Opting out of fatherhood
Discussion
Integroo said:
The problem is in the first scenario there is no child to be concerned about post abortion, whereas in the latter scenario there is a child that needs to be cared for and its interest must trump the interests of the mother and/or father. Allowing the father to abdicate his responsibilities would lead to the welfare of the child being diminished.
That's a fair point. I don't pretend to have all the answers but in effect it means that the mother would need to ask herself if she really wants to carry on with the pregnancy given the financial impact from having to provide for it on her own.
Is there a distinction to be made between welfare being diminished but still perfectly acceptable?
The argument set out in the article seems watertight. Bloke can opt out of responsibility early in the pregnancy leaving the mother with the choice between raising the child on her own or having an abortion. That way both parties can choose independently whether they do not wish to become more than just biological parents. The woman still has complete control over whether an abortion takes place or not. She is just losing the right to compel the father to be involved if she chooses to continue the pregnancy.
I think the weakness is that it supposes that when the woman chooses to continue or terminate the pregnancy she is just considering her own interests. If that is the case, then it would be fair to weigh those equally with the father's interests. But what if the woman feels that she has a duty to the unborn child?
I don't think it's unreasonable to feel that sense of duty, so I'd modify the opt out idea like this.
Bloke has to make it clear BEFORE the woman gets knocked up that he is opting out of parental responsibilities. That way women who don't think an abortion is morally equivalent to sneezing can choose whether to take the risk of getting up the duff by a bloke who will walk away from a pregnancy. If the woman isn't prepared to take that risk, fine, she needs to find a new partner.
I think the weakness is that it supposes that when the woman chooses to continue or terminate the pregnancy she is just considering her own interests. If that is the case, then it would be fair to weigh those equally with the father's interests. But what if the woman feels that she has a duty to the unborn child?
I don't think it's unreasonable to feel that sense of duty, so I'd modify the opt out idea like this.
Bloke has to make it clear BEFORE the woman gets knocked up that he is opting out of parental responsibilities. That way women who don't think an abortion is morally equivalent to sneezing can choose whether to take the risk of getting up the duff by a bloke who will walk away from a pregnancy. If the woman isn't prepared to take that risk, fine, she needs to find a new partner.
ATG said:
Bloke has to make it clear BEFORE the woman gets knocked up that he is opting out of parental responsibilities. That way women who don't think an abortion is morally equivalent to sneezing can choose whether to take the risk of getting up the duff by a bloke who will walk away from a pregnancy. If the woman isn't prepared to take that risk, fine, she needs to find a new partner.
That's unworkable because it gets you into a he said she said scenario.Bill said:
ATG said:
Bloke has to make it clear BEFORE the woman gets knocked up that he is opting out of parental responsibilities. That way women who don't think an abortion is morally equivalent to sneezing can choose whether to take the risk of getting up the duff by a bloke who will walk away from a pregnancy. If the woman isn't prepared to take that risk, fine, she needs to find a new partner.
That's unworkable because it gets you into a he said she said scenario.
ATG said:
Bill said:
ATG said:
Bloke has to make it clear BEFORE the woman gets knocked up that he is opting out of parental responsibilities. That way women who don't think an abortion is morally equivalent to sneezing can choose whether to take the risk of getting up the duff by a bloke who will walk away from a pregnancy. If the woman isn't prepared to take that risk, fine, she needs to find a new partner.
That's unworkable because it gets you into a he said she said scenario.ATG said:
It's perfectly workable. If bloke wants to be able to opt out, he needs her signature on a bit of paper saying "he does not want kids". If he choses to pork someone before getting her to sign, it's his decision and he doesn't get to walk away.
Oh yeah, contracts in family law are well known for being absolutely straight forward and hassle free. That's why the divorce thread on here is so short.
I assume you would also be content for the woman to do the same? IE, we can have sex, but if I get pregnant and have a child it is your sole responsibility.
And people say millennials have a sense of entitlement.
Edited by gregs656 on Thursday 24th January 19:10
Edited by gregs656 on Thursday 24th January 19:12
ATG said:
It's perfectly workable. If bloke wants to be able to opt out, he needs her signature on a bit of paper saying "he does not want kids". If he choses to pork someone before getting her to sign, it's his decision and he doesn't get to walk away.
Sorry, I didn't realise you were suggesting the full romantic signed deal. You'd need witnesses though, which could be awkward. 
HughiusMaximus said:
I'd settle for 'society' acknowledging there is a problem / unfairness before we get bogged down in how to try to fix it!
How's it unfair?? If you're not prepared to take the risk of a sprog bag up, get the snip or become a monk.Removing one parent is unfair on the poor
dgregs656 said:
ATG said:
It's perfectly workable. If bloke wants to be able to opt out, he needs her signature on a bit of paper saying "he does not want kids". If he choses to pork someone before getting her to sign, it's his decision and he doesn't get to walk away.
Oh yeah, contracts in family law are well known for being absolutely straight forward and hassle free. That's why the divorce thread on here is so short.
I assume you would also be content for the woman to do the same? IE, we can have sex, but if I get pregnant and have a child it is your sole responsibility.
And people say millennials have a sense of entitlement.
Edited by gregs656 on Thursday 24th January 19:10
Edited by gregs656 on Thursday 24th January 19:12
Frimley111R said:
It's fine in practice but in the throws of a one night stand or relationship it's quite a thing to do. She will know it basically says, you're on your own if you get preggers. Like a prenuptial agreement. Bit of a relationship/passion killer.
If people want to continuing taking the risks they currently do, that's fine. It'd just provide people with a mechanism to state their wishes formally if they chose to do so. Anything that encourages people to think through the consequences of what they're about to do and their obligations to others is a good thing. If that discourages some one night stands and avoids some unwanted pregnancies and abortions, that'd be a good thing. ATG said:
Several attempts and that's what you come up with? Why on Earth would you assume Is think the woman should be able to insist on signing over parenthood to the bloke? If she doesn't want to bring the child up then she can choose to have an abortion. That's the current position. Why would that change?
It's several additions, because I find your viewpoint perplexing, disappointing none the less that you chose to play the man not the ball(s).I am not at all surprised that you don't want to see fathers forced to be single parents, just mothers.
What if she doesn't want to have an abortion? After all, if a man doesn't want a child he can choose not have vaginal sex or take control of contraception, both significantly less traumatic and less likely to cause medical complications than having an abortion - but this is apparently too much to ask of men.
Roger Irrelevant said:
This thread reads like a country & western song - a load of jilted men resentful and mistrustful of women and moaning about how unfair life is. Am I the only person here who has never had any particular trouble with the women I've been in long-term relationships with, bar the occasional tiff, and who doesn't automatically assume that their overriding goal in life is to stitch a man up?
You're quite wrong, it's absolutely the reverse. It's because most men quite rightly trust the women they're in long term relationships with and don't 'automatically assume that their overriding goal in life is to stitch a man up', just like you, that it is so very easy for her to do if she is that way inclined (your missus included if she's of fertile age).The problem is, you only need it to happen the once and the result is life changing.
I think it's safe to assume that the posters saying 'just bag up' (as they so lovingly put it) probably have never been in a long term loving relationship since they don't seem to understand really basic things like trusting the person you're with.
Ultimately, as a bloke, and short of a vasectomy (and try keeping that a secret!), we are completely reliant on the woman in our life being honest and trustworthy about this.
That's just how it is, and that's precisely why it's such an issue for men who have been caught out. It's a massive betrayal of trust and it's not even something you can walk away from (like infidelity).
Ari said:
Ultimately, as a bloke, and short of a vasectomy (and try keeping that a secret!), we are completely reliant on the woman in our life being honest and trustworthy about this.
Seriously, as a man who REALLY doesn't want a kid, why not just wear a condom?It's not that complicated.
desolate said:
Ari said:
Ultimately, as a bloke, and short of a vasectomy (and try keeping that a secret!), we are completely reliant on the woman in our life being honest and trustworthy about this.
Seriously, as a man who REALLY doesn't want a kid, why not just wear a condom?It's not that complicated.
Antony Moxey said:
And it’s not foolproof either, which is kind of at the core of the discussion.
Almost every action you take carries a risk.there are loads of ways of having sex that carry an incredibly small chance of resulting in pregnancy. If you are adamant you don't won't a child do one of them.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff