lubylou12 Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 i agree, but after the other poster was making out that people should not have sex what so ever even with contraception unless there aiming to get pregnant yes someone was basically saying this, it was not willman this time but it has been said that even with contraception its not an accident, which is stupid beyond belief:loopy: so in not so many words saying as you said about, not to engage in sex even with contraception or you may get pregant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carly83 Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 hmmmmmmmmmm???? isnt there? so what about the ladys on the pill, implant, injection, if they fall pregnant on these isnt it an accident? id say so, as every one has sex, including yourself It's still not an accident because that person has still chosen to have sex and so has chosen to expose themselves to the possibility of ending up pregnant. i was refering to the above poster when i said 'other poster' as thats who started the contraception part of the thread if i meant you had said it i would have said what willman said. I never said anything about working mums, single parents etc or their abilites . I made a clear opinion 2 names on the birth certificate or a reduction in child elements of benefits. Nothing else. but you don't get £200 a week for all the other "accidents " though. . so this is not aimed at single mothers then? hense my point regaurding alot work and do not claim benefits like that Whilst we're talking accidents - IF they don't know the mans name why are they having unprotected sex not just contraception? Surely the odds of sperm beating a condom and the pill are minute. first of alot of people can not use chemical based contraceptives, i cant use the pill injection or implant as all cause me to perminatly bleed, condoms are my only choice, 3 in every 100 condoms are ineffective you've got to admit the chances of 3 in 100 women accidently falling pregant despit before carefull is pretty high! still awaiting a responce regaurding the birth certificut for my daughter and not wanting a monsters name to stare her in the face everytime she see's it, and whether you think i should have begged the sick'o to come to the registry office with me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carly83 Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 yes someone was basically saying this, it was not willman this time but it has been said that even with contraception its not an accident, which is stupid beyond belief:loopy: so in not so many words saying as you said about, not to engage in sex even with contraception or you may get pregant found the post to quote now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 i was refering to the above poster when i said 'other poster' as thats who started the contraception part of the thread if i meant you had said it i would have said what willman said. so this is not aimed at single mothers then? hense my point regaurding alot work and do not claim benefits like that first of alot of people can not use chemical based contraceptives, i cant use the pill injection or implant as all cause me to perminatly bleed, condoms are my only choice, 3 in every 100 condoms are ineffective you've got to admit the chances of 3 in 100 women accidently falling pregant despit before carefull is pretty high! still awaiting a responce regaurding the birth certificut for my daughter and not wanting a monsters name to stare her in the face everytime she see's it, and whether you think i should have begged the sick'o to come to the registry office with me! Obviously you intend to repost out of context, as you were the one i believe comparing accidents of birth with crossing roada and the cost of it. Of course all my posts are directed at single mothers they're the only ones who can register the birth without a father present or select not to name him. But i never mentioned working mums. Re: condoms i don't have an issue with using or not or getting pregnant, if you're happy to have sex and possibly get preganant to an unknown man thats your choice - but surely you should get his name. It's difficult to comment on the birth certificate without seeming to be harsh, but this should be a decision that is made by the authorities not the birth mother imho. I don;t know if your child knows her fathers name and history but you implied she was aware, so wheres the harm having it in black and white. In fact my birth certificate doesn't show my parents name on it. As i said a change in the rules to allow the names to be given - or dna tests or whatever to facilitate two names on the certficate.For every 1 person like you who have true issues, dozens more choose not to name the father to get benefit help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carly83 Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 Obviously you intend to repost out of context, as you were the one i believe comparing accidents of birth with crossing roada and the cost of it. Of course all my posts are directed at single mothers they're the only ones who can register the birth without a father present or select not to name him. But i never mentioned working mums. Re: condoms i don't have an issue with using or not or getting pregnant, if you're happy to have sex and possibly get preganant to an unknown man thats your choice - but surely you should get his name. It's difficult to comment on the birth certificate without seeming to be harsh, but this should be a decision that is made by the authorities not the birth mother imho. I don;t know if your child knows her fathers name and history but you implied she was aware, so wheres the harm having it in black and white. In fact my birth certificate doesn't show my parents name on it. As i said a change in the rules to allow the names to be given - or dna tests or whatever to facilitate two names on the certficate.For every 1 person like you who have true issues, dozens more choose not to name the father to get benefit help. your obviously not even reading my posts are you, merely picking out the odd word and making up the rest. i said about crossing the road as to show everything in life carries a form of risk whether it crossing the road or having sex with a condom. single mothers are NOT the only one that can register the birth with out the father present, married mothers can do the same and choose not to have the fathers infomation added if so desired. you implied all single mothers are claiming £200 a week in benefits, i know you never mentioned working mums as obviously you can not grasp that some SINGLE mothers also work and do not claim benefits other than those that are not means tested. why your directing the sex with out knowing the name of a bloke as an activity i participate in i don't know had you of read my earlyer posts correctly you would see i have been living with my husband since my daughter was 6 weeks old, (with him just over 10 years now) so no im not having sex with any unknown man with or without condoms i only mentioned that condoms are the only form of contraception i can use. who in there right mind is going to insist on a paedophiles name be entered onto a legal document for the innocent party to have to forever own, and yes my daughter is aware that he is her father and the one that helped make her but she also see's my husband as the one thats her dad not my paedophile ex. D.N.A tests are carried out by the child support agency as if a mother goes onto benefits the fathers details are requested (whether his on the birth curtificut or not) and he can either agree paternity, refuse paternity and have a dna test, or refuse paternity and refuse a dna test in which case by law he becomes finacualy responsable for said child. whether a mother discloses the fathers name or not on a birth certificut she will get benefits IF she is entitled to them, the birth certificut does not effect them one bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 whether a mother discloses the fathers name or not on a birth certificut she will get benefits IF she is entitled to them, the birth certificut does not effect them one bit. Thats the point I think it should - everything else is completely erroneous and irrelevant imho, exactly what i said posts and posts ago before people started making excuses up and i unfortunately chose to reply to them. Which i do regret and will do no further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lubylou12 Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 single mothers they're the only ones who can register the birth without a father present or select not to name him. But i never mentioned working mums. . oh my god haha, your joking arnt you:hihi: you cannot register anyone on the birth cert if they do not attend, you cannot do that, single mum or not, the father HAS to be PRESENT to be on the birth cert, any mother single or not can chose to go alone and not enter the father yes but you cannot i reapeat cannot register a father without him being there to sign if the father refuses to go the mother has no choice to but to register the child in her name only oh god you really tripped up there lmao, just goes to show you know naff all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Star Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 oh my god haha, your joking arnt you:hihi: you cannot register anyone on the birth cert if they do not attend, you cannot do that, single mum or not, the father HAS to be PRESENT to be on the birth cert, any mother single or not can chose to go alone and not enter the father yes but you cannot i reapeat cannot register a father without him being there to sign if the father refuses to go the mother has no choice to but to register the child in her name only oh god you really tripped up there lmao, just goes to show you know naff all The father doesn't have to be present if the parents are married - in that case, it's kind of assumed that a married woman would be pregnant by her husband... If you are not married however, they ask that the father is there to register the birth as he is admitting to his child - if this wasn't done random names could be added, which isnt fair on some innocent bloke who biologically has nowt to do with the kid... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Bourne Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 If you want to discuss extreme exceptions of getting pregnant accidentally lets also talk extremes of wanton child production,like the woman in Leeds with 5 kids(who was recently done for abduction). You mean Karen Matthews, 'mother' of Shannon Matthews? Actually it wasn't five kids... it was seven kids from five fathers... http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jun/16/shannon-matthews-family-life x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lubylou12 Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 The father doesn't have to be present if the parents are married - in that case, it's kind of assumed that a married woman would be pregnant by her husband... If you are not married however, they ask that the father is there to register the birth as he is admitting to his child - if this wasn't done random names could be added, which isnt fair on some innocent bloke who biologically has nowt to do with the kid... but in the case of unmarried people then they HAVE TO be there, the issue we are talking about it women sleeping with anyone then not declaring the father, as some people keep going on about, so they have to have the man thereto register him as the father, if he refuses then shes buggered and yes i agree they should be there as yes they could add anyone but what if the married women had an affair on added her hubby as the father knowing hes not? it should be the same for everyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.