A weird moral dilima?

Question

Ok, so this discussion was going on in another forum I'm on, and I thought I'd share with you guys and see what you think.

A man, let's call him Jim, is in a long term, serious relationship with a woman, let's call her Mary. Jim does not want kids, ever, and has told Mary this. Mary does want kids and has tried several times to talk Jim out of his stance, to no avail. So Mary goes off her birth control without telling Jim, they have sex, and surprise! Mary is pregnant. Jim is, of course, furious and feels like the trust in their relationship has been violated beyond the point of repair. He simply cannot fathom staying with someone who tricked him like that. Mary insists that she's keeping the baby, and wants Jim to stay with her, but Jim knows that, if he did, it would be detrimental to both of them and the child.

What should they do? Why?

randy c, how is Jim at fault for not wanting children? He has a right to that.

If Jim stayed, he would be resentful towards Mary, resentful towards the child, and basically be in a situation he'd been trying to avoid all his life.

Answer 1

Mary should have left Jim a long time ago if she wants kids and he doesn't. What Mary did should be criminal. It's no wonder Jim wants to leave. I wouldn't trust that woman either and I certainly would no want to stick around.

Jim still has at least a financial obligation to the child. But after a betrayal like that, he has no obligation to Mary whatsoever.

Answer 2

If he feels he cannot live with this situation then it is only right that he should leave. She will have what she wants and he will be free to find someone else who he can trust. Mary should not expect him to support the child either as this was her own decision and not mutual consent and a situation which she has now inflicted on him. They both must visit a solicitor and get this put down in writing and also find out if he can demand that his name is not put down as the father on the birth certificate because not only has she gone against his wishes that he didn't want a child but when that child reaches adulthood he will be free to find his father and this may not be the express wish of Jim and could also damage any relationship he may forge in the future if this child ever show up unannounced. So Mary has destroyed their relationship with this selfish act and therefore must bear the consequences.

Just had a thought though, if he didn't want children then why did he let her take all the responsibility for contraception he should have been equally responsible or maybe he should have had a vasectomy or did he think he may change his mind if ever he met another woman? After all he was having his cake and eating it!!!!! MMMMMM - thought provoking!

Answer 3

Well, first off, they should not stay together. At this point Jim will have a difficult or impossible time being a good father. The circumstances of the conception will forever be a shadow.
They may as well concede to the obvious. Separate, and let the child support collection machine start.
Now, if I could go back in time and knock some damn sense in Jim's head -- If he is 100% sure that he does not want to have children, he should have gone to a urologist and gotten a vasectomy. There's no discussion. If he has made that clear and public, well it's his penis. Go get the bridge taken out. That's what I did.

On the issue of child support: Although Mary was deceitful and manipulative, child support is for the child, not for mom. It sucks that Jim is in this position, but you can not settle the score by making an innocent child's life more difficult.

Answer 4

Heterosexual intimate relationships equal potential for reproduction. Mary should have ended the relationship if she knew she would have to decieve Jim. Jim could walk away with a clear conscience, but a large mainainence bill. It is a difficult one and a good post.
If it was me, I would have gone and found a fella I could reproduce with as there is little point in such opposites. If the child senses such tension, Jim is right it would be no good for baby.
This happens alot with young couples who don't take the idea that having a intimate relationship has every chance of producing offspring.
What if the birth control had failed and Mary was totally against abortion?
They really should have thrashed this crucial issue out earlier

Answer 5

Obviously Mary was very deceitful and no longer deserves Jim's trust. Morally, I also believe Jim shouldn't have to pay child support, but legally she may be able to force him.

Bottom line, if he is still not interested in the baby, and she's so manipulative that I don't forsee her being a very good mother, they should give the baby up for adoption to a loving couple who would deserve and appreciate it. I think that would be in the best interest of the baby -- which should be both Jim & Mary's primary focus now.

Answer 6

Marriage does more or less indicate that at some point children will follow. Yes it should have been worked out long before they got married. Mary is flat out evil for being that selfish. Jim is dumb for not having his tubes cut is he didn't want children so badly. In this case Mary did in fact betray Jim's trust along the same lines as cheating on him.

What should they do I can't help with as I would need vastly more information.

Answer 7

First, it looks like Jim is going to be paying child support (as he well should) for the next 18 to 21 years.

Mary is pretty sleazy to intentionally do that to someone she is supposed to have a relationship with. Jim is a fool to be having sex with someone who has told him she wants children when he is adamant he does not want children.

As to what they should do. Their personal wants and desires are no longer valid. The greatest priority by far is that of this child who doesn't care why he was conceived. Either Jim and Mary figure out their own place in the caring for this child or the child should be given up for adoption so that it can grow up in a loving 2 parent home where both parents truly want a child.

Answer 8

Jim should absolutely leave the relationship. Mary is a manipulative, selfish creature who obviously can't be trusted. Yes, Jim is going to need to step up and take care of his child, though, whether he likes it or not. Anytime someone has sex, regardless of whether or not you use protection, there's a chance of pregnancy, and anyone who has sex should be ready and willing to accept that consequence. It's a chance you take when you decide to have sex. So he should dump the b****, and do the right thing by his child.

Answer 9

Jim should cut his losses and leave - Mary's been far too sly and deceitful. Even if he decided, after the birth of the child, that he wanted more kids, he'd still resent Mary for going behind his back in the first place.

Answer 10

You neglect to say why Jim staying would be detrimental?

I would say that if they've been in this relationship sooo long, that they can come to some common ground and that is the child. What is best for the child? I can tell you, coming from a broken family myself, it isn't Jim saying "goodbye" to the whole thing and leaving. Mary needs to work on earning trust back and Jim needs to stand up and be a man. Neither were in the right, neither were thinking of the other above themselves. They need to get married and move on to the next stage in their lives for the sake of that child.