How would you feel about this situation

[BelleCanzuto]

Edited to add: the story which prompted this question has now been published.
You can find it here: A Kind of Communion.
The responses I got on this thread did help me greatly, and I changed the ending from the first draft. If any of you have comments or feedback, please don't hesitate.
thanks for all your thoughtful responses
Belle

~~~~~
I wrote a story yesterday, but the more I thought about the ending, the more I wondered how it would come across to people in general (cuz sometimes my weird gets the better of me). Let me know what y'all think, if you would:

A man and a woman have a brief, illicit relationship. The discovery of the relationship would be very damaging for the man, personally and professionally. Discovery of the relationship wouldn't affect the woman much one way or the other.The relationship ends, amicably, as suddenly as it started, with both people pledging not to contact the other. Shortly thereafter, the woman realizes that she's pregnant. She hadn't intended to get pregnant, wasn't planning it, maybe there were medical issues that had made a pregnancy unlikely, so she hadn't thought it was a possibility. She decides that it's fortuitious. She decides to raise the child with no expectation of support or involvement from the man. She's in a good position financially, emotionally, etc to raise the child by herself.

If you were the man in the relationship, the father of the child, would you
1) want to know about the child and decide for yourself whether to face the damage related to the relationship?
2) not know about the child and go on living your life?

Also: if the woman in the story wrote you a letter, annoucing the child, explaining that she didn't expect any assistance from you but just wanted you to know how grateful she was for this outcome and you now had no way to contact her (she'd moved, changed numbers, etc).
Would you
1) think that was cruel of her to tell you and then deny you the possibility of contact?
2) think it was nice to know about and feel comfortable going on with your life?

or any other reaction that you all think is pertinent.
thx
Belle

 

[YDB95]

I'd want to know, and I'd probably want the chance to be involved on some level, even if it had to be kept out of the public eye.

 

[DarkWhispers2U]

Either let me participate in the child's upbringing or don't tell me a damn thing. That's my feelings on the matter. Of course, I'm not exactly in this guy's state of mind or shoes.

 

[gordo12]

Wow, wicked question.

I'd definitely want to know and participate. Regardless of the consequences. Of course my wife would kill me so my good intentions may be moot!

 

[ElectricBlue]

Key phrase:

...with both people pledging not to contact the other...

Under those circumstances, and that's the deal, the father should never know of the child - in which case the answer to the first question should only ever be 2).

If she breaks the pledge, tells him, and then breaks off all future contact so he can't ever do 1), then she's something of a heartless bitch (and I don't say that very often).

 

[LoquiSordidaAdMe]

I get the impression you are looking for the morally correct actions for your characters. Like you want them to do the right thing, but you're not sure what that is. I think EB nailed it above by pointing out the key phrase:

...with both people pledging not to contact the other...

If she breaks the arrangement by contacting him, the moral thing to do is allow him the opportunity to do the same.

On the other hand, if she abides by the arrangement and he finds out anyway, he could fairly argue that the circumstances were outside of the original spirit of the agreement.

I think the most moral response is for her to discreetly inform him of the unforseen circumstances, give him an opportunity to respond and revise the arrangement, but make it clear he's under no obligation and the original arrangement can continue if he chooses.

For him, doing the right thing would depend on who would be hurt and how much he trusts her to raise his child.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

I get the impression you are looking for the morally correct actions for your characters. Like you want them to do the right thing, but you're not sure what that is.

It's less about wanting them (the woman, in this case because she's holding all the cards) to do the morally right thing as it is looking for a second opinion about how something might come across. I wrote in a PM to someone who'd answered that the ending was a couple of sentences that I thought made a nice twist to a sub-theme of the story. But the more I thought about it today, the more I wondered if what I wrote would come across, as EB put it, heartless.

And no, I don't want this character to seem heartless or cruel.

I'm really appreciating the feedback so far.

 

[Javahead]

From the man's view point: 1 & 1. I'd want to know, and I'd want the possibility of some relationship with the child. But that's just me.

Something to consider, too, is that today, with modern DNA testing, the odds of something hidden coming to light even decades later is considerably higher that it was in times past. And it's increasingly likely that the child, whether from health concerns or simple curiosity, will test someday.

I may be projecting, but I can understand it from the child's viewpoint, because I lived it. I was born about 10 months after my mother filed for divorce from her first husband - although he was listed on my birth certificate, she never claimed any child support and I never met him. She remarried a couple of years later, and I was adopted by her second husband, so I didn't lack for a father, but I always wondered.

So a few years ago, I did DNA testing - quite honestly, I was more concerned about health issues (I was *very* relieved to find I hadn't inherited a couple of genetic nasties), but it included a complete "ancestry" breakdown - and although 50% of it closely matched my mother's extremely well documented family history, the other half made it exceedingly unlikely that my putative birth father was who she'd claimed.

I asked her. And after some hemming and hawing, she came clean - after her marriage broke up, she had an extremely short rebound affair with a coworker (almost a soap opera stereotype - hot young nurse with young doctor on the make).

Neither had expected it to last, and she was already planning to move away, so when she found she was pregnant, it was easier for her to believe (or at least claim) that my father was her ex. And since she didn't intend to claim child support anyway, that's where it rested.

On the whole, I'm just as happy the way things turned out - by all accounts, her ex was a pretty awful person (my uncle knew his younger brother, so he occasionally passed on the latest stories). And thanks to testing, I'm in occasional touch with one of my half-siblings - I was *amazed* to find out how many of my own personality quirks are "nature" more than "nurture."

But the point is that even 50+ years after, hidden secrets don't necessarily *stay* hidden. Perhaps I'm letting personal experience influence my answer. But I know that if I were the man in that scenario I'd want to know up front rather than being possibly blindsided a few decades later.

 

[JuanSeiszFitzHall]

I'd want to know, and I'd be hurt if I was closed off. But I personally wouldn't have gotten into this situation, so that's no help.

I agree with Javahead that the kid (and the woman raising the kid) should have all of the relevant information about the kid's biological parentage, and this might be difficult without the man's involvement. In a decade or too it may be very difficult for anyone to get through life without being able to provide that information to health insurers, employers, etc. Not a pretty picture, but it could happen.

 

[Hypoxia]

I won't opine on morality because that's your call as author. I'll suggest you ask yourself what ending(s) you want. Resolutions or not; twists; tragicomedy. What tempts you?

 

[jaF0]

#3, be advised and discuss/recommend termination.

Or better yet, #4, she terminates without ever making further contact as agreed initially.

 

[Touch_type]

I wrote a story yesterday, but the more I thought about the ending, the more I wondered how it would come across to people in general (cuz sometimes my weird gets the better of me). Let me know what y'all think, if you would:

A man and a woman have a brief, illicit relationship. The discovery of the relationship would be very damaging for the man, personally and professionally. Discovery of the relationship wouldn't affect the woman much one way or the other.The relationship ends, amicably, as suddenly as it started, with both people pledging not to contact the other. Shortly thereafter, the woman realizes that she's pregnant. She hadn't intended to get pregnant, wasn't planning it, maybe there were medical issues that had made a pregnancy unlikely, so she hadn't thought it was a possibility. She decides that it's fortuitious. She decides to raise the child with no expectation of support or involvement from the man. She's in a good position financially, emotionally, etc to raise the child by herself.

If you were the man in the relationship, the father of the child, would you
1) want to know about the child and decide for yourself whether to face the damage related to the relationship?
2) not know about the child and go on living your life?

Also: if the woman in the story wrote you a letter, annoucing the child, explaining that she didn't expect any assistance from you but just wanted you to know how grateful she was for this outcome and you now had no way to contact her (she'd moved, changed numbers, etc).
Would you
1) think that was cruel of her to tell you and then deny you the possibility of contact?
2) think it was nice to know about and feel comfortable going on with your life?

or any other reaction that you all think is pertinent.
thx
Belle

Surely the starting point has to be that she has the right to decide what is best for her and her child. In the immediate future what benefit is there to her, the child, or indeed him, by reopening an amicably terminated relationship? And especially given that he, apparently, has a lot to lose by the relationship becoming public. She merely invites what: distrust, guilt, shame? In the future, should they reconnect, there is the possibility that he may resent not having known and been able to enjoy his offspring's growing up. Such resentment, should he indulge it, may sour the possibility of a renewed relationship. But these are what ifs I'm sure she considered and are theoretical at a time when she has to be thoroughly pragmatic. Any sensible, mature man would surely understand and support her decision, however painful if may be for him when/if he discovers his paternity.

 

[NoJo]

Personally, I'd blackmail the woman until she had no money left, then marry a rich widow. But I am a hopeless romantic, I guess

 

[Sonatatre]

I would like to think about this from the kids perspective. I think the child will want to know who the father is. I think the child would want to have contact at some point.

Would the woman tell the child who their father is when they are old enough to ask such questions? I think in situations like this when the mother hides it from the father in order to not upheave the fathers life, there is usually some contact eventually.

I think the worst part of this is to deny the child their right to see their father.

 

[sbrooks103]

I wrote a story yesterday, but the more I thought about the ending, the more I wondered how it would come across to people in general (cuz sometimes my weird gets the better of me). Let me know what y'all think, if you would:

A man and a woman have a brief, illicit relationship. The discovery of the relationship would be very damaging for the man, personally and professionally. Discovery of the relationship wouldn't affect the woman much one way or the other.The relationship ends, amicably, as suddenly as it started, with both people pledging not to contact the other. Shortly thereafter, the woman realizes that she's pregnant. She hadn't intended to get pregnant, wasn't planning it, maybe there were medical issues that had made a pregnancy unlikely, so she hadn't thought it was a possibility. She decides that it's fortuitious. She decides to raise the child with no expectation of support or involvement from the man. She's in a good position financially, emotionally, etc to raise the child by herself.

If you were the man in the relationship, the father of the child, would you
1) want to know about the child and decide for yourself whether to face the damage related to the relationship?
2) not know about the child and go on living your life?

Also: if the woman in the story wrote you a letter, annoucing the child, explaining that she didn't expect any assistance from you but just wanted you to know how grateful she was for this outcome and you now had no way to contact her (she'd moved, changed numbers, etc).
Would you
1) think that was cruel of her to tell you and then deny you the possibility of contact?
2) think it was nice to know about and feel comfortable going on with your life?

or any other reaction that you all think is pertinent.
thx
Belle

I'm torn on the first question. On one hand, I'd want the opportunity to make my own decision, on the other hand it would be a very difficult decision.

On the second, it's easier, it's #1. If I'm to be denied the possibility of contact, whether or not I might want it, I'd rather not know.

 

[SimonDoom]

I would want to know about the child, and know enough facts about the child's circumstances to be able to make an informed decision about what to do next. Ideally, I would want to have a relationship of some kind with the child, and I would hope that the mother would be open to that.

With respect to the relationship with the child, however, the right standard I would want to follow would be "the good of the child" rather than my own preferences. For instance, what if the woman had remarried and the child thought her husband was the father? My personal preference would be for the mother to be honest with the child, but if she wasn't, my second-best preference would be for whatever was best for the child. I wouldn't try to interject myself in the child's life against the mother's preferences. I think I could live with that, although I imagine I would have some sense of regret and sadness going forward.

 

[Inkhorn]

Oof. This one strikes a bit close to home...

As the man, I would not want to know BUT... it would probably be better if I did. The child may have questions of their own in the future or perhaps need my medical history. Plus, I can imagine the shock I might receive if it’s revealed to me years later. All of the doubts and worries and regrets over what could have been...

As for the woman sending me a letter with no way to contact her? Cruel. Well-meaning as it might have been on her part, it would have been a knife to the heart. A betrayal on several layers. Because the agreement was that there would be no contact at all, an agreement she broke (albeit with good reason.) And because she robs me of any choices to contact her back, to try and take a part in our child’s life, to even just say “You’re welcome.” And because she robs our child of any choice in the future; if the child wants to know about me when they’re grown, how are they going to find me? Ten, twenty years later, I might have moved, changed email addresses and phone numbers. While not impossible to track me down, it would be daunting and/or expensive. So... yeah, definitely cruel.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

bumped due to the edit of the OP

The story which prompted this question has now been published. It's here: A Kind of Communion

Thanks everyone for all the responses, which helped me redo the ending.

 

[gordo12]

That's the kind of story you read and think, "Damn! Wish I'd written that."
Got a 5 from me.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

That's the kind of story you read and think, "Damn! Wish I'd written that."
Got a 5 from me.

Thanks, Gordo. That's very kind.

 

[sbrooks103]

I get the impression you are looking for the morally correct actions for your characters. Like you want them to do the right thing, but you're not sure what that is. I think EB nailed it above by pointing out the key phrase:



If she breaks the arrangement by contacting him, the moral thing to do is allow him the opportunity to do the same.

On the other hand, if she abides by the arrangement and he finds out anyway, he could fairly argue that the circumstances were outside of the original spirit of the agreement.

I think the most moral response is for her to discreetly inform him of the unforseen circumstances, give him an opportunity to respond and revise the arrangement, but make it clear he's under no obligation and the original arrangement can continue if he chooses.

For him, doing the right thing would depend on who would be hurt and how much he trusts her to raise his child.

I'm of two minds. On one hand, they agreed to no contact, he would be harmed if their affair came to light, which it almost surely would if she contacted him, so she shouldn't, but that seems so cold, that on the other hand I think she should.

On the second question, I think she SHOULD tell him, affirming that she WASN'T looking to obligate him to anything, but leave that option up to him. If he's willing to risk his reputation, etc., that should be his choice. To tell him, then deny him, is cruel.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Pragmatically speaking: this kind of thing can come to light quite by accident, in this age of cheap DNA testing and ancestry databases. That's generally not a good way to find out.

 

[ElectricBlue]

The story which prompted this question has now been published. It's here: A Kind of Communion

Thanks everyone for all the responses, which helped me redo the ending.

Your story was significantly more complex, and with many more morality beats, than your opening post suggested.

Given the circumstances of your male lead, he almost should have been eternally tormented by knowing and being held remote, because he'd broken his eternal vows and in his ethos, sinned. You let him off lightly, because he got his cake and got to eat it.

 

[Cumminginsiderher]

If you are looking for some sort of "Moral Highground" for either of the two to take, you are barking up the wrong tree. Obviously, because of their past relationship, NEITHER of them can claim any sort of Moral Highground.

Given that, I have seen some successful lawsuits against women who had a child and never contacted the father to let them know a child existed. Usually, they find out when the child becomes an adult and comes looking for them. Something else I have seen is when the father finds out while the child is still a minor and then sues for custody and wins. Something along these lines might be more interesting and practical rather than trying to go with a moral thing.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

Your story was significantly more complex, and with many more morality beats, than your opening post suggested.

Given the circumstances of your male lead, he almost should have been eternally tormented by knowing and being held remote, because he'd broken his eternal vows and in his ethos, sinned. You let him off lightly, because he got his cake and got to eat it.

Ever since I finished the thing, I've been toying with the idea of writing a companion piece told from his point of view. Because, he's got a whole backstory in my head to attempt to answer the question of why he would break his vows. [Which would also be a good writing exercise for me, since I've never attempted to write a story from a male POV.] I may yet. I did want to see what kind of reception this story got, but his story is nagging at me, regardless.

And yeah, I simplfied the question considerably, because I didn't want to give too much away for anyone who went on to read the story. And because the part I was questioning had to do with her responsibilities. It really was invaluable information.

Thank you also, for your lovely comment.