She's pregnant - I'm freaking out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It absolutely blows my mind that an adult in this day and age who would freak out at the possibility of a child would not use birth control every single time. Blows. My. Mind.

Exactly. He's using the pull out method with a woman he didn't want to commit to longterm. What kind of sense is that? She's pregnant and he didn't do anything to prevent it from happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It absolutely blows my mind that an adult in this day and age who would freak out at the possibility of a child would not use birth control every single time. Blows. My. Mind.

Exactly. He's using the pull out method with a woman he didn't want to commit to longterm. What kind of sense is that? She's pregnant and he didn't do anything to prevent it from happening.

A guy with a PhD, no less. Duh....

[Anonymous]

Unreal how many nasty comments directed at OP because he made a mistake. What's funny is that I bet half of the women on here have either had an abortion or tricked their bf into a relationship with the old, `I'm on the pill` trick.

[Anonymous]

I wonder what OP is doing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unreal how many nasty comments directed at OP because he made a mistake. What's funny is that I bet half of the women on here have either had an abortion or tricked their bf into a relationship with the old, `I'm on the pill` trick.

He’s 35, he should know how to have safe sex by now.
It’s not a ‘mistake’ it’s a child, and what some other mythical people you made up are doing is not relevant here.
This is the dumbest comment in the whole thread.

I’ll refer you to this previous comment as well:


He's a Professor! All he had to do was walk over to the Health Center or whatever and they would have given him condoms FOR FREAKING FREE!!

[Anonymous]

Of course he should but damn, the woman is divorced with two kids . ANY WOMAN KNOWS if you don't want to get pregnant the only way to make sure you don't is BE ON BIRTH CONTROL. She didn't do it, now she's a single mom of three kids, one of whom is with a baby daddy who doesn't want to be with her. Dumb dumb dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And does she want to get back with you?

OP here. I think she would. Like I said, we got along exceptionally well but I decided I didn't want to be a stepdad (and she was/is ultimately looking to remarry). So I broke it off.

Sounds like you fell into the classic trap. Dont give the conniving woman what she wants. Pay her the minimum and move on. This is her problem. Now shes really screwed. 2 kids, 2 dads. What a dumbass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why people are telling OP to 'support the lady'. By making a choice that effects both of them, she is roping him into an expense that will take at LEAST 25% of his salary for the next 18 years. But sure OP go ahead, no big deal.

Umm the OP made the choice of having sex with a woman still capable of having children. He could have had a vasectomy, he could date a woman past having children, he could abstain from sex. Therefore he had 50% of the responsibility. An ex boyfriend of mine said that his dad reminded him any woman he has sex with can be the mother of his children. This is why everyone is saying he needs to support his child regardless of if the relationship with his ex.

His only moral obligation is to financially support the kid. It is her womans right to choose to keep the baby, therefore her physical responsibility. They were equally responsible for birth control and any single mom should know how to protect herself against pregnancy. This was a calculated move on her part.

[Anonymous]

This is true. If she keeps the baby OP has to pay support and be a dad to the kid, even if the timing personally sucks and torpedoes his chances of having a normal family life down the road when he is ready to get married and have kids. I do feel bad for him there. He's now saddled with baggage.

The woman- man, if I were her, I would be so damn mad at myself for putting my existing kids through this. They've already been through a divorce, meeting new boyfriends and then seeing them go, now they get a random sibling added to the mix. So irresponsible and inconsiderate to them.

Situation just sucks all around. Any update OP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why people are telling OP to 'support the lady'. By making a choice that effects both of them, she is roping him into an expense that will take at LEAST 25% of his salary for the next 18 years. But sure OP go ahead, no big deal.

Umm the OP made the choice of having sex with a woman still capable of having children. He could have had a vasectomy, he could date a woman past having children, he could abstain from sex. Therefore he had 50% of the responsibility. An ex boyfriend of mine said that his dad reminded him any woman he has sex with can be the mother of his children. This is why everyone is saying he needs to support his child regardless of if the relationship with his ex.

His only moral obligation is to financially support the kid. It is her womans right to choose to keep the baby, therefore her physical responsibility. They were equally responsible for birth control and any single mom should know how to protect herself against pregnancy. This was a calculated move on her part.

His only *legal* obligation is to financially support the kid. His moral obligations to a child he helped create and who had no say in the matter are far different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unreal how many nasty comments directed at OP because he made a mistake. What's funny is that I bet half of the women on here have either had an abortion or tricked their bf into a relationship with the old, `I'm on the pill` trick.

He’s 35, he should know how to have safe sex by now.
It’s not a ‘mistake’ it’s a child, and what some other mythical people you made up are doing is not relevant here.
This is the dumbest comment in the whole thread.

I’ll refer you to this previous comment as well:


He's a Professor! All he had to do was walk over to the Health Center or whatever and they would have given him condoms FOR FREAKING FREE!!

Please shut your pie hole, Miss perfect

[Anonymous]

Who knew using condoms was perfection?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why people are telling OP to 'support the lady'. By making a choice that effects both of them, she is roping him into an expense that will take at LEAST 25% of his salary for the next 18 years. But sure OP go ahead, no big deal.

Umm the OP made the choice of having sex with a woman still capable of having children. He could have had a vasectomy, he could date a woman past having children, he could abstain from sex. Therefore he had 50% of the responsibility. An ex boyfriend of mine said that his dad reminded him any woman he has sex with can be the mother of his children. This is why everyone is saying he needs to support his child regardless of if the relationship with his ex.

His only moral obligation is to financially support the kid. It is her womans right to choose to keep the baby, therefore her physical responsibility. They were equally responsible for birth control and any single mom should know how to protect herself against pregnancy. This was a calculated move on her part.

His only *legal* obligation is to financially support the kid. His moral obligations to a child he helped create and who had no say in the matter are far different.

Nope. That's on her. The only way he would be morally obligated to be a part of this childs life is if he insisted in her keeping the baby and not aborting. This is all on her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why people are telling OP to 'support the lady'. By making a choice that effects both of them, she is roping him into an expense that will take at LEAST 25% of his salary for the next 18 years. But sure OP go ahead, no big deal.

Umm the OP made the choice of having sex with a woman still capable of having children. He could have had a vasectomy, he could date a woman past having children, he could abstain from sex. Therefore he had 50% of the responsibility. An ex boyfriend of mine said that his dad reminded him any woman he has sex with can be the mother of his children. This is why everyone is saying he needs to support his child regardless of if the relationship with his ex.

His only moral obligation is to financially support the kid. It is her womans right to choose to keep the baby, therefore her physical responsibility. They were equally responsible for birth control and any single mom should know how to protect herself against pregnancy. This was a calculated move on her part.

His only *legal* obligation is to financially support the kid. His moral obligations to a child he helped create and who had no say in the matter are far different.

Nope. That's on her. The only way he would be morally obligated to be a part of this childs life is if he insisted in her keeping the baby and not aborting. This is all on her.

NP. Nope. There will be a child, it will be his biological kid and, like it or not, that kid will suffer serious psychological trauma if he doesn't have a father / knows his own father doesn't want to have a relationship with him. It may not seem fair, but that's the reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who knew using condoms was perfection?

Yeah but he didn't even try