Girlpower?

[M's girl]

Saw this Dr. Phil show on TV this afternoon (Dutch TV, it must have already aired in the US some time ago) where a guy claimed his girlfriend had become pregnant while claiming a) to be not able to conceive and b) using the pill anyway for some other (medical) reason.

He says he told her (I think before they even had sex or sex without a condom) he did not want to become a parent at this stage in his life. After the first period of their relationship - where they used condoms - they started to have sex without. He thought he was (double) safe anyway in the pregnancy-area because, as said before, she claimed to be not able to conceive AND use the pill on top of that.

As a guy (I'm not, but..), I would lose the condoms after a while, I'm sure! Now she has this baby-girl and he has to pay her $ 500 in child support and he does not agree.

I must say, I'm with him on this one. He says men have no voice whatsoever when an unwanted/unscheduled pregnancy occurs, while she would have had several options like giving the child up for adoption, abortion and even (legal) abondonment on her part would have been what she could choose from. He, on the other hand, had to go with whatever she decided.

I wonder what you all think. Sure, he could have used condoms (with her) for the rest of his life. But when your lady says she can't conceive anyway...?
I don't know.

So, discuss, please....

 

[silverwhisper]

i think that given he's exercised a reasonable amount of care, he shouldn't be held liable. this situation sucks.

that said, i do have one question: was the woman in question already aware of his views on the matter?

ed

 

[M's girl]

As far as I know (from the show on TV) she was, yes. It had come up in their conversations. I imagine she told him she could never get pregnant and he said he did not mind because he did not want to be a parent anyway, or something like that, I'm not sure.

But he knew from her she could never get pregnant (or so she claimed) and she knew from him he did not want to be a dad, at least not any time soon.

So....

 

[M's girl]

The thing is..... it's known that sometimes women trick men into fatherhood and that sucks. But when they have unprotected sex he is being a dumb ass, especially when their relationship is not solid. It's still wrong when a woman tricks a man like that, but he has some responsability too.

In this case I feel different. I mean, come on.... if a woman tells you she can't get pregnant and assuming they got the STD thing covered and all...? I can imagine he wanted to lose the condoms at one point, thinking that they would be safe.

 

[bobsgirl]

I remember that show, MG. As I recall, she knew his views but she wanted a baby so...

I have very mixed feelings about this. He was duped, no question, but the bottom line is, there's a little girl who shouldn't be penalized because her mother has questionable ethics.

I guess I have to come down on the side of the little girl on this one. God help her, with a mother like that.

 

[SweetErika]

Yes, it's unfair to the man, but at the same time, I think, 'If he didn't want kids, he should have protected himself against that possibility by getting a vasectomy.'

I don't trust the "I have a medical condition that prevents pregnancy" deal unless the person's been sterilized or has an obvious reason like missing the necessary parts, because miracles happen.

Also, there must have been some sign she had questionable ethics before they got pregnant, or perhaps he didn't know her as well as he should have to rely on her word on both counts. So, I still stand by the thought that it's his responsibility to protect against an undesireable outcome too, if it's that important, and I agree with BG in that the kid shouldn't be penalized.

 

[M's girl]

You're right BG (hello dear, by the way )....

There is no doubt this little girl (Elizabeth) deserves a good life, and preferably so with a mum and dad to raise her. No question about that.

But that's the thing.... women who do these kind of things know that society will look at it this way, which will benefit them. On a different level (not that that has anything to do with this really) M and I have to deal with an ex-wife who will claim everything M owns, and then some, only to proceed with trying to claim stuff & money that belongs to me, all in the name of the well being of the children. Okay... that's a whole different story. But she depends on sympathy from society (which in our case she is starting to lose fast; these things will ultimately catch up with you you know?) and so does this woman. And it's not fair.

I don't know if the man in this case should be punished for "helping" to put a child in this world when he was against it to begin with and was fooled into believing she could never give birth. The child should be taken care of properly, but in my opinion and in this case it's the mother who needs to provide the care and finances that are needed, since she is the one responsible for her birth. The father, in a scenario like this, could have been any man and I assume she really did not care much who it would have been. That's so wrong.

Just the way I see it...

 

[M's girl]

Yes, it's unfair to the man, but at the same time, I think, 'If he didn't want kids, he should have protected himself against that possibility by getting a vasectomy.'

I don't trust the "I have a medical condition that prevents pregnancy" deal unless the person's been sterilized or has an obvious reason like missing the necessary parts, because miracles happen.

Also, there must have been some sign she had questionable ethics before they got pregnant, or perhaps he didn't know her as well as he should have to rely on her word on both counts. So, I still stand by the thought that it's his responsibility to protect against an undesireable outcome too, if it's that important, and I agree with BG in that the kid shouldn't be penalized.

Hi Erika,

That's a good point about the vasectomy. But I think he said he was not ready to have kids yet (so maybe later on in his life he would).

Of course this is a case of very poor judgement on his side and probably he did not know her well enough. I would say he would have been responsible (emotionally and financially) to help her with finding a solution (abortion?) but having to pay the rest of your life (forced to act the fatherrole and paying big bucks too) for poor judgement when basically you have been misinformed at the least...? Besides, what kind of father would he be, filled with resentment and anger?

Let's assume she really did not know she could conceive. That it was a surprise to her ass well when she found out she was pregnant. Then it was still her call to decide if she wanted to keep this child, and since he had said before, and continued to say, he did not want to father a child, she should have made her decision to keep the child based on that. If she was the only one who wanted to keep the child - she would be the one responsible.

I was talking to M about this. He says (I would have to check) that in NL a father has to declare at birth (of the child) that it's his (married or not). If he refuses to do so, the woman cannot make a claim of responsibility or child support. Now, if that is true, I can see how that could benefit low-life men/fathers who do not take their responsibilities. On the other hand this forces men and women to think about this better beforehand, because a woman will know she cannot trick a man into parenthood.

 

[Phaedre]

Haven't seen the show...

but if the case is as presented then I would think the gentleman in question would have reasonable grounds to feel peeved.

However as has been said if he _really_ didn't want to father children he could have taken other precautions or indeed had the snip, bearing in mind that miracles can occur even after that.

 

[sensualromantic]

Saw this Dr. Phil show on TV this afternoon (Dutch TV, it must have already aired in the US some time ago) where a guy claimed his girlfriend had become pregnant while claiming a) to be not able to conceive and b) using the pill anyway for some other (medical) reason.

He says he told her (I think before they even had sex or sex without a condom) he did not want to become a parent at this stage in his life. After the first period of their relationship - where they used condoms - they started to have sex without. He thought he was (double) safe anyway in the pregnancy-area because, as said before, she claimed to be not able to conceive AND use the pill on top of that.

As a guy (I'm not, but..), I would lose the condoms after a while, I'm sure! Now she has this baby-girl and he has to pay her $ 500 in child support and he does not agree.

I must say, I'm with him on this one. He says men have no voice whatsoever when an unwanted/unscheduled pregnancy occurs, while she would have had several options like giving the child up for adoption, abortion and even (legal) abondonment on her part would have been what she could choose from. He, on the other hand, had to go with whatever she decided.

I wonder what you all think. Sure, he could have used condoms (with her) for the rest of his life. But when your lady says she can't conceive anyway...?
I don't know.

So, discuss, please....

frankly if she said she could not concieve what was she doing on birth control? further more unfortunately the mans choice is far less and far less forgiving. that said men have the short end of the stick when it comes to choices and the law. i eagerly await the male pill. also with todays std rate he should protect no matter what unless married or wanting to concieve.

 

[Mazuri]

I think forcing this man into the father role is more a disservice to the child than to force her to live without a male father figure. She can find male role models in other family members (uncles, cousins, grandfathers, etc), friends' male family members, or even Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America. To force the man, whose main fault was to trust this woman's song and dance about being sterile, to act as a father will force him to resent the girl. I feel it'd be worse for the little girl to grow up knowing her father doesn't want her, never wanted her, resents her existence, is probably angry about it, etc than to grow up with only a mother (even if she is a twit) and other male family influences.

 

[Phaedre]

frankly if she said she could not concieve what was she doing on birth control?

Technically I can't conceive due to major gynae issues but as I still have the requisite bits, even if they don't work as they should, if I were sexually active with a partner who wasn't happy to take the risk I'd use bcp just to lower the chances of that 'miracle' even more.

 

[M's girl]

frankly if she said she could not concieve what was she doing on birth control?

They did not go into that one very much. If I recall well something was said along the lines of "another medical reason", which sounds reasonable.

I went on birth control pills long before I was ever ready to have sex, let alone a baby. I experienced huge problems with my periods in them being very irregular and bleeding like crazy when they showed up at all the wrong times (the embarrasment of leaking onto your chair (wood, thank God) in school and things like that) and fainting due to pains in my back and the large amount of blood loss. Best solution at the time (to balance my hormones mainly) was to go on birth control pills.

So yes, I do understand how she could use them and still claim it was for a medical reason (other than birth control) only...

So.........

What are we saying? Men should use condoms always, unless they want to have a child with someone? In theory that sounds reasonable, but I don't think it will ever happen. And it should not. The problem in this case was not that he did not make sure they were safe. It was an issue of (at least) misrepresentation...

 

[rosco rathbone]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: retain control of the seed, men. If you "really don't want to become a parent at this stage in your life", then you are a god-damned fool if you go shooting the deadly venom up in there and taking her word, her best intentions, her good wishes, for anything. Unfair as it is, it's a woman's world when it comes to keeping or aborting a baby. The only control men have is control over the seed.

 

[SweetErika]

What are we saying? Men should use condoms always, unless they want to have a child with someone? In theory that sounds reasonable, but I don't think it will ever happen. And it should not. The problem in this case was not that he did not make sure they were safe. It was an issue of (at least) misrepresentation...

Yes, as Rosco said, men protecting themselves is what it comes down to. Perhaps it's not fair or reasonable practically, but in the current legal environment, it's the bottom line.

Ideally, there would be some kind of legally binding agreement that a couple could create to absolve the person who doesn't want to be a parent of all rights and responsibilities relating to the child, much like a prenuptial agreement. I'm not sure if there's any precedent or something like this (assuming it uses the proper language and is notarized/witnessed, etc.) would stand up in our courts now, but I bet it'd have a fair chance given the success of adoption, donor and surrogacy contracts. In my mind, that'd protect both parents and the child from the type of situation in question.

 

[Mazuri]

I'm not sure that doc would stand up in court. There was a case a few years back of a surrogate mother who signed all the legal documents but, once the child was born, demanded her child back and the courts complied leaving the biological parents out of the loop entirely (I think they sued for visitation and either were denied entirely or were given very little). I think in a situation like that, he should be allowed to not pay child support if he makes no effort to be a part of the child's life. If the woman truly just "wanted to have a baby" she wouldn't be sticking him for money.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Yes, as Rosco said, men protecting themselves is what it comes down to. Perhaps it's not fair or reasonable practically, but in the current legal environment, it's the bottom line.

Exactly. "Fair and reasonable" don't mean dick when she's pregnant and wants to have (abort) the kid contrary to your wishes.

DOn't get her pregnant unless you are on the same page. Retain the seed, men. I'm sick of this strange notion that men are powerless to control their sperm. I'm hornier than most and I retain tight control.

 

[Leah57]

Abstinence prevents pregnancy and STDs 100% of the time.....

 

[M's girl]

Abstinence prevents pregnancy and STDs 100% of the time.....

Well, yeah.... but we're talking about men here, and most, unlike Rosco maybe, are not too good at that and certainly not when sex is involved...

Of course I'm all for men taking their own responsibilities and in theory abstinence, condoms and vasectomies are all within their options to stay in control of at least that situation. But does that mean that a woman - who is convinced at 20 years of age she does not want to have children - should make sure and get a histerectomy? Yeah, I know the men's vasectomy is reversable some of the time and the women's histerectomy is not....

As far as I know, in the Netherlands, when a couple is married, the man automatically becomes the father of the child (I suppose even if he turns out not to be the biological father). When the two are NOT married he will need to register himself as being the (biological) father, although any man can claim to be the father(figure) if the mother agrees. A man who suspects not to be the biological father after all can have tests done and if those prove he is not, he can withdraw from fatherhood and the legal and financial aspects. I expect that to happen mainly in situations where the woman has performed / committed adultery.

A man who is married to another woman than the mother of his newborn can not claim to be the father legally (even if they both would want that for their child) because he is (still) married to another woman. If he's not married but he still does not want to acknowledge the child I don't think there is anything the mother can do.

 

[jerseyman1963]

The fact that these wing nuts were airing their deepest personal troubles on TV tells you all you need to know about these people. What's going to happen to the kid when he/she grows up and is old enough to understand what mommy and daddy were saying to the Talking Head on TV? Oh, excuse me, I meant to say, to Dr. Phil.

Maybe one or both of them didn't want to have kids now, but they do, and the fact that they're still not thinking things through tells you all you need to know about their sense of responsibility (or lack thereof), which got them in this situation in the first place.

If this guy had been serious about not wanting kids now, he would have realized there's always that slimest of chances, and acted accordingly. I shouldn't be too harsh, because heaven knows I've made my own dumb mistakes in life, but the people who "discuss" these matters in the national media in their 15 minutes of fame are saying, "Look at me! Look at me! I am a star!" They're not really doing anything serious to improve their own lives or the lives of those around them, and they make me rather ill.

And speaking of not really doing anything to improve anyone's life, they made a baby, and for better or worse, they're both responsible. He SHOULD pay child support. It's not about whether the woman tricked him or not, it's about THE KID now. For the sake of the child, it would have been better if this guy had followed his instincts, and not fathered a child, because clearly he is not ready or capable to be a man.

 

[StrixVaria]

The laws in the US are unnecessarily draconian in regard to parental roles and responsibilities.
I fathered a child at the ripe old age of 21, negotiated a settlement in which I agreed to pay the mother 10k and absolved myself of all parental rights and responsibilities. We had the agreement documented by two attorneys.

Five years later, she shows back up in court and claimed child support.

I presented our agreement as defense and was told that it was null and void since the mother had no right to bargain away the rights of the child. I was nailed with back support from the time of birth, with no consideration for the 10k already paid. I was told that I could sue the mother for breach of contract, but would have little ground since the contract was not upheld in court. Basically, I was fucked.

I went straight into the clinic the next day and got a vasectomy. I requested that they not only do the snip and tie, but that they also remove as much of the vas as they could, cauterize both ends and suture a line between them.

I would strongly recommend that ANY male over the age of 10 have the same procedure done, it’s the only way to protect yourself financially. If women want babies, let them adopt them from small third world countries.

 

[shy slave]

I can see why he would feel 'peeved', 'annoyed', 'angry' and possibly abused.

But when oh when will people realise that lies happen.

This woman may have wanted a child, she may have wanted him and thought a child would tie him to her, so she lied or there was a medical miracle.

People do it all the time.

Of course he should not have trusted her, but he did and he is now paying an emotional and material price for it.

Once the child is born, then what?
Does he have contact and find a way to move on from the fact the mother lied?
Does he tell the child she lied and the child should never have been created?
Does he have no contact and leave the mother to say 'Daddy didn't want you?

Problems everywhere.

Bottom line, he fucked her and wanted to believe what she said was true. Wanted to believe that medically it was not possible. Now everyone is paying, including a child who has had no say in the matter.

On the point about the pill. It is not failsafe. I got pregnant twice when on the pill. Things do interfer with with its optimum working, for example antibiotics.
On the point of not being able to get pregnant, medical knowledge can get it wrong. This could be one of those times. But if she was told she could not get pregnant I would want to know why she was on the pill. Perhaps it was for painful periods or acne. But he should have had enough sense to ask. Otherwise he is not really taking care of himself properly.

Every fuck has consequences: STD's, orgasms, no orgasms, pregnancy, emotional hurt, emotional joy etc etc. Not looking after your own well being for the sake of a fuck is dumb, really dumb.

 

[shy slave]

The laws in the US are unnessarily darconian in regard to parental roles and responsibilities.
I fathered a child at the ripe old age of 21, negotiated a settlement in which I agreed to pay the mother 10k and absolved myself of all parental rights and responisibilities. We had the agreement documented by two attornies.

Five years later, she shows back up in court and claimed child support.

I persented our agreement as defense and was told that it was null and void since the mother had no right to bargain away the rights of the child. I was nailed with back support from the time of birth, with no consideration for the 10k already paid. I was told that I could sue the mother for breach of contract, but would have little ground since the contract was not upheld in court. Basically, I was fucked.

I went straight into the clinic the next day and got a vasectomy. I requested that they not only do the snip and tie, but that they also remove as much of the vas as they could, cauterise both ends and suture a line between them.

I would strongly recommend that ANY male over the age of 10 have the same procedure done, it;s the only way to protect yourself financially. If women want babies, let them adopt them from small third world countries.

This is a really hard line to take.

I wish I could disagree with you, but actually I don't.

It would not be my advice but I can see merit in it.

When my son started dating a girl who was very pretty but very small town minded, I was worried sick she would 'accidentially' end up pregnant and his life options would suddenly become very narrow for a young man of 18 years.

I would have loved him to be a father, but at an older age when he had made a choice to become one. I did not want him to become a father because it had been engineered by a pretty girl who knew what she wanted in life, long before he had figured out what he wanted.

As it happened his life turned out differently. But I have a 17 yr old and I have few worries a girl would engineer such a situation with him. I know boys/mens cocks often rule there common sense abilty, but I think my younger son is a little more street wise and less trusting of people.

of course I could be wrong, but I hope he has children at a time when he and a girl both want them and not before.

 

[StrixVaria]

The only fair solution would be to apply the strictures of commercial partnership law to parenting. If marriage is treated as a contract, parenting should be as well.

 

[M's girl]

I fathered a child at the ripe old age of 21, negotiated a

I feel sorry for you, but....

... to me it would depend on what the agreement with the mother of your child was before you started to fuck her. I mean, I started this thread taking the side of the father IN THIS CASE, because I think he was deliberately lied to and that he was fooled into fatherhood although he had clearly stated he was not ready to be a father. At the moment they skipped the condoms (which he started using in the beginning of their relationship as far as I know) it would have ALSO been the time for her to say: let's keep them on just in case.

In your case...? If you were just fucking her without a condom and you did not clearly talk about what would happen if.... I think you should be responsible for what happened as a result of the unprotected sex you chose to have. You can't buy off your parental rights/responsibilities but I understand you for trying. I think she's a bitch for coming back on the agreement you two made, but maybe she has the same excuse of being at the ripe old age of 21 (or younger?) when this all happened, and as you indicate yourself.... People do not make the best choices/decisions at that age.

Did you ask her to have an abortion (and offer to pay for it) before you started talking about the settlement?

You know, it's not like I'm saying fathers should not be responsible but they should have the same choice the woman has when the child is unwanted. If she wants the baby gone she can go have an abortion, even if the man does want the child - planned or not! He just does not have that option and that is wrong in my opinion.