+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 72
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,812
    Thanks
    2,904
    Thanked
    2,665
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I guess another question this would raise is how this would work in the case of a marriage/de facto where the relationship was not going to end, especially where other children were involved? If there was an unintentional pregnancy, could the father still ask for a financial abortion? So only financially supporting some of the children, but not others?

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Frankenmum For This Useful Post:

    AdornedWithCats  (04-12-2016)

  3. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    18,250
    Thanks
    1,444
    Thanked
    7,874
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by babybeeno1 View Post
    This was me aswell nearly 100% the same except exh forged my signature on the birth certificate changed my sons last name and added his name to it. Took me 6 months to get my sons last name changed back to mine but I couldn't get his name off it at all then on the back it tells my DS what his name was when he was born. He also had another life going on aswell that I had no idea about at all as it was a fellow employee of the company we worked for hence they both where sacked.

    In a way I am for it. I know of someone who told her BF that she was on the pill....she wasn't.....they had only been dating for 3 months.....boom she was pregnant.......it was her plan all along to get pregnant as she found out what the pension would be compared to the Newstart allowance she was on. When all the benefits where added up it's nearly $800 a week which is more then what I earn in a week working full time. She's also lodged child support and the guy earns mega bucks but she didn't put him on the birth certificate which has made her case ALOT harder. She's in it for the money so she doesn't ever have to work and has already said to her sister that she plans on doing it again in a couple years time.

    Professional baby maker in the making

    I feel if women lie just to have baby and trick the guy like in this case then I'm all for it.
    of course a single person getting Newstart is going to get more when they have a baby.

    Living on family tax benefit and single parent pension certainly isn't raking in the money. It's not a luxurious lifestyle by any means!

    "in it for the money" lol��������������� ���������������� ���������

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to BigRedV For This Useful Post:

    cheeeeesecake  (04-12-2016)

  5. #23
    TheGooch's Avatar
    TheGooch is offline Winner 2014 - Newbie of the Year
    Winner 2016 BubHubs DIVA Award
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    5,312
    Thanks
    9,577
    Thanked
    5,069
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week

    Default Financial Abortion

    I'm going to read a bit more before forming definite opinions but right now this is where I sit:
    No opt out
    Sex could result in a pregnancy. You go in knowing that.
    I disagree with the idea that women can choose abortion but men can't. Abortion has a medical impact on a woman's body. I firmly believe what happens to women's bodies is their choice.
    I think that's different than imposing financial decisions on someone.
    I think the two are different and not comparable.
    Last edited by TheGooch; 04-12-2016 at 12:19.

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TheGooch For This Useful Post:

    AdornedWithCats  (04-12-2016),Freyamum  (05-12-2016),M'LadyEm  (04-12-2016),Meg2  (05-12-2016),Sally1981  (06-12-2016)

  7. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    460
    Thanks
    330
    Thanked
    302
    Reviews
    0
    The only problem I see is that once the child is born, the rights of the child are paramount (UN International Rights of the Child). Therefore whether or not the man has opted out, the child's right to have a relationship with it's parent trumps anything else. So if the father opts out for a few years, then (usually once they marry or are in a relationship) suddenly decide they want IN and want to see the child and form a relationship, then anything they signed previously will be null and void. And it isnt like they will be made to backpay the child support they should have been paying for however many years either.

  8. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,062
    Thanks
    870
    Thanked
    1,029
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigRedV View Post
    of course a single person getting Newstart is going to get more when they have a baby.

    Living on family tax benefit and single parent pension certainly isn't raking in the money. It's not a luxurious lifestyle by any means!

    "in it for the money" lol��������������� ���������������� ���������
    I know what it's like I was on it for a while with DS1 when I became single with a new born. This person just has no idea at all but when they haven't worked a day in their life and are 26yrs old getting that much cash a week was like winning the lottery for them. Lol NOT

    The poor day is being taken for a ride in every way financially

  9. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,608
    Thanks
    886
    Thanked
    2,050
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I think we have come to a point where contraception is good enough that we feel like we can have s3x without having the consequence of a pregnancy & baby, but not good enough that it is completely foolproof - so we have s3x & then are suprised when a pregnancy and baby occurs. I think the availability of the male contraceptive will be a great step forward.

    But unfortunately, having s3x DOES mean that sometimes, a baby results, whether it is wanted or not. It is not pro-life, it is biology and sperm and egg.

    If the woman chooses to progress with the pregnancy, I just dont see how a man choosing not to be financially responsible is a good decision for the child. Whether he likes it or not, he is the biological father, & the person who will suffer the consequence of him pretending that he ISNT the father - is the child. It's not fair to say to a child 'well, your father never wanted you, so we have no money to buy you new shoes'.

    The only way to solve the problem of unwanted children is - 100% foolproof contraception - for males and females - or not having s3x unless you are willing to deal with the fact that a baby may result (neither of which is a good solution).

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cheeeeesecake For This Useful Post:

    AdornedWithCats  (05-12-2016),SSecret Squirrel  (05-12-2016)

  11. #27
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    8,395
    Thanks
    5,947
    Thanked
    4,953
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/4/15100 Posts in a week
    Yes we all know sex = chance of pregnancy, but the woman (in Australia) will always have a say in if she keeps the baby or not, the father technically currently has no say. So how is it fair that the decision be 100% up to the mum and as an effect 0% none of the dad's decision.
    @Cheeresecake in your example of the no shoes, if in that scenario, why does the dad have to take full responsibility for that? The woman also didn't have to keep the child, but she chose to, so is it not partly her fault (you know having sec knowing she could get pregnant) that the child can't have new shoes? Why is it 100% the guys fault? (I say 100% because my hypothetical example has BOTH mother and child agreeing to financial abortion.

    This would give both parents who both 50% conceived the child a 50/50 decision to make, not 100% the female. Because remember many woman who choose to terminate do so because they feel they can't afford it. Why is it that she get 100% say and the father doesn't get any (if he wanted to keep it)?

    I just think it will always be tipped in the woman's favour given her body her choice (agree with this but still at the same time still have battle in my own mind of where the child/foetus becomes more important that the mothers right to not carry said child/foetus), however An issue I have always had with abortion is the dads have no say. We want equality which we should have, but there is no equality for men presently and I think there should be some way of a father being able to have a say too.

  12. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to A-Squared For This Useful Post:

    AngelicHobgoblin  (05-12-2016),atomicmama  (05-12-2016),BlondeinBrisvegas  (06-12-2016),Hasselhoff  (05-12-2016)

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    396
    Thanks
    187
    Thanked
    384
    Reviews
    0
    I really hate the term 'financial abortion'. The point of an abortion is that the child never comes into existence, therefore it has no needs and no one has to be responsible for it. Simply saying you don't want to pay for your child is not an abortion.
    My take is that there is not a discrepancy between the rights of the man and woman. Neither party can be forced to physically carry the fetus in their body for 9 months and then give birth, but both parties must take responsibility for the child once it exists.
    We can switch the genders around so we see this isn't a men's rights issue. A comparison could be made to those women who don't know they are pregnant until quite late in the pregnancy. They miss out on the choice to terminate the pregnancy (just as men do), but it doesn't follow that they should therefore be able to choose to 'financially abort' the child - they may find themselves in a position that they didn't choose and don't want, but they still have to take responsibility for a child that now exists.

  14. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Meg2 For This Useful Post:

    AdornedWithCats  (05-12-2016),Barnaby  (05-12-2016),JustJaq  (05-12-2016),Mod-Degrassi  (05-12-2016),Sally1981  (06-12-2016),VicPark  (05-12-2016)

  15. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    5,022
    Thanks
    10,604
    Thanked
    5,123
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts

    Default Financial Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by Meg2 View Post
    A comparison could be made to those women who don't know they are pregnant until quite late in the pregnancy. They miss out on the choice to terminate the pregnancy (just as men do), but it doesn't follow that they should therefore be able to choose to 'financially abort' the child - they may find themselves in a position that they didn't choose and don't want, but they still have to take responsibility for a child that now exists.
    I've been enjoying reading the responses in this thread and how it has got me thinking.

    Just on giving rights to the child away, and pp mentioned if a woman discovered late she has no choice but to continue and be responsible.... Doesn't the woman still have a right to opt out? Either via adoption or placing into care? A mother does not then pay child support once they have given up the child?


    Quote Originally Posted by A-Squared View Post
    @Cheeresecake in your example of the no shoes, if in that scenario, why does the dad have to take full responsibility for that? The woman also didn't have to keep the child, but she chose to, so is it not partly her fault (you know having sec knowing she could get pregnant) that the child can't have new shoes? Why is it 100% the guys fault? (I say 100% because my hypothetical example has BOTH mother and child agreeing to financial abortion.
    Agree with this point. It's not 100% the fathers fault for the financial situation the mother is in.


    Personally I don't believe either party should be "trapped" into being responsible (either financially or physical custody) for a child they did not want and took active precautions in avoiding- including trusting a woman who says she's on the pill . And a woman DOES have the most power in this matter. Whether that is unfair or not is hard to say.

    Eta: then again by making men pay up for children they have created does save a govt a small fortune on welfare- which is valid
    Last edited by Little Miss Sunshine; 05-12-2016 at 09:17.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Little Miss Sunshine For This Useful Post:

    atomicmama  (05-12-2016),Hasselhoff  (05-12-2016)

  17. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,900
    Thanks
    2,398
    Thanked
    1,680
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by babyno1onboard View Post

    I also think that termination should be a joint decision and should require the fathers consent, not just the mothers.
    You really think it would be appropriate to force a woman to carry a baby she doesn't want, because the father didn't consent?

  18. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to JustJaq For This Useful Post:

    atomicmama  (05-12-2016),Barnaby  (05-12-2016),gingermillie  (05-12-2016),LaDiDah  (05-12-2016),smallpotatoes  (05-12-2016),TheGooch  (05-12-2016)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Financial dependence as sahm
    By Freyamum in forum Stay At Home Mums (SAHMs) Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-12-2016, 18:00
  2. Financial hardship...anyone done a part 9 agreement
    By melimum in forum Family Finances
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 21-04-2016, 22:24
  3. Need urgent financial advice
    By 2BlueBirds in forum General Chat
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-01-2016, 12:15

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
FEATURED SUPPORTER
ProSwimProSwim runs learn to swim classes for babies, children and adults. Our indoor centre in Plympton Park has lessons all ...
FORUMS - chatting now ...
IVF Babies due August/Sept/Oct' 16 #4pregnancy and babies through IVF
hospital based care versus shared carePregnancy & Birth General Chat
Spectacular September TTCConception & Fertility General Chat
Amazing August TTC #2Conception & Fertility General Chat
Come chat, Ladies who are 40+ TTC or ExpectingConception & Fertility General Chat
any bright ideasGeneral Chat
REVIEWS
"Made bed time less anxious"
by Meld85
My Little Heart Whisbear - the Humming Bear reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›