Pregnant, advised to talk to dad through solicitor

FBaby

So because women are 'lucky' that biologically, they can choose to take actions to go back to how their lives were before, but men should have no choice, accept it, and take responsibility. Sorry, to me it has nothing to do with biology. Both have choices and both have rights to exercise these choices.

but society recognises that the child has a right to be financially supported by both its parents and to at least know their identity.

And if that's what OP wants, that will happen. The man has said nothing about not paying, at the moment, he doesn't want to have anything to do with OP or the baby.

The way is handling it is not different to the way OP could have handled it if he'd said he wanted the baby, but she insisted she didn't and went and had an abortion. Would posters had said that she was a loser in the roles were reversed like that? Of course not, it would have been 'her body her right'. In this case, it is his mind/heart, his choice.

This is not against OP in anyway, it is in reaction to posters' comments towards a person they don't know anything about.

Person_one

FBaby wrote: »

So because women are 'lucky' that biologically, they can choose to take actions to go back to how their lives were before, but men should have no choice, accept it, and take responsibility. Sorry, to me it has nothing to do with biology. Both have choices and both have rights to exercise these choices.

No, I don't think women are particularly 'lucky' actually! Do you think that men, en masse, would swap and happily be the ones that carry the babies and all the physical, financial and social baggage that comes with it in order to have the right to end a pregnancy they didn't want? I'd be surprised if they voted for that!

The problem with allowing men the right to 'opt out' of parenthood is that the person you're depriving and causing harm to is the child. Once that exists it has a right to be supported by both parents and to know who they are. You can't take that away from them, their rights take priority.

benjus

FBaby wrote: »

I'm quiet surprised at how judgmental posters are of this man's actions. The reality is that he didn't want this child. We don't know why, but surely that is his right. If OP had decided she did not want that baby, she could have taken the decision to abort or give the child to adoption and forget it ever happened. Why are men judged for wanting to move on and forget about it too?

We don't know all the circumstances in this case, but why do we defend so strongly women's right to abortion if they don't want an accidental baby (and to be clear, I have no issue with this), but consider men to be losers when they take a similar decision?

Do you believe that men should have the right to force a woman to have an abortion or to give up the baby for adoption? Or to father as many children as they want without paying for them?

If you don't believe in any of those, then the birth of the baby is firmly under the mother's control but is going to have an impact on the man's life. Any reasonable person would be trying to work out how to handle the situation with the baby's mother, not running away and trying to disappear.

Pixie5740

It's not the fact that the ex does not what the child (at this moment in time at least) that people are flaming him for. It's his cowardly behaviour. If he doesn't want to be a father he should 1) Have the decency to sit down and tell the OP this instead of running and hiding, 2) Take better precautions not to become a father.

If the shoe was on the other foot and the OP announced she was pregnant and then disappeared, cutting all contact and called the police after a couple of texts I would also find that cowardly. The least the ex would deserve is a conversation.

gettingtheresometime

I'm just hoping that the OP has decided against creating a blog about the situation .....there really are some things which should remain private between the two parties

red_devil

How selfish can you get. This man has a father yet he wants to deny his child one. Some man really lack something.

Ask him how he would like it if his father had deserted him.

DUTR

red_devil wrote: »

How selfish can you get. This man has a father yet he wants to deny his child one. Some man really lack something.

Ask him how he would like it if his father had deserted him.

Remember males are not female but with a dangly bit.
Reading the thread both party's already have 2 a piece on the children front, at 44 perhaps it's an age to say enough is enough on that front. Not everybody sets sights on family life as the ultimate aim, we are all here just once.
I remember when my daughters mum became pregnant , I was not best pleased, after the child came along I warmed a bit to the idea, but 18yrs later still don't really like the idea if truth be known.
CSA/CMS ? 15 or 12% gross and that it, it'll never be enough according to posts on this and the CSA board, the OP has a long winding road ahead assuming all is healthy over the next few months.

red_devil

DUTR wrote: »

Remember males are not female but with a dangly bit.
Reading the thread both party's already have 2 a piece on the children front, at 44 perhaps it's an age to say enough is enough on that front. Not everybody sets sights on family life as the ultimate aim, we are all here just once.
I remember when my daughters mum became pregnant , I was not best pleased, after the child came along I warmed a bit to the idea, but 18yrs later still don't really like the idea if truth be known.
CSA/CMS ? 15 or 12% gross and that it, it'll never be enough according to posts on this and the CSA board, the

OP has a long winding road ahead assuming all is healthy

over the next few months.

it is not the babys fault its here and the father should step up to his responsibilities. Its a flaw in your personality if you dont want anything to do with your child. As said he had a father how would he like it if his father hadnt wanted to know him?.

DUTR

red_devil wrote: »

it is not the babys fault its here and the father should step up to his responsibilities. Its a flaw in your personality if you dont want anything to do with your child. As said he had a father how would he like it if his father hadnt wanted to know him?.

As said, that doesn't come into it, that is how you would think, it is not how he would think right now at least, in the real world not everyone is excited and pleased about the forthcoming arrival of the next 'bundle of joy' .
Then there is all the saga and drama of the domestic disputes and witholding access etc or seeking permission from the mum (no point pretending that some are not like that) , so from my seat I can see why the guy is prepared to go his own way and just contribute financially. Much as it may hurt and removing bragging rights of those left behind.

Gavin83

red_devil wrote: »

it is not the babys fault its here and the father should step up to his responsibilities. Its a flaw in your personality if you dont want anything to do with your child. As said he had a father how would he like it if his father hadnt wanted to know him?.

While I think it's right a father should financially support a child he didn't want I don't think he should necessarily have to be there for the child. That is the fathers choice as much as it's the mothers choice if they have it in the first place. Some might not agree but I don't think they should be forced to support the child emotionally. Would you even want a child to have contact with a father who clearly didn't want them?

I'm sure some people have a perfect view that once the child comes along the father will magically fall in love but life doesn't always work like that.