If a woman lies about being on the pill, is it rape by deception?

originally posted by: WoodcarverThe part where this hurt you in any way. It seems like you want out of this relationship or you want out of the responsibility for the child, and you're trying to use a percieved lie to get some advantage. If she was pregnant, then she didn't lie. If you knew the child wasn't yours and still decided to raise them as your own, ghen you are responsible. There was no lie, and def no rape.

Errr... again, what?

Let's cut through this a little bit. Please, OP, correct me if I'm wrong.

OP is no longer in a relationship with this person, therefore has no need to come up with reasons to escape it
OP is not the father of the child but still gave the kid 7 years of his life rather than walk away (as he could easily have done)

I've separated all of that out because it is completely unrelated to the issue of rape. Let's not go back to it again because it's entirely and completely irrelevant.

On topic, however, is your comment about "hurt". Do you understand how "law" works? The criminal law will set out what conditions need to be met for an offence to have been committed. That law states (summarising for brevity) that it is an offence to have sex unless there is consent. It doesn't need OP to be "hurt". If they had sex, and OP did not consent, that's it. Stop going on about "hurt". It is completely and entirely irrelevant to whether this situation would legally constitute rape.

Ok, so "consent" is really at the heart of this thread. You mention that the lie was not really a lie. This, actually, is a very astute point and worthy of looking at in more detail. It's just a shame that point is surrounded by complete gubbins.

For this, I would suggest looking at the law relating to Drugs. Why? Because situations arise where someone thinks they are selling something that is illegal, but it actually turns out to be legal. In other words, they think they are doing something wrong, when actually they aren't.

In the case of R v Shivpuri ([1986] UKHL 2), the courts were faced with the task of answering this very question.

The question actually put to them was:

"Does a person commit an offence under section 1 of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 where, if the facts were as that person believed them to be, the full offence would have been committed by him, but where on the true facts the offence which that person set out to commit was in law impossible, e.g., because the substance imported and believed to be heroin was not heroin but a harmless substance?"

According to the highest court in the land, the answer is yes. To apply it to the current case, if the law required you to have told a lie in order to commit the offence, and you told what you thought was a lie but later turned out to be impossible (ie couldn't get pregnant because already pregnant) then you are still committing the offence.

Of course, all of that becomes irrelevant when you realise that OP didn't ask if she could get pregnant, he asked if she was on the pill. It was a very specific question, to which she gave a very specific (and knowingly incorrect) answer. The pregnancy issued may well be inferred, but that isn't actually relevant to the issue of the lie.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
Rape is not as they would put it, but an act of violence. And such laws really do nothing more than to make life more difficult and control people.

Rape by deceit, that is one of the biggest exploitable laws out there and unfortunately if it was ever passed, would cause more problems than it would help. The courts are going to have to look at such cases and the “Victims” would have to be willing to sit and be cross examined by the attorneys and justify said charges.

Except OP's country has had those laws (or variations thereof) for years without this tidal wave of problems that you predict.

Not to rain on your parade or anything.

Maybe not rape but a criminal issue would make sense, although it may be somewhat difficult to prove and theres assumed risk for both parties whether using contraception or not that would mitigate some of the responsibility on the part of the woman.

originally posted by: Wetpaint72
a reply to: grainofsand
And I mean no harm. I'm sorry you were lied to. Just be careful.
People lie.

No worries, the point of the thread was to consider consent through deception. I said from the start I wasn't bitching about anything so no need to feel sorry for me at all.
I was looking for a discussion about the concept of consent gained through deception, and if a woman lies to a man that she is using birth control, and that is a condition for consent by the man, then is that 'rape by deception' as featured in the OP links.

It has been an interesting thread to keep up with, just a pity there were so many facebook style emotional replies which couldn't stick to the topic.
I would love to have seen the difference in responses if I had been a woman and a guy slipped his condom off on the sly, when wearing a condom had been a condition of sex.
I'd bet all my money the replies would have been different.

originally posted by: MagnaCarta2015
Maybe not rape but a criminal issue would make sense, although it may be somewhat difficult to prove and theres assumed risk for both parties whether using contraception or not that would mitigate some of the responsibility on the part of the woman.

This is actually "the big thing" in most rape cases. How do you prove it? This is also why courts struggle to prevent rape trials turn into character assassinations of the alleged victim.

Assumed risk is a different kettle of fish, but if the other person is lying about fundamental matters then you are being denied the ability to calculate that risk or take alternative steps to mitigate it.

a reply to: EvillerBob

Thanks for the informative contributions to the thread
It would appear to me that if a condition of consent to sex by a man is that the woman is using birth control, and the woman deceives him then consent is not granted and the deception would constitute an offence.

I am not pushing for this to be chased by authorities, just more curious with the legal situation and so far I'm drawn to thinking that my comments in the OP stand quite well.
I only consented after being deceived.

...and again, for all those emotional types out there, I am not bleating about anything at all here, just looking at the story in an objective legal perspective.

I wish we could have a real face to face conversation. Over a couple drinks. This is a good one.

a reply to: Wetpaint72

I agree
It is an interesting one though isn't it...I thought I'd bitten off more than I could chew in this thread at one point though, fast n furious emotions running wild with some folk lol

a reply to: grainofsand

It's actually rather pleasant now it's calmed down a little.

I tried to get out at one point put was pulled back in against my will.

it's a beautiful day
or night
or rainy day in England

a reply to: nonspecific

I tried to get out at one point put was pulled back in against my will.



Isn't that line what this thread is about

or is that an obvious joke I missed

a reply to: Layaly

A little risque maybe?

Haha! It's certainly been an interesting day off work for me
I'm gonna have to bail on the thread soon though, got loads of stuff I should have done today, and I've kind've said all I can about the topic.
No doubt I'll get flamed to bits after I log off, always good for a chuckle though!

My kindest regards to all you good people

a reply to: nonspecific

maybe
I am obsessed and I am stressed with this mess
pancakes may calm me down
one is allowed single act of depravity
such as
cdn.someecards.com...

**If anyone asks I was not in this thread

A its a shame the thread has come to this as the overall concept is a great discussion point. Unfortunately you posted a RELEVANT personal story (I'm sure you've learnt from this) and people have attacked your personal story.

Unfortunately I do not believe you when you say you would not have consented if she said she wasn't taking birth control. You are a red blooded human in a moment of passion, more than likely invested alot of time and money to get to this point (often a safe assumptions when with strangers). Most people's reaction would be il worry about it later or she can adleast get an abortion ( not that that would be running through your head at the time).but you could be different, and clearly STDS didn't even cross your mind, so in that sense you were irresponsible to continue regardless of the proposed BC.

But I do feel for you. You did what most other people would do. It was a mistake and have embraced the deception, to which I applaud you ( still being a good "father".)

But on another note the amount of deceptions you would have expressed (exaggerations, willingness to impress, portraying non confrontational views that are not your own), you wouldn't be able to keep count leading up to the sexual encounter.

Thankyou for starting the thread as it is very interesting, it's a shame of the troll type nature that has formed though.

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: grainofsand

It's actually rather pleasant now it's calmed down a little.

I tried to get out at one point put was pulled back in against my will.

If ATS threads could be represented by a scene from a film, it would be the scene from A Bronx Tale where the guy locks the door to the cafe and says "Now youse can't leave..."

originally posted by: EvillerBob

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: grainofsand

It's actually rather pleasant now it's calmed down a little.

I tried to get out at one point put was pulled back in against my will.

If ATS threads could be represented by a scene from a film, it would be the scene from A Bronx Tale where the guy locks the door to the cafe and says "Now youse can't leave..."

I am usually pretty good at keeping my cool and walking away unless it's a friday night and I've had a few.

This was one of the fastest intense tuesday afternoon threads I have seen in a long time.

originally posted by: rossacus
Unfortunately you posted a RELEVANT personal story (I'm sure you've learnt from this) and people have attacked your personal story.

Haha, no I'll never learn
It always gives added value if I can add a personal touch so I'll carry on same as always. I was looking for a lively debate and certainly found it so all good.

Unfortunately I do not believe you when you say you would not have consented if she said she wasn't taking birth control. You are a red blooded human in a moment of passion, more than likely invested alot of time and money to get to this point (often a safe assumptions when with strangers).

Ah that's a pity but hey, you don't know me so no worries.
All I can say is that I have actually stopped in the past, and I would again. Having another child is my worst nightmare. It's caused arguments before now but I do have self control.
What I learned from the experience back then was never again to believe a woman if she says she's on the pill, and always use a condom. The only other situation I would even consider having sex without barrier contraception would be if I could actually feel the implant in a womans arm.

Cheers for the considered reply though, I expect round two of emotionally charged flaming when the next timezone in the US logs on lol

a reply to: EvillerBob

a reply to: nonspecific

Haha it was pretty intense at one point, good laugh to be honest, but it would have been preferable if the debate had stuck to the legal intricacies of 'consent' instead of 'it takes two to tango' and whining about sex with someone when you don't really know them.

...cheers for helping the discussion stay on track though chaps, appreciated.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I wasn't talking to anyone in particular, just a observation that there was at least one person ignoring the OP's stated desire to avoid such talk.

I just find it rude, if nothing else.