal with it if the above document was not signed by both parties.

There was a "Men's Advocate" on the programme, saying that for a very short time after conception, a man should have the ability to "opt out", if you like.


Sounds to me like they didn't make every effort, every effort would mean no kid.

You can't force a woman to have an abortion. Contraception is never 100% failsafe.

Sounds like they need to htfu, take responsibility for their actions and learn not to rely on someone else to take care of the contraception.

Yes, the only sure-fire (no pun intended) way to avoid conception is abstinence. I think in one case contraception had failed, and in the other, the woman told the bloke she was on the pill, presumably she lied.


If they both did their best to avoid it and she got pregnant anyway, then they are both equally responsible for the baby/child. If his idea of making sure it didn't happen was just to leave full responsibility for contraception up to her, then he also has some responsibility for the result.

But if he made "every effort" and she somehow tricked him into fathering a child in the hope that he would change his mind after the event, then it's her responsibility to deal with the consequesnces, not his.

I think each case would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. MsKABC, do you have an example for us to consider?

I didn't see the whole programme and I was trying to entertain a boisterous toddler, but one case involved a guy who'd fathered a child with a woman and I think the contraception had failed. She informed him she was pregnant very early on and it ended up going to court a couple of times. He got thrown out both times. The second case involved a guy finding out two years later that a former girlfriend had had his child and was demanding child support. She'd told him she was on the pill, unclear as to whether she'd lied or it had failed her. In the interim, he had gotten married and started his own family.


If it does the absent (in the scenario above) fathers life is impacted signifantly - he cops financial responsibility for the next 18 years!!!

But - He gets off pretty light in comparison to the woman.


Too true, and perhaps this is why the law says that women can terminate pregnancies or adopt out, whilst men have to financially support the child. Or does it stem from some traditional societal convention that a man must support a woman?


What you are proposing (or Dr Phil is) is that the woman take full responsibility for any pregnancy where the guy didnt want a baby? yeah right that would work.

No, no - I'm not proposing anything. I feel quite strongly that if a guy gets his willy out then he should be prepared to face the consequences. I do see the double standard present however. It's a very complicated situation, and involves the life of an innocent third party.

[Mom]

To be perfectly honest guys do get a pretty shitty deal.

If a girl decides she wants a baby....she can bloody well do it without the consent of a male! And yes there are plenty of psycho females out there that do this!!

And if I am not mistaken these psycho girls can even put the fathers name on the birth certificate to legally bind them into taking responsibility for a child they didn't want!!! WTF!

How would prove/dis-prove "every effort" to esure a baby is not created?

Sure use the birth certificate as a legally binding agreement, but get both mom and dad to sign it stating that they are to jointly assume care for the child.

No daddy signature = no daddy responsibility


Interesting aside to this too Stirts, I agree there are septic females out there that are fully capable of catching a guy out, no doubt about it.

Here in NZ when you sign up for the DPB, unless you name the father of your baby you are not given then same level of benefit as when you do, you get paid less. Dont even start me about child support here.

I had a friend, seperated from her partner and went on the DBP as her boy was really young. Her ex had to pay 18% of his income to IRD for child support, he was a good earner too btw. She on the other hand got $12.50 per week child support paid to her from IRD. She asked him for some money to help buy the lad a pair of shoes, he refused as he was paying so much already (fair enough). No equity there, fathers forced to pay huge sums of money each week, and the mother of his child gets a pittance. Oh, and this works both ways too, it really sucks to have 18% of your pay deducted each week and paid to your dickhead ex, when you have sole care of one child and weekabout care of the other two. DAMHIK!

EDIT: Opps I got started :o

[EatOrBeEaten]

It's a bloody minefield to be sure. I used to know a couple back in the UK who were engaged. They were trying for a sprog and she got pregnant. He changed his mind on the whole thing, got cold feet, and cancelled the wedding. After a year of treating her like shit he finally dumped her. His daughter is 5 now and he pays her mum a small amount and only sees her about twice a year. :no: He tried to argue that he had changed his mind on it so she should terminate or accept that he had no input, the cheeky bastard.

Every case is different, but there's a lot to be said for making absolutely sure that you can't spawn unless both of you really really want it....

[Grahameeboy]

Many years ago my girlfriend at the time got pregnant..condom split (not boasting or anything).

We discussed. I was happy to accept responsibility for being a Father and also said that it was her choice whether she wanted to continue the pregnancy...she decided to terminate, I paid for private treatment and was the only guy sitting in the waiting room of the abortion clinic.

We carried on going oout for a while but as is quite common she suffered a delayed reaction and accused me of killing her baby etc..not nice but I supported her and we still keep in touch.

Not an ideal situation, but I stood by her decision...am sure many will criticise me but I don't look back with regret...

But have taken the rare responsibility of sharing custody of my disabled Daughter as I believe that this is what a Father should do.

[Grahameeboy]

On one hand, I can see thier point, no wait, thats a callus, anyway as I was saying.....Being an American show, its a wonder couples dont have legal documents drawn up before fucking each other to ensure that neither life is screwed. Seems to me, that if a female gets pregnant, the guy involved did not cover up before penetration, and the ejaculation that followed did its job wonderfully! He will soon be a dad, deal with it if the above document was not signed by both parties.

Maybe they should try Body Orgasms

[Tank]

One thing that gets me is terminations.

Some people (yes more men than women) talk about this as if its a contraceptive or at the very most a very quick and easy procedure.

The truth of the matter is that it is something that *can* cause life long trauma.

Its not a decision to be made as lightly as a lot of people do or recommend.

** Edit - BTW - I've never been in a relationship that 'we' have had to make that decision - Im only basing this off people I know. I have no strong view on it being good or bad either way.

[Mully]

Many is the man who has had a child with a woman trying to "trap" him into a relationship.


and was the only guy sitting in the waiting room of the abortion clinic.

Yeah, it's a good place to pick up chicks - at least you know they put out.

[MsKABC]

One thing that gets me is terminations.

Some people (yes more men than women) talk about this as if its a contraceptive or at the very most a very quick and easy procedure.

The truth of the matter is that it is something that *can* cause life long trauma.

Its not a decision to be made as lightly as a lot of people do or recommend.

** Edit - BTW - I've never been in a relationship that 'we' have had to make that decision - Im only basing this off people I know. I have no strong view on it being good or bad either way.

Yes - it's easy to say it's unfair to force men into fatherhood whilst women can choose to have a termination. It's not exactly an easy option.

[MsKABC]

Yeah, it's a good place to pick up chicks - at least you know they put out.

I feel sorry for you that you are that desperate.

[EatOrBeEaten]

It's not an easy decision to make, no. To be fair, the women I know who've had one don't seem to be emotionally shattered by it. There's an overriding sense of sadness that it had to happen but pragmatism is a wonderful thing, and rather a termination than a kid born to parents who just can't cope with or want a child...

That said, given the number of long-term contraceptive measures available to women, this problem should be decreasing (if the world made any kind of bloody sense)

[Grahameeboy]

One thing that gets me is terminations.

Some people (yes more men than women) talk about this as if its a contraceptive or at the very most a very quick and easy procedure.

The truth of the matter is that it is something that *can* cause life long trauma.

Its not a decision to be made as lightly as a lot of people do or recommend.

** Edit - BTW - I've never been in a relationship that 'we' have had to make that decision - Im only basing this off people I know. I have no strong view on it being good or bad either way.

Agreed which is why I did not make our decision lightly...

[Stirts]

That said, given the number of long-term contraceptive measures available to women, this problem should be decreasing (if the world made any kind of bloody sense)

And that is exactly it....with the way contraceptive is in this "modern age" I find it hard to understand how a female gets pregnant by mistake.

As Mom stated earlier "Personally I have ALWAYS taken control of my fertility, I dont want a child ergo I take steps to prevent it from happening. Common sense really."

If I miss a pill....even when the Drs say you can miss one depending on where you are in your cycle you will be safe. Fuck that.... I miss a pill, I am at the chemist the next day getting the morning after pill.....I would hate to have to go through the termination of a baby....but personally I wouldn't let it get that far.

[MotoGirl]

Yes, the only sure-fire (no pun intended) way to avoid conception is abstinence. I think in one case contraception had failed, and in the other, the woman told the bloke she was on the pill, presumably she lied.

Alternatively she may have been the 2 percent where the pill wasn't effective. In this case of "just bad luck", should daddy be allowed to opt out?

[Mully]

I feel sorry for you that you are that desperate.

:bleh:

It's better than picking up chicks at family reunions. The rellys frown upon that.

:lol:

[Monobrow]

<snip>I think in one case contraception had failed, and in the other, the woman told the bloke she was on the pill, presumably she lied.<snip>

Maybe she didn't lie, forgetting to take one pill could do it. However I'm aware there are women out there who do lie.

I just think it's rich these guys claiming they made every effort to ensure no pregnancy. Saying you don't want kids up front is no good when you can't rely 100% on contraception. The female may not want kids either but abortion is not an option for everyone and adoption is no less traumatic.


<snip>but personally I wouldn't let it get that far.<snip>

And the guy shouldn't either. Even if there's an agreement between you that the female will take sole responsibility for the contraception, you'd need to trust that she will tell you if the situation changes or deal with the consequences. I personally don't think she should have to go solo if the rubber/pill fails.

[MsKABC]

Alternatively she may have been the 2 percent where the pill wasn't effective. In this case of "just bad luck", should daddy be allowed to opt out?

Personally I don't believe so, but some people may feel that she has taken responsibility for the contraception and therefore the responsibility of the child is hers.

[Stirts]

Alternatively she may have been the 2 percent where the pill wasn't effective. In this case of "just bad luck", should daddy be allowed to opt out?

Of course he should ..... If she was on the pill this generally means she doesn't want a baby at that point in time. Bad luck for her, but if she decides to keep it, why should he be held responsible for the in-effectiveness of the pill and her sudden decision to keep the baby.

[MotoGirl]

Of course he should ..... If she was on the pill this generally means she doesn't want a baby. Bad luck for her, but if she decides to keep it, why should he be held responsible for the in-effectiveness of the pill and her sudden decision to keep the baby.

An interesting response. I personally say bad luck for both of them purely on the basis that he chose to shag her knowing that the pill is only 98 percent effective yet he took no extra precautions to account for the shortfall.


her sudden decision to keep the baby.
Taking the pill is a way of saying "I don't want a baby at this point in time" whereas getting sterilised is saying you never want kids. I wouldn't necessarily call it a "sudden decision" if she chose to keep a baby that had been conceived earlier than planned, provided she did nothing deceiptful to help it along. If I found myself pregnant I wouldn't terminate, and yes, I'm currently on the pill. Cajun and I intend to have kids at some point and if it happened accidentally then we'd just deal with it and welcome our new arrival.

Edit: When neither partner has done anything wrong or devious, why should the woman get caught with the baby alone? Yes, it's fine to say she should terminate or adopt out but who's to say that's an option the woman is prepared to take? I know a woman who's had a termination and she never got over it. She felt so bad that she effectively got pregnant again to replace the one she had terminated.

[Stirts]

An interesting response. I personally say bad luck for both of them purely on the basis that he chose to shag her knowing that the pill is only 98 percent effective yet he took no extra precautions to account for the shortfall.

Most definitely bad luck for both.

But how effective is any contraceptive? you cant get it tested! Condoms break! How far do you go to safeguard yourself from getting pregnant or getting someone pregnant, short of not having sex and quite frankly bugger that!!!

As a female I take FULL responsibility....at the end of the day it is me that will get pregnant therefore if I decide to keep the baby and poor boy over there doesn't want anything to do with it fair call I understand and I walk away!

[Monobrow]

Personally I don't believe so, but some people may feel that she has taken responsibility for the contraception and therefore the responsibility of the child is hers.

If you're in a caring relationship with someone you'd have to be a right cunt to abandon ship.

If you're not in a caring relationship you're the fool for not thinking to safeguard your arse.

Pay up the child support and stop ya whining.

[MotoGirl]

Most definitley bad luck for both.

But how effective is any contraceptive? you cant get it tested! Condoms break! How far do you go to safeguard yourself from getting pregnant or getting someone pregnant, short of not having sex and quite frankly bugger that!!!

As a female I take FULL responsibility....at the end of the day it is me that will get pregnant therefore if I decide to keep the baby and poor boy over there doesn't want anything to do with it fair call I understand and I walk away!

Yep, you are right. How many guys do we know that would rather buck the condom to feel the sensation rather than wear it for the extra protection? (Based on a woman also taking the pill.)

[Stirts]

If you're in a caring relationship with someone you'd have to be a right cunt to abandon ship.

When you are in a caring relationship with someone you generally have the discussion about babies, and if you agree that you both don't want kids, and then she changes her mind without telling you or accidently gets pregnant and wants to keep it? I think someone else may be the cunt there!

[fireliv]

Tough one.

If I was a guy (heaven forbid!) and I was having a 1 night stand or casual etc, even if the chick said she was on the pill, I would still use a condom, I mean no harm in that.

If I was a guy in a long term relationship, and something happened with the contraception, then too bad. Deal with it, be supportive and be a dad.

However I can understand guys might get tricked into having kids, and in that case the one who did the tricking should deal with the consequences.

[MsKABC]

If I was a guy (heaven forbid!) and I was having a 1 night stand or casual etc, even if the chick said she was on the pill, I would still use a condom, I mean no harm in that.


And if the condom broke and conception resulted?

Would this situation be any different in a long-term relationship?

[Monobrow]

When you are in a caring relationship with someone you generally have the discussion about babies, and if you agree that you both don't want kids, and then she changes her mind without telling you or accidently gets pregnant and wants to keep it? I think someone else may be the cunt there!

Talking about it before it happens and having it happen are quite different. Maybe up until that point the chick believed she didn't want kids then finds out she's pregnant and what her options are. Making a decision like that may not be so user friendly when it actually happens.

Changing her mind without telling you assumes deceit and that's a whole different playing field.

[fireliv]

I think it would. But what would I know A) not a guy and b) never had a 1 night stand.

From my female point of view, I am also of the view that contraception is my responsablilty as well. If the condom broke, I would probably get the morning after pill as well just to be sure, even if I was on the pill.

[Mom]

Tough one.

If I was a guy (heaven forbid!) and I was having a 1 night stand or casual etc, even if the chick said she was on the pill, I would still use a condom, I mean no harm in that.

If I was a guy in a long term relationship, and something happened with the contraception, then too bad. Deal with it, be supportive and be a dad.

However I can understand guys might get tricked into having kids, and in that case the one who did the tricking should deal with the consequences.

I knew a chick that did that to her boyfriend. Fucken terrible thing to do, stopped taking the pill and did not tell him. Of course a baby was made, she expected him to marry her on the spot. This was back in the days where a child born out of wedlock was not a cool look at all.

She told him she got pregnant, not that she had stopped taking the pill mind. He moved house, changed jobs and they set up house together, no wedding bells (also a no no back then). Baby was born, and things started to go down hill for them. She was an absolute harridan, gave him shit every hour they were together. He worked like a dog to support them and she was vile in the extreme. One day in the heat of yet another argument she told him she got pregnant on purpose.

That was it for him, he kept going to work, paying the bills and taking her shit, but he did not react at all, just went through the motions of life. One day he came home from work and the house was empty, totally devoid of furniture, she had taken every single thing there. He rang us and we went round, honestly you simply would not have believed it, everything gone, but he was grinning. We put him up for a little while till he got some replacement bits and peices.

She ended up back at her parents place (very strict dutch catholic family) nursing her injured pride taking the full heat from them, while he quietly went about getting on with his life. She eventually contacted him wanting to get back together, bet you cant guess his response.

This back before DPB, and when solo mothers were not cool. He used to send her some money each month for the baby c/- of her parents place as far as I know has never had anything to do with her again. Want to know who I feel sorry for? Their little boy.

EDIT: not so little now thinking on it, he must be 30 :shit:

[Stirts]

Talking about it before it happens and having it happen are quite different.

I fully get that. Then I think the discussion needs to be re-addressed and decisons need to be made by both. But if it were me.....I wouldn't hold it against him if he walked away.


Changing her mind without telling you assumes deceit and that's a whole different playing field.

For sure!

[Mom]

If you're in a caring relationship with someone you'd have to be a right cunt to abandon ship.

If you're not in a caring relationship you're the fool for not thinking to safeguard your arse.

Pay up the child support and stop ya whining.


Talking about it before it happens and having it happen are quite different. Maybe up until that point the chick believed she didn't want kids then finds out she's pregnant and what her options are. Making a decision like that may not be so user friendly when it actually happens.

Changing her mind without telling you assumes deceit and that's a whole different playing field.


Two great posts in a row :clap:

[oldguy]

Sexual intercourse, or coitus, refers in a strict biological sense to the insertion of the male's penis into the female's vagina for the purpose of reproduction. Sexual intercourse is found among all mammalian species.

Sexual Intercourse — The Most Intimate Behavior
In addition to recognizing a wider array of behaviors as constituting different types of intercourse, sex researchers and therapists have come to recognize that humans engage in sexual intercourse for many reasons beyond procreation. Sexual intercourse is among the most intimate behaviors possible between two people, and, for many people, it is also one of the most pleasurable and emotionally satisfying.

sure way not have an unwanted pregnancy anal or oral.
so if the guy had done this, she wouldn't be pregnant, he wouldn't be trying to do a runner.

Moreover, intercourse is not limited to partnerships between individuals of opposite genders. Same-sex or homosexual encounters, involving oral or penetration or stimulation, are also referred to as sexual intercourse. Some also include digital (use of fingers or hands) intercourse or mutual masturbation as yet another form of intercourse.

[Swoop]

Condoms do break!! Damn bloody right they do.


:bleh:It's better than picking up chicks at family reunions. The rellys frown upon that.
Funerals are much better... All those grieving women needing comforting...:done:

[Lonebull]

OK, I confess I was watching daytime TV, Dr. Phil to be precise. The show today was about men who have fathered children and wanted to opt out of taking any part in the child's life and/or paying child support. Their argument was that they made every effort to ensure a child was not created. They'd also made it clear to their partner beforehand that they didn't want to be a father and therefore they were under no obligation. They pointed out that no-one forces women to become parents against their will as they have the option of termination or adopting out (in many societies at least). Why should men be forced to take responsibility if women aren't?

I'd never really looked at it this way, and they do have a point. It's quite a double standard in many respects.

Thoughts?

I hear what your sayin and agree but the system is so heavily stacked in favour of women when it comes to children and families that such an argument at this point in time is on a hiding to nothing. Fair does not have a lot to do with it.
I know that there are some women out there who may disagree with me about the stacked system but I would say those women have never been though the courts as a male in a custody or access battle (Pardon the Homer Simpson moment). The "system'" is super sensitive to the "plight of women" and for good reason. We all know that in some cases there is entrapment and its not always the guys fault but the way things are in such matters I feel it will be "guilty until proven innocent" for guys for some time to come. The double standard is there no doubt and it does not stop with who the father of the baby is. Unfortunately as men we must pay the toll for every dickhead out there who can't handle his drink or his anger and takes it out on his wife or girlfriend. The thing is the statistics don't lie, women die every day and this has fueled the way that the courts and society structures its laws and views such things as the sanctity of "family" whatever "family" means nowadays. Then add to that the encroaching American Ethic that someone is always guilty and therefore has to pay and you get the picture. I totally agree that if a woman makes the choice as MsKABC has outlined then she alone should foot the bill. Trouble is that that view has no chance of even being considered unless some perceptions start to change. We can sit round and bleat about how unfair it all is or we can start to make some inroads. Balance needs to be restored but that will take time and some decent guys sticking up for themselves. We also need to jump up and down on those idiots who make it hard for us. Don't be part of a society that turns the other cheek. GET INVOLVED.

That's my two bits worth

Ka Kite

[Hans]

I'm not normally quite this concise, but; Tough shit, HTFU and bear it.

[trump-lady]

IUD 30 dollars last 5 years. Condoms to stop catching eww nasties and spermacide to make sure. I dont beleive its anyone elses responsibility but mine. My body my life.

I will never get pregnant to keep a man and I am 32 and seen it rampant all over New Zealand. Why would ya?


Men pick your women better, talk about this to your partners because theres to many dam kids out there "lost" cause of this stuff or being raised in traped relationships that have no love.

One thing I dont understand is that WTF in this day and age isnt there something for men! WTF

Crazy

[Hans]

Yep, you are right. How many guys do we know that would rather buck the condom to feel the sensation rather than wear it for the extra protection? (Based on a woman also taking the pill.)

I know many, many, many. :whistle:

[fire eyes]

OK, I confess I was watching daytime TV, Dr. Phil to be precise. The show today was about men who have fathered children and wanted to opt out of taking any part in the child's life and/or paying child support. Their argument was that they made every effort to ensure a child was not created. They'd also made it clear to their partner beforehand that they didn't want to be a father and therefore they were under no obligation. They pointed out that no-one forces women to become parents against their will as they have the option of termination or adopting out (in many societies at least). Why should men be forced to take responsibility if women aren't?

I'd never really looked at it this way, and they do have a point. It's quite a double standard in many respects.

Thoughts?

In that respect .. I can understand the said fathers decision to opt out .. especially if they have made 'every effort' .. Surprises me though about the term 'responsibility' ... if not to father a child .. would you not have a vasectomy???

Great thread by the way .. gets the mind ticking ..



This is really making me think.

[reofix]

the problem is daytime tv.. the solution is ... a life!

[MsKABC]

In that respect .. I can understand the said fathers decision to opt out .. especially if they have made 'every effort' .. Surprises me though about the term 'responsibility' ... if not to father a child .. would you not have a vasectomy???

Great thread by the way .. gets the mind ticking ..



This is really making me think.

Having pondered it a bit more and read the responses, my position is that if a bloke makes it very clear that he doesn't want to father a child, uses contraception, and warns his partner that if she falls pregnant then he will have no part of it (thus she can take her chances by sleeping with him), then maybe he has a moral/ethical get out of jail free card. He would have trouble proving a verbal contract like that in court though, wouldn't he?

[fire eyes]

Having pondered it a bit more and read the responses, my position is that if a bloke makes it very clear that he doesn't want to father a child, uses contraception, and warns his partner that if she falls pregnant then he will have no part of it (thus she can take her chances by sleeping with him), then maybe he has a moral/ethical get out of jail free card. He would have trouble proving a verbal contract like that in court though, wouldn't he?

I can agree with some of that. If he has taken every precaution and his partner agrees .. and his partner at the time still falls pregnant .. why is it her responsibility to shoulder the burden of dealing with the child.

Decisions made does not exempt one from accountability especially when you are a participant, upon conception .. the rules previously agreed no longer apply in my book.

If a man is totally against having children ... then a vasectomy or no sex at all would be the obvious course of action to take.

[gatch]

Girl says to me shes on the pill, that means she doesn't want the babies, for me this is great, no-one LIKES condoms. If however by accident she did fall pregnant I would suck it up and do the decent thing. Because I could have done more to try prevent this. It couldn't be good for a kid to find out Daddy doesn't love you cause you were an accident.

If however there was deceit involved it would be made very clear that my money will stay in my pocket, you can't lie about this kind of shit when there is a whole other life that hasn't properly started to consider.

I really wish there was a viable male-contraceptive, it would be very difficult then for guys to back out of fatherhood if they hadn't "been on the pill" so to speak. That and it would cut the chances of a woman trying the old "keep a nigger baby" trick.

Come onnnn science.

[R1madness]

I have a son and 2 step daughters and dont want any more kids. I had a vas 3 years ago. Mostly pain free and easy. Problem solved. But i am 41 not 21. A 21 year old guy cant get the snip (at most places) because it is not fair to them. Just because they say they dont want kids (ever) now doesnt mean they wont change their mind in 10 years time. So no the snip is not always an option. I know lots of guys that have been trapped into an unhappy relationship because she "forgot" to take the pill (for about 3 months while secretly flushing them down the toilet one every night). They stay for about 6 years then think screw it i would rather pay than put up with the crap any more. And pay they do..... usually losing the house and everything in it to her, along with the car, the dog, and their dignity as well. Then they have to pay til the kid(s) are 18.
A true dad will pay and not care or argue with the amount that is taken by the government but a man that has been tricked will take every oppertunity to avoid payment, and believe me there are plenty of options to get out of paying if you look into it (or ask a friendly male accountant)......

[Mully]

Having pondered it a bit more and read the responses, my position is that if a bloke makes it very clear that he doesn't want to father a child, uses contraception, and warns his partner that if she falls pregnant then he will have no part of it (thus she can take her chances by sleeping with him), then maybe he has a moral/ethical get out of jail free card. He would have trouble proving a verbal contract like that in court though, wouldn't he?

It's a nice theory but all the woman has to do is tell IRD and Slappy is paying through the nose for 18 years. Whether or not he wants to be involved or not.

EDIT: especially these days, where the DPB is seriously considered as a career option.

[fire eyes]

I have a son and 2 step daughters and dont want any more kids. I had a vas 3 years ago. Mostly pain free and easy. Problem solved. But i am 41 not 21. A 21 year old guy cant get the snip (at most places) because it is not fair to them. Just because they say they dont want kids (ever) now doesnt mean they wont change their mind in 10 years time. So no the snip is not always an option. I know lots of guys that have been trapped into an unhappy relationship because she "forgot" to take the pill (for about 3 months while secretly flushing them down the toilet one every night). They stay for about 6 years then think screw it i would rather pay than put up with the crap any more. And pay they do..... usually losing the house and everything in it to her, along with the car, the dog, and their dignity as well. Then they have to pay til the kid(s) are 18.
A true dad will pay and not care or argue with the amount that is taken by the government but a man that has been tricked will take every oppertunity to avoid payment, and believe me there are plenty of options to get out of paying if you look into it (or ask a friendly male accountant)......

If vasectomy is not a viable option .. then there is another .. don't fuck.

[Number One]

One thing I dont understand is that WTF in this day and age isnt there something for men! WTF

SING IT SISTER!


Girl says to me shes on the pill, that means she doesn't want the babies, for me this is great, no-one LIKES condoms.

So what about venerial diseases...do you like those? :eek:

Not getting at you personally with this Gatch.

BUT I find it strange (and quite irritating actually) that just because a chick might be on the pill (or might TELL a guy that she is on the pill) this computes in a mans head as way hey hey no condom nookie! What if she is lying? What if she happens to be on antibiotics that effect it's efficacy? What if she is forgetful and hasn't been taking it regularly at the same time and all that jazz?

My take on this is that it takes two to tango and both people should be responsible for preventing a baby when they don't want one....especially in the case of casual sex. I too know of psycho hose beasts who have tricked their boyfriends into fatherhood - one even went so far as to prick holes in his stash of condoms!!!

I don't care who you are no one is truely prepared for parenthood and it is tough and a bloody important job to at least TRY to get right...SO I believe both parties should agree either way and if they don't want kids they should take all available precautions and then if a rogue sperm should manage to slip past the goalie both parties should be adult enough to shoulder whatever responsibility comes their way. For guys this might just mean accompanying the lady to the abortion clinic and supporting her through what is a fucking awful experience EVEN when you KNOW it's the right choice

If you are grown up enough to do the horizontal hula you should be grown up enough to face the consequences head on!

[Skyryder]

I wonder how many men would 'accept' no for an answer if the woman said that she did not want to get pregnant.

There's no double standards on this issue. If you don't want fatherhood have a wank.

If ya want the real thing you take ya chances and it's the womans 'say' come what may.



Skyryder

[Fub@r]

Years ago my ex was having a coffee with a friend of her's who was on the DPB but also in a relationship.

I was in the other room and overheard them discussing how National was proposing to make anyone who was on the DPB with a child over 6 go in to part time work. (this was 10 years ago). Anyway she was saying how she didn't want to work and had gone off the pill without the partner knowing. Her plan was to get pregnant and maintain her work free benefit.

About a month later she was pregnant, National lost the election and now this poor bastard has to pay for a kid to this nutty cow.


A few years back I heard about a test case in the UK where a guy was taking his girlfriend to court to force her to go through with her pregnancy. He wanted the kid she didn't as was going to get an abortion. I never heard the outcome of this case but the arguments were:

He said if he didn't want the child and she did he is forced to be financially liable for the next 19 years. He wants the child so why does he have no say?

Whereas she had decided she didn't want it and female groups argued that its her body and she decides what happens.

[Lissa]

Having pondered it a bit more and read the responses, my position is that if a bloke makes it very clear that he doesn't want to father a child, uses contraception, and warns his partner that if she falls pregnant then he will have no part of it (thus she can take her chances by sleeping with him), then maybe he has a moral/ethical get out of jail free card. He would have trouble proving a verbal contract like that in court though, wouldn't he?
The problem is not all contraception is 100% accurate. Condoms burst, pills are not effective if you are on antibotics or you have diarrhea or are sick etc. Having an abortion isnt something that is easy to go through, and its not a method of contraception. Of course there are women who may try to get pregnant with just about anyone so they can have a child and then screw the guys life up forever, but I think (hope) those are few and far between.

There is of course the fact that if you dont want to have children dont have sex :D having a child is a possible outcome even with every precaution. So I guess I am saying, if a guy has sex with a woman, uses all precautions and she still gets pregnant than he has a responsibility to that child, the child didn't ask to be born and shouldn't suffer for it. I guess guys just have to step up and accept that sometimes there are no accidents... only choices.

[Mikkel]

Of course accidents can happen, nothing bar abstinence is 100% fail safe

And even that, if we are to believe certain authorities on contraception, doesn't hold true all of the time ;)


The truth of the matter is that it is something that *can* cause life long trauma.

Whereas having a kid you truly do not want *will* cause life long trauma - and possibly for everyone involved.


The problem is not all contraception is 100% accurate. Condoms burst, pills are not effective if you are on antibotics or you have diarrhea or are sick etc. Having an abortion isnt something that is easy to go through, and its not a method of contraception.

Butt, there is another way...(NWS)

http://www.berylium.net/uploaded_images/anal-723075.jpg


But in all seriousness, a woman who is misleading a partner into knocking her up and then decides to keep the baby while reaping 18 years of benefits on his account is guilty of reverse rape. It is a despicable thing to do.

Ultimately abortion or no abortion is the woman's choice. However, it does take two to tango and if she decides to use Joe Bloggs as a sperm donor without his consent he ought to have at least the same rights as the ones that gets paid to provide the same service. I do think we can all agree that the main purpose of sex these days is recreation, not procreation - if so it is important to recognise this fact legally as well.

[gatch]

So what about venerial diseases...do you like those? :eek:

Not getting at you personally with this Gatch.

BUT I find it strange (and quite irritating actually) that just because a chick might be on the pill (or might TELL a guy that she is on the pill) this computes in a mans head as way hey hey no condom nookie! What if she is lying?

It's not just guys that want to bump uglies without rubbers..

As for vd and all the other really fun infections to have (none to date thank fuck), I guess it's like people riding a motorbike without all the safety gear, you feel the fear and do it anyway.. And live with the consequences..

[Number One]

It's not just guys that want to bump uglies without rubbers..

As for vd and all the other really fun infections to have (none to date thank fuck), I guess it's like people riding a motorbike without all the safety gear, you feel the fear and do it anyway.. And live with the consequences..
Indeed! Absolutely right with all that - oh and congrats on never yet having had a venerial disease too ;)

[Skyryder]

The best contraception for a male is his hand. If he is not prepared to use what nature gave him and opt for the real thing whose purpose is procreation then he takes the consequences reguardless.

It's that simple..............realy is.

Skyryder

[Jantar]

Wow. What brought on this dredge?

[Number One]

Ha ha dredge from hell Skyryder

[XxKiTtiExX]

And if I am not mistaken these psycho girls can even put the fathers name on the birth certificate to legally bind them into taking responsibility for a child they didn't want!!! WTF!

Sure use the birth certificate as a legally binding agreement, but get both mom and dad to sign it stating that they are to jointly assume care for the child.

No daddy signature = no daddy responsibility

When you register a birth it is jointly signed, the father has a section that he must fill in and sign. There is a legal requirement for him to do this.


Unless....

The father is unknown.
Listing the father would cause stress on either parent. (eg: There is a domestic protection order in place, if this is the case you need evidence of this such as police reports etc).

Or..

The child was concieved medically using a sperm donor.

[PrincessBandit]

The best contraception for a male is his hand. If he is not prepared to use what nature gave him and opt for the real thing whose purpose is procreation then he takes the consequences reguardless.

It's that simple..............realy is.

Skyryder

Yep, if a bloke wants to guarantee no sproglets then either your suggestion or ye olde blow up doll are the best options. I have heard of other exotic alternatives which don't involve animate creatures but then that might be saying too much....