Rosanna Davison advises cheating woman to conceal paternity doubts from her boyfriend

Balmed Out wrote: »

Id guess one of the many reasons rape has always been considered such a heinous crime is it removes a woman's right to determine the father of her offspring and what this women is considering may be the same. He also deserves to know she cheated - and with a friend which says even more and on top of this the child would have a right to know who their father is.

so wrong on many levels.

Would I be right in assuming that Rosanna doesn't actually write the column herself? I always assumed all the sections like this used ghost writers.

Perhaps I'm reading it wrong, but that answer reads like you are reducing a woman's worth to producing babies.

I would have thought the reason cited would be low down on the list of reason why rape is wrong.

It's wrong even without any conception or risk of it - it's wrong because of what it does to her full stop.

Assuming this story is all true (which I doubt) and that Ms Davison has given this advise (which I also doubt) the following points strike me

RD tells the girl to tell the one night stand that the kid could be his...but not the boyfriend that the kid may not be his...strange advice...why only tell one party and not both.

RD says to break off contact with the ONS after dropping bombshell of possibility of kid being his. Not quite sure how he/she could stay out of contact after that conversation. Im sure the ONS would be very anxious to know.


In my opinion if she tells the boyf she runs the risk of breakup...regardless of whether kid is his or not. I'm guessing she doesn't want to be a single mother.

My 'advice' would be to try a paternity test from the father after the baby is born without telling him (IE try to get some hair or something that they can run a DNA test off without him knowing). If she finds out hes not the father, then go to the ONS and tell him he is (most likely).

I wouldn't be saying anything to anybody about possibilities of fatherhood until shes more sure. Its not right...but I think its possibly (!!!) the least bad situation all round if she doesn't go dropping bombshells like that and probably destroying 4 peoples lives (her, boyf, ONS & baby) over something shes not sure of.

One thing though, she needs to keep her knickers on in future.


Alternative solution would have been for her to have an abortion earlier on and said nothing (***note I am not opening up a rights/wrongs pro/against abortion discussion...merely mentioning that it may have been a option she could have done earlier in the pregnancy and not had to resort to RD & her 'advice')

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

You're assuming he's not the father. The lady never stated if either one was the father. Just a "maybe".
In what way does the child lose the most?



See above. Lady has no idea who the father is. She thinks it could be his mate.

It's definitely not OK to not tell your partner that there's a significant chance the child they're raising might not be theirs. If it's his friend's child then it's his friend's responsibility to contribute towards the child's upbringing.

Wesson Wide Weed wrote: »

But. Some people are horrible. Some of those people are women. Most people are sound. Tbh, this whole thing of avoiding women rather than avoiding horrible people as a response to the actions of some horrible women does come across as the action of someone who's either not that bright or not that predisposed to like women in the first place.

I think that's over-simplifying things. People aren't just "sound" or "horrible". The vast majority of men/women that end up as abusive partners will have started out as nice ones and their behaviour will have changed slowly over time.

The poor chap in this instance has no idea that his girlfriend is sleeping with his mate(s?) and possibly is pregnant by one of them. He probably thinks he's found one of the good ones and without knowing an awful lot more about the situation we've no idea if he has any culpability in that. He could be an idiot who's blind to the fact his partner's a blatant liar and cheat or he could be the victim of an incredibly scheming and manipulative woman.

And this is why many men are choosing to avoid relationships. You can't easily tell the good from the bad. Our legal system actively prevents you from planning for the worst whilst hoping for the best (non recognition of pre-nups, co-habitation aspects of the Civil Partnership Bill) and the family courts are massively biased against men. So for many men, the risks they're being asked to face when committing to a relationship are simply too high to justify the rewards. Many of us (myself included) still throw caution to the wind and marry but from a purely logical point-of-view, it's a foolish thing for a man to do.

(Of course, women of means are exposed to some of the same risks but, ime, they tend to select partners of lower means at such a low level that the only thing worth mentioning about them in such this conversation is that the changes we require to re-balance the gender inequality in this country should be done in a gender-blind fashion in order that they're not discriminated against either.)

Macavity. wrote: »

Rosanna Davison should be made raise the child, see how she likes it.

:eek:

Now that's hardly in the poor child's best interests!

ballsymchugh wrote: »

i agree with endacl above, it's probably a bullsh1t story with a bullsh1t reply from someone on work experience.

in all seriousness though, if this were a real situation, it has implications on the baby's health down the line in cases of inherited dodgy genes.

This point about knowing the genetics for health reasons is an extremely important issue and possibly the most important thing at play here. I simply cannot fathom how anyone could advise on keeping quiet. So irresponsible in terms of the child's health.

bb1234567 wrote: »

Sickening. God I hope its the boyfriends baby for his sake, imagine finding out it wasn't yours

I think it's safe to assume that it's not a real story. The indo is shambolic. This is the paper who pays Barry Egan to create propoganda videos for John Delaney and two page spreads on Twinks missing dog. They're not the New York Times.

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

electro, I've stated if the child is the other man's she better own the Hell up to it and do something that's in the best interest of the child. My point was that some people are acting like it's a sure thing. Some are not. Neither side giving opinions are 100% correct here and there's no point acting like either side is.

But it's not good enough to allow a person to raise a child if there's a significant chance it may not be theirs! You have to let the father know about the doubt