**** I'm pregnant

ceridwen

aldo wrote: »

If he really loved you he would respect your decision to keep it. No person in the world can ever tell a mother to terminate a little baby.

Stick to your guns.

On the other hand - one could equally well say "If a woman really loved a man - she wouldnt try and force him to be a father against his will"......

tru

ceridwen wrote: »

On the other hand - one could equally well say "If a woman really loved a man - she wouldnt try and force him to be a father against his will"......

Rubbish. She's not forcing him to be a father. If he was that bothered, he should have worn a condom, whether or not she was using contraception herself.

ceridwen

tru wrote: »

Rubbish. She's not forcing him to be a father. If he was that bothered, he should have worn a condom, whether or not she was using contraception herself.

Yeh..yeh....knew that old chestnut would come up.....<sigh>

If women didnt come piling in every time one of these threads comes up to say "Ignore the man - he doesnt count" - then I wouldnt find it necessary to point out the other viewpoint......

But thinking purely and simply from the OP's viewpoint alone - she cant afford a child....

tru

ceridwen wrote: »

Yeh..yeh....knew that old chestnut would come up.....<sigh>

If women didnt come piling in every time one of these threads comes up to say "Ignore the man - he doesnt count" - then I wouldnt find it necessary to point out the other viewpoint......

I never said 'ignore the man'.

If he's taken no responsibility for contraception, he can hardly complain now, can he?

We don't know what she can or can't afford.

ceridwen

tru wrote: »

I never said 'ignore the man'.

If he's taken no responsibility for contraception, he can hardly complain now, can he?

Then all I can say is I'm delighted to hear the male Pill has been fully tested and is widely available - hmmm.......:cool:that's not what I'd read. :cool:

Right now - only women have the Pill available to them. At any point - only the woman can have an abortion - the man will never be able to do so.

So - he had a full choice did he then in those circumstances? Since when were condoms 100% reliable? Have they improved since I was weighing up the contraceptive options many years back now?

But - back to the other point - have you taken a look at the size of the debts OP has? Perhaps you would like to explain how she (and - yes I mean the person herself - NOT the State) can afford a child in those circumstances...

jackieglasgow

In my experience, condoms are 100% effective if used properly, but that's not the debate here, and I find your input distasteful to say the least, Ceridwen. Your own decision not to have children too often causes you to comment unnecessarily when these types of threads are mentioned. As for not being able to afford children, anyone can afford them, they are free, their food can be free, and if you don't get caught up with keeping up with the Joneses then the essentials for a baby don't cost much either.
I think that any man, whether in a relationship or not, needs to be proactive about contraception, because the only 100% guaranteed way of avoiding pregnancy is celibacy or sterilisation. They should always be aware that the contraception being used may fail, and be prepared with a back up plan, of using a second type of contraception, or discussing what they would want to happen in the event of an unplanned pregnancy. If a man is not sensible enough to do these things, and his partner becomes pregnant, then of course the situation should be discussed, but it is very much the woman's right to choose. It is her body, and it is her life which will be forever affected whatever way the situation ends.

tru

If he wears a condom and it fails, that's a different story.

No contraception is 100% reliable, everyone knows that. So if he really doesn't want babies, he should make sure he doesn't manage to make any.

But, we don't know him. His reaction may have been out of character, he may have just been shocked and it hasn't sunk in yet.

Don't assume the debts are eating all wannaberich1's money - we have debts that could have been paid off years ago but we're still plodding along with them. We had the nasty letters and phone calls for about 2 years - the interest was frozen ages ago so I decided as they'd given us so much stress, they can wait and we'll pay off a tiny amount per month

Babies really aren't that expensive.

wannaberich1 - you sound like you want to keep the baby, the only thing stopping you from being happy about it is your OH. I would wait for a couple of weeks and then see how he feels.

newcook

jackieglasgow wrote: »

In my experience, condoms are 100% effective if used properly, but that's not the debate here, and I find your input distasteful to say the least, Ceridwen. Your own decision not to have children too often causes you to comment unnecessarily when these types of threads are mentioned. As for not being able to afford children, anyone can afford them, they are free, their food can be free, and if you don't get caught up with keeping up with the Joneses then the essentials for a baby don't cost much either.
I think that any man, whether in a relationship or not, needs to be proactive about contraception, because the only 100% guaranteed way of avoiding pregnancy is celibacy or sterilisation. They should always be aware that the contraception being used may fail, and be prepared with a back up plan, of using a second type of contraception, or discussing what they would want to happen in the event of an unplanned pregnancy. If a man is not sensible enough to do these things, and his partner becomes pregnant, then of course the situation should be discussed, but it is very much the woman's right to choose. It is her body, and it is her life which will be forever affected whatever way the situation ends.

while I agree with a lot of what you have said, not all contraception is 100% (apart from celibacy as you have pointed out)
I think condoms are 97% and the pill is 99% (if taken around the same time every day).

completely agree that its the womans decision as it is her body!

ceridwen

The back-up plan in case of contraceptive failure is abortion though - and the man isnt able to implement that on his own.

I was always well aware that - IF the contraception had ever failed for me - then I would have gone straight to the back-up plan as soon as I was ware. It was never necessary in the event.

However - abortion isnt the ONLY back-up plan. If a woman really really doesnt want an abortion/doesnt believe in them - then there is that option that never ever seems to be even considered these days - ie adoption.

No - I'm not saying its easy. No option is ever easy - but sometimes one just has to choose the "least worst option".

But - we still come back to that £28,000 odd of debt......and the fact that children DO cost money....a LOT of money - even if one doesnt think all the way through to "How much does it cost to go to University these days?" down the line. One only has to think a few years down the line to childcare costs....

Anyway - the day that women dont instantly come piling in to go "Keep it - regardless of the man...and regardless of finances....regardless of everything" is the day that the other viewpoint won't have to be put in fairness to balance out opinions...

xmaslolly76

Ceridwen if you discount the money situation for the time being what say does the man actually have in all of this it is at the end of the day her body and she is the one that has to go through all of this be it having the baby or aborting. He cant dictate that she has to get rid of it just the same as if the tables are turned and the man wants the child but the woman doesnt you can't force a woman to give birth. So until the male pill is out or men can start carrying the babies then they unfortunately get very little say in the matter as unfair as that may seem. Thats not to say they should not be given the opportunity to give their opinions and be kept informed the whole way through.

The only way for a man to avoid getting their partners pregnant if they dont want children is to keep it in their pants if they want to take the risk but not get wet feet then they should put their wellies on before going paddling but understand that it could still happen and accept the consequences if it does.