Someone I know is going through something, which made me think about this today. If two parents decide to give up their baby for adoption, that's that. Nobody is going to call them up to help if and when the child enters teens and has behavioral issues because they have made the choice not to parent.

What I have been thinking about today is if a woman gets pregnant via one night stand or short lived affair, and the guy says he will pay child support but wants zero contact with the child, does that guy still have no moral obligation to help out should the child enter teens and have behavioral issues?

Why or why not? Personally, I don't think the latter scenario is that much different than a couple mutually deciding on adoption. Both cases reflect parents not wanting to parent, though when it is just one of the two that doesn't want to parent, I suspect people would look down on that when they wouldn't look down on adoption.

You have a kid, you take care of it.

Period.

As sad as it is that a man would opt to not have a role in his child's life, if he is paying child support, then I don't think much else can be expected of him. I don't think he's under any moral obligation to be involved, if he's had that attitude consistently from day one.

Chris wrote:

As sad as it is that a man would opt to not have a role in his child's life, if he is paying child support, then I don't think much else can be expected of him. I don't think he's under any moral obligation to be involved, if he's had that attitude consistently from day one.

I agree with Chris. It'd be unfortunate and maybe even a little lowdown, but emotional bonds can't be enforced. They're either there, or they aren't.

Chris wrote:

As sad as it is that a man would opt to not have a role in his child's life, if he is paying child support, then I don't think much else can be expected of him. I don't think he's under any moral obligation to be involved, if he's had that attitude consistently from day one.

This. If a woman knows that the guy shares this attitude, I don't even see why she would have the child in the first place.

Chris wrote:

As sad as it is that a man would opt to not have a role in his child's life, if he is paying child support, then I don't think much else can be expected of him. I don't think he's under any moral obligation to be involved, if he's had that attitude consistently from day one.

Just like Eddie Murphy and Scary Spice. After the DNA test proved her baby was his, he's been throwing her money for support but isn't at all interested in being that child's daddy.

It's a shame we can't all be like this

He's also somebody who lies about getting hookers and had a drug problem.

Who should we believe?

Yeah - I agree with most of you. It's a shame that he's choosing to miss out, but you can't force a person to be involved when he has no interest in it. There may come a day when he'll regret that decision, but you can't force it on him if he really isn't interested. That said, if he doesn't want a kid, he should take precautions an d not expect the women to the b the only one taking precautions.

TSJFan4Ever wrote:

Yeah - I agree with most of you. It's a shame that he's choosing to miss out, but you can't force a person to be involved when he has no interest in it. There may come a day when he'll regret that decision, but you can't force it on him if he really isn't interested. That said, if he doesn't want a kid, he should take precautions an d not expect the women to the b the only one taking precautions.

I agree with this.