'My body, my baby'

LeeHoffmann

She meant that a woman can get trapped in a dysfunctional relationship with the father of her child. You can consider yourself trapped in that way. Abortion/adoption isn't a solution for everyone

Napper Hawkins

I know exactly what she meant.

Is it dysfunctional because the father didn't want the kid?

LeeHoffmann

I don't know. I think having a kid with somebody you don't get on with and don't like is going to make for a difficult relationship, whether both were in favour of keeping the kid or not

Napper Hawkins

So why have the kid?

LeeHoffmann

like I said, abortion/adoption isn't a solution for everyone.

Napper Hawkins

So how does a woman have the right to complain about being trapped in a dysfunctional relationship with a man who didn't want the kid in the first place?

She made her choice, a choice he had no say in.

Cue resentment, hostility and an unwanted kid who grows up with or without a father who didn't want him/her anyway and the kid has his/her mother to thank for this.

Am I making sense?

LeeHoffmann

So how does a woman have the right to complain about being trapped in a dysfunctional relationship with a man who didn't want the kid in the first place?

Let's look at a few different situations which will result in a child from an unwanted pregnancy...
- 1. the mother and the father are both in favour of keeping the kid but don't get on.
- 2. the mother's in favour of keeping the kid, the Dad wants nothing to do with the child
- 3. neither the mother or the father are in favour of keeping the kid but for whatever reason an abortion isn't an option and they can't go through with adoption

In these cases...
1. both parents can feel trapped in a dysfunctional relationship
2. afaik nobody can force a man be a Dad (as in have a relationship with a child, not just biologically-speaking). Afaik the man can be forced to be financially responsible but I don't think he can be forced to have a relationship with the child. If this is true, then there is no need for the parents to have any dealings or relationship with each other. Hence, neither are trapped in a relationship.
The man may still feel trapped in terms of having to pay child support. Many posters feel there should be an opt-out clause for men during pregnancy up until the abortion cut-off point. I'm inclined to agree here but I'd probably make that cut-off point for the man's decision to opt out a couple of weeks earlier than the abortion cut off point.
3. In this case both could feel trapped.

Napper Hawkins

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

Let's look at a few different situations which will result in a child from an unwanted pregnancy...
- 1. the mother and the father are both in favour of keeping the kid but don't get on.
- 2. the mother's in favour of keeping the kid, the Dad wants nothing to do with the child
- 3. neither the mother or the father are in favour of keeping the kid but for whatever reason an abortion isn't an option and they can't go through with adoption

In these cases...
1. both parents can feel trapped in a dysfunctional relationship
2. afaik nobody can force a man be a Dad (as in have a relationship with a child, not just biologically-speaking). Afaik the man can be forced to be financially responsible but I don't think he can be forced to have a relationship with the child. If this is true, then there is no need for the parents to have any dealings or relationship with each other. Hence, neither are trapped in a relationship.
The man may still feel trapped in terms of having to pay child support. Many posters feel there should be an opt-out clause for men during pregnancy up until the abortion cut-off point. I'm inclined to agree here but I'd probably make that cut-off point for the man's decision to opt out a couple of weeks earlier than the abortion cut off point.
3. In this case both could feel trapped.

Ok.


1. They deserve their unhappiness and the resentment of their offspring so.

2. Man is trapped financially supporting a kid he doesn't want, despicable imo.

3. That's down to the individuals unique circumstances I suppose, if it's religious reasons then I've no sympathy for anyone but the kid who shouldn't be alive or should have been given to parents who actually want them.

So what other reasons would there be for no abortion/adoption?

NewFrockTuesday

It could be argued, that men ultimately have the last choice when it comes to pregnancy. They have the choice to stay or go.

If the decision has been made – by the woman – to proceed with the pregnancy, then man has the choice to stay around, not necessarily in the relationship, and help with the upbringing of the child or he can walk out the door and decide to have nothing to do with the situation. (Regarding the payment of child support - the scenarios I see are the men not handing over a penny and getting away with it or handing over laughably small amounts that wouldn’t keep the child in nappies for a week. That’s another thread though)

What happens in a scenario where the man has been telling the woman he wants a child and then once he knows she is pregnant changes his mind and walks out the door? Is he supposed to have some sort of hand in the process of deciding the outcome of the pregnancy where deception and cowardice have been his main playing cards? You can stick that to a long or short term relationship.

Should a violent alcoholic who gets his partner pregnant just before she decides to leave him get any say? What about a loving partner who goes out and get killed – who steps in then on his behalf? Should his family have a say in what happens? What about the woman who has an abortion in secret? Should the man be allowed to charge her with murder?

Ultimately the woman is the more vulnerable party. She is the one standing to lose job, freedom, opportunities etc. If she decides a life of a diminished living standard because of pregnancy is not for her at the moment, then what right does a man have to tell her otherwise? If she decides she does not want to live with the physical effects of giving birth right now, why should a man who has no idea what it is like tell her otherwise?

You can paste a thousand scenarios on the board but each one of them boils down to the person who stands to lose the most. That’s usually the woman.

If an equally strong minded woman decides to keep the baby should she be upset if the father says:

'Your body, your baby, I'm off'.

You make it sound like this is an unusual scenario.

The “two to tango” argument does not apply to real life situations in as black and white a manner as painted. Its very difficult to keep an open mind on how the other person might be feeling when you have made a decision as huge as whether or not to abort. Im glad I am a woman, because if somebody came into my life, stayed a short while and then presented me with a mill stone for my neck for the rest of my financial and emotional life, I am not sure I’d be the upstanding and generous person I would expect as a reaction from the person I would present the same scenario to as a woman.

It is unfair that women have the ultimate say in whether a pregnancy goes ahead or if it doesn't - but the alternative is enforced pregnancy, which would be a ridiculous scenario and, given the current tenets to abortion even here, a legal nightmare.

Enforced pregnancy is the alternative. I am sure there are those who would present a case for.

Feeona

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

So how does a woman have the right to complain about being trapped in a dysfunctional relationship with a man who didn't want the kid in the first place?

She made her choice, a choice he had no say in.

Wow, well you were responding to my post that women can also be affected by dysfunctional relationships where a child is (unfortunately) involved. It seems though that you didn't bother to read my post about discussing options with the father, because your proof that women aren't affected as much by dysfunctional rels. involving a child is that women can just yell 'my body, my baby' and that's that.

I really hope you have experience backing up your comments, otherwise you're just projecting a view of women which shows them to be heartless, cruel bitches.

Napper Hawkins

Feeona wrote: »

Wow, well you were responding to my post that women can also be affected by dysfunctional relationships where a child is (unfortunately) involved. It seems though that you didn't bother to read my post about discussing options with the father, because your proof that women aren't affected as much by dysfunctional rels. involving a child is that women can just yell 'my body, my baby' and that's that.

I really hope you have experience backing up your comments, otherwise you're just projecting a view of women which shows them to be heartless, cruel bitches.

Ah here.

I do have experience. I went through all of this crap a few years ago.
I also never said that women are less affected by dysfunctional relationships than men, in fact I believe they are generally more affected.

I just think it's wrong that a guy should have to pay for a kid he doesn't want. Not all men who find themselves in this situation are violent, alcoholic or just scumbags in general.

I want a kid, but with someone I actually want to have it with and when I'm good and ready.

Elle Collins

Monty Burnz wrote: »

But a woman can force a man to be a father, with all the legal and financial repercussions that this implies for the man.

Balls. The only way a woman can force a man to be a father is if she ties him down and rapes him repeatedly until she's been impregnanted. I think we can agree this is not the common route to fatherhood. :rolleyes:

Elle Collins

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

I just think it's wrong that a guy should have to pay for a kid he doesn't want.

Er, then maybe he shouldn't make a kid he doesn't want?!

Maguined

Elle Collins wrote: »

Balls. The only way a woman can force a man to be a father is if she ties him down and rapes him repeatedly until she's been impregnanted. I think we can agree this is not the common route to fatherhood. :rolleyes:

Elle Collins wrote: »

Er, then maybe he shouldn't make a kid he doesn't want?!

I think the point they are trying to make is that if a woman gets pregnant she can choose the end the pregnancy or she could choose to give the child up for adoption, but choices completely removes any financial or parenting responsibility towards the child whereas a father does not have access to these options, there is no legal way for him to choose to be rid of these responsibilities as once the mother makes her choice his legal responsibilities are in play.

Napper Hawkins

Elle Collins wrote: »

Er, then maybe he shouldn't make a kid he doesn't want?!

So where do they sell these magic, unbreakable condoms you seem to believe exist?

Or are you suggesting all men should stay celibate until it's baby time?

LeeHoffmann

I think Newfrock Tuesday brings up a good point. Many posters are saying that men should have the right to give up parenting responsibilities (up to a certain point in pregnancy) because women can do so, and that it's unfair that men can be forced to pay for child support in this situation. The reality is that men often aren't chased down for this money and it's mostly up to the man whether he pays or not as the law isn't rigidly enforced. Or am I wrong in this? Has anyone here ever been forced to pay (or known somebody who's been chased for money in this way)?

A question for the men of boards: If you could legally give up parenting rights and responsibilities in such a situation, would you find it difficult knowing there's a living breathing son or daughter of yours out there in the world?

I guess what I'm asking is: given that this discussion has already gone on for seven pages, is this really just about money? Or is it more about men's frustration that they can become Dads (i.e. not just biological fathers, not just financial supporters, but active parents) because a woman decides to continue with an unwanted pregnancy? I'm asking because there's probably some men on boards who think they would decide to be an involved parent in such a situation, but resent that that could happen and fear the possibility.

Is anybody of the opinion that a pregnancy should only be continued with if both parents/potential parents agree to it? In other words, should an abortion be performed if one parent (male or female) doesn't want to have a kid?

py2006

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

A question for the men of boards: If you could legally give up parenting rights and responsibilities in such a situation, would you find it difficult knowing there's a living breathing son or daughter of yours out there in the world?

That's not the point. Its having the option of opting out.

Feeona

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Ah here.

I do have experience. I went through all of this crap a few years ago.
I also never said that women are less affected by dysfunctional relationships than men, in fact I believe they are generally more affected.

I just think it's wrong that a guy should have to pay for a kid he doesn't want. Not all men who find themselves in this situation are violent, alcoholic or just scumbags in general.

I want a kid, but with someone I actually want to have it with and when I'm good and ready.

Thanks for explaining, I went off on one earlier because too often women are portrayed as selfish, remorseless beings without any regard for anyone else in their orbit!

I agree with what you have in bold, again sometimes men are portrayed as being like this, but I have enough sense and experience (as do most women) to know that men are not like this. Of course I choose to surround myself with people who care for me. People who come out with lines like the line in bold usually choose, unfortunately for them, to surround themselves with people who treat them badly.

The problem is could you actually see yourself saying to a woman 'Have an abortion or I walk' after she has spoken about all the options with you? If the thought of an abortion filled her with emotional and physical turmoil and fear? Could you (or any man for that matter) really go through with such a hard line?

Stheno

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

Has anyone here ever been forced to pay (or known somebody who's been chased for money in this way)?

Men have been imprisoned for failing to pay maintenance here, not often, but it has happened.

See this thread

metrovelvet

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Ah here.

I do have experience. I went through all of this crap a few years ago.
I also never said that women are less affected by dysfunctional relationships than men, in fact I believe they are generally more affected.

I just think it's wrong that a guy should have to pay for a kid he doesn't want. Not all men who find themselves in this situation are violent, alcoholic or just scumbags in general.

I want a kid, but with someone I actually want to have it with and when I'm good and ready.

If this were the case, where men didnt have to pay for kids they don't want, you do realise the social welfare bill will sky rocket and the tax payer will be paying for those kids these men abandon? You do realise that poverty levels will increase and that usually means higher crime rates and higher crime rates usually mean more prison, more police, more courts and again more money taken from the public purse?

Marty McFly

metrovelvet wrote: »

If this were the case, where men didnt have to pay for kids they don't want, you do realise the social welfare bill will sky rocket and the tax payer will be paying for those kids these men abandon? You do realise that poverty levels will increase and that usually means higher crime rates and higher crime rates usually mean more prison, more police, more courts and again more money taken from the public purse?

Nope im not buying that at all, sure the amount of so called single mothers out there already scrounging of the state is already at a ridicously high level what with getting rented accomdation for next to nothing and a large percentage of them have there partners living with them, crack down on all of that and I think itd just be about the same level as it is now. Also why would the social welfare billl sky rocket? There already is childrens allowance, genuine single mothers getting extremely cheap rented accomodation, the single mother could still work like many of them do now etc, so I dont know but im thinking your theory is flawed.

metrovelvet

I'm thinking you can have an intelligent conversation about this or you can have the kind of one you want to have, and that type, I dont find very interesting.

HellFireClub

Feeona wrote: »

The problem is could you actually see yourself saying to a woman 'Have an abortion or I walk' after she has spoken about all the options with you? If the thought of an abortion filled her with emotional and physical turmoil and fear? Could you (or any man for that matter) really go through with such a hard line?

In fairness, standing up and taking responsibility for a child if happen you father one, in no way means you will choose to stay with the mother of that child in terms of entertaining a relationship with her that you could be seriously unhappy in, (sure you mightn't even know her sirname in the case of a pregnancy that emerged out of a one night stand)...

I know it doesn't sound kind or in any way ideal, but sure if you put yourself in that situation where it can happen and you hardly know the person or their character, then you only really have yourself to blame...

py2006

metrovelvet wrote: »

I'm thinking you can have an intelligent conversation about this or you can have the kind of one you want to have, and that type, I dont find very interesting.

I thought he gave a very intelligent response to your extreme view to be honest. Just because he doesn't agree with you or pointed out a different perspective on your point does not mean he is incapable of an intelligent discussion.

py2006

I think the point being made is not so much that men want to abandon a child. Its more about the fact that women can choose to opt out of a responsibility should the wish but men do not have that choice.

Personally, if I was to bring a child into this world I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I was to abandon it. I may not wish to be in a relationship with the women in question but I would certainly want to provide and have a relationship with the child.

The other side is the woman blocking the men from seeing their child just because they don't want to have a relationship with the father themselves! But that's for another thread I guess!

The Corinthian

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

A question for the men of boards: If you could legally give up parenting rights and responsibilities in such a situation, would you find it difficult knowing there's a living breathing son or daughter of yours out there in the world?

You would be talking about a situation akin to adoption, where a mother abdicates all parental responsibilities, yet a a living breathing son or daughter of her's would be out there in the World. As such it really depends on the man or woman, but I would imagine that it would be something that would be at the back of the mind of most people, even years after.

But the situation for men is more complex than that because when you say that men could "legally give up parenting rights and responsibilities" it presupposes that they have any rights - we don't. Even if married, the proposed changes to the law (abolishing guardianship in favour of 'parental responsibility') would effectively remove pretty much the few rights that a non-custodial parent (i.e. the father) currently has.

Ultimately it depends upon the two 'parents' in any given scenario. All too often all men are tarred with the same brush as the guys who go round fecklessly fathering children by multiple women. In reality, this is a minority of cases and often there are plenty of other factors at play - for example, just as a woman's relationship with the father may be a factor in her decision to have an abortion, a man's relationship with the mother may also affect his behaviour.

Indeed, in the most extreme cases, there are plenty of men who would be involved, but effectively are blocked by the mother; they have few legal options and those options that are available are never enforced - men are regularly jailed for non-payment of maintenance, women are never jailed for denial of access. Faced with such a hopeless situation what do you think many men decide?

Returning to the topic of male abortion, as it's often called, it would be very difficult to implement, especially in Ireland. Even if the political landscape were amenable, it would require drastic reform of social welfare, otherwise it would increase costs to the State (and hence the taxpayer) substantially. Philosophically, society would have to abandon this notion that a mother has an absolute right to stay at home to raise her child(ren), even if she can't afford it (something presently written into the constitution). In practical terms, even reforming social welfare would not be enough, because you would need to replace it with affordable child care, for a start.

But if that was done, what would likely be the result? More abortions is my guess. Many would still have children, even in the knowledge that they are solely financially responsible for their decision to become a parent, but I suspect that the "World owes me a living because I bred" brigade (a minority, as with the feckless dads), would think twice about motherhood, thus driving up abortion rates.

HellFireClub wrote: »

In fairness, standing up and taking responsibility for a child if happen you father one, in no way means you will choose to stay with the mother of that child in terms of entertaining a relationship with her that you could be seriously unhappy in, (sure you mightn't even know her sirname in the case of a pregnancy that emerged out of a one night stand)...

Depends, as some mothers do see it as a 'package deal'; either they expected a relationship as part of any future scenario, and thus effectively block the father if he rejects her, or if they specifically did not want a relationship, any relationship between the father and the child would be too intrusive for them.

Either way, directly or indirectly, the mother may choose to thwart any relationship the father may have with the child for her own selfish reasons, which can have disastrous consequences, especially at the start. Nonetheless, it really depends upon the situation.

LeeHoffmann

You would be talking about a situation akin to adoption

Exactly. Thanks for responding.

I would imagine that it would be something that would be at the back of the mind of most people, even years after.

:eek: Really? I've heard people say it would be emotionally tougher to give up a living child than abort a pregnancy. At least, I thought men would find it difficult to live on as normal knowing there's a child of theirs out there that they'll never have contact with

men are regularly jailed for non-payment of maintenance, women are never jailed for denial of access

. Wait - regularly??? Is this really the case? I'd never heard of such a case before today but I know of a few men who don't contribute at all and haven't been forced to pay or had to go to jail. Is it really the case that this occurs regularly and not just an extreme exception? Genuine question here. Does anyone know of any stats on this??

All too often all men are tarred with the same brush as the guys who go round fecklessly fathering children by multiple women...there are plenty of men who would be involved, but effectively are blocked by the mother

Agreed about men getting tarred but likewise women are all too often tarred with the same brush as those who block access to the child as a form of revenge because the father rejected her. Both sets are in the minority.

The Corinthian

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

Really? I've heard people say it would be emotionally tougher to give up a living child than abort a pregnancy.

I would imagine that this is because it is rationalized (whether true or not - I'm not going to go into an abortion debate) as not really being a child, nowadays.

At least, I thought men would find it difficult to live on as normal knowing there's a child of theirs out there that they'll never have contact with

Naturally, but again it depends on the man, just as it can depend on the woman.

. Wait - regularly??? Is this really the case? I'd never heard of such a case before today but I know of a few men who don't contribute at all and haven't been forced to pay or had to go to jail. Is it really the case that this occurs regularly and not just an extreme exception? Genuine question here.

Regularly does not mean that many men do not simply get away with not paying, all it means is (as a good friend and solicitor once told me) that it does happen regularly.

Does anyone know of any stats on this??

Such cases are held in camera, so it is difficult to ascertain the numbers, beyond anecdotal examples. However, it can be said that father are sent to jail (for breaching maintenance orders) and mothers are not (for breaching access orders), simply because one can point to numerous examples of the former and would be hard pressed to find any example of the latter.

K-9

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

. Wait - regularly??? Is this really the case? I'd never heard of such a case before today but I know of a few men who don't contribute at all and haven't been forced to pay or had to go to jail. Is it really the case that this occurs regularly and not just an extreme exception? Genuine question here. Does anyone know of any stats on this??

It depends if there is a court order and if it's enforced by the mother if not paid. As somebody who has had financial problems in the last year yep, if the arrears are looked for a warrant can be issued and you are a ward of court (arrested) when you get to court. You basically have to show you are willing to pay and look for a reduction in the figure.

Feeona

HellFireClub wrote: »

In fairness, standing up and taking responsibility for a child if happen you father one, in no way means you will choose to stay with the mother of that child in terms of entertaining a relationship with her that you could be seriously unhappy in, (sure you mightn't even know her sirname in the case of a pregnancy that emerged out of a one night stand)...

I know it doesn't sound kind or in any way ideal, but sure if you put yourself in that situation where it can happen and you hardly know the person or their character, then you only really have yourself to blame...

As I've outlined in my previous posts, I'd take responsibility for my actions by sitting down with the father and discussing the options. I don't understand why you think I wouldn't take the 'blame' or try to apportion it elsewhere

It's a moot point for me anyway, because I can't see myself having a one night stand in the future. I just think it's important to be aware of the different scenarios people face at different times in their lives. There but the grace of god and all that jazz.