Presexual Agreement Contracts

Understood, but it is important to state that the responsibility for prevention is upon both people. You seem very adamant that you do not want to spread your DNA so take responsibility for your own bodies reproductive abilities. If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant then she is expected to either take some form of birth control or get sterilized. Why would that not hold true for the man as well? If you do not want to risk passing along your DNA to anyone then take responsibility for it and do what you need to do to prevent it. Don't put the responsibility off on someone else.

Unless your name is Sheldon Cooper or Amy Farrah Fowler, you should not ever start an intimate relationship with a contract. That could never be a foundation of a relationship, as it would bypass the most important fundament... trust!

So, as long as you don't trust being on the same page, dont have sex!

Originally posted by AccessDenied
First off..this may have been better posted in the relationships forum.
Secondly, I see no problem with how you feel towards children/relationships...but a contract is a bit much.
If you find the right person, I fail to see how a legal document would be needed. It sounds more like you wish to cover your behind on the off chance you found yourself in that situation.
If you really don't want children...permanently deal with it and get a vasectomy. No worries.

I have to ask, would you tell a women who has decided that she does not want children to just get a hysterectomy? What happens in the event that at a later time a person decides they are in a position to raise children responsibly?

So you fail to see how a legal document is needed? Let me show you what kind of world we live in and perhaps you can see how a legal document is needed.

Here is the case of Dr. Richard Phillips and Dr. Sharon Irons. This couple while dating engaged in consensual oral sex. Dr. Irons then saved the males sperm and used it to get pregnant without his knowledge or consent after they had parted ways. Of course Dr. Richard Phillips did not know about any of this until he was successfully sued for child support and forced to pay $800 per month to Dr Irons.
Source

This is not an isolated incident. Here is a story out of the UK about a married couple who married in 1979. The male in 1999 had to undergo drug treatment for arthritis and was worried that he could be left infertile due to the treatment. So he had his sperm frozen in the event that he and his wife would want children in the future. They divorced in 2000 and weeks after the divorce the Women went to the clinic where the sperm was stored and forged his signature allowing doctors to use the frozen sperm and fertilize her egg. She gave birth in 2001. She then later went back and did it a second time having another child in 2003. All without the Male's knowledge or consent. He was then ordered to pay $200,000 in back child support and sued for even more money when his ex wife fell into debt.
Source

Here is another story out of Houston Texas. In this case the Female saved the Males sperm from used condoms, then took the sperm to a clinic and used IVF procedures to get pregnant with twins. They began dating in 2005, split in 2007 and 3 months after splitting she informs him that she is pregnant. Of course she sued for child support and won.
Source

Here is another story of a married couple who attempted to use fertility treatments to get pregnant. As the relationship was falling apart the women forged the Male"s signature and used IVF treatments to get pregnant using the sperm samples saved by the clinic.

Source

So I got news for you.... in the real world, men need to cover their behinds. The idea of a women getting pregnant to save a relationship is not new. The idea of a women getting pregnant to trap a man is not new. The idea of a women getting pregnant just to receive benefits is not new. However, with today's technology there are even more options for unscrupulous women to get pregnant.

Originally posted by chrismir
Unless your name is Sheldon Cooper or Amy Farrah Fowler, you should not ever start an intimate relationship with a contract. That could never be a foundation of a relationship, as it would bypass the most important fundament... trust!

Exactly

Interesting topic. I'll throw in my 2 cents...
First of all, I'll say that as a woman, I would have no problem with such a contract.
Secondly, yes, I can't imagine that this would/could ever be enforced. Which is too bad if both parties were in agreement. If I were the woman who signed, or verbally agreed, I would not expect the father to be responsible and would not go after him. Also, right now there is a lot of political talk about whether women should should be 'allowed' to have control of their own bodies, let alone considering the man's wishes.
And thirdly, I have actually thought on this topic because I have younger brothers, and as the mother of sons and a daughter, I realized that it is only my daughter who has the ultimate decision. *It used to be seen as the girl who got left 'holding the bag' so to speak, but it is actually the reverse now that I've thought about it.

edit to add *maybe because abortions were less accessible/available

At any rate, abstinence aside, in a situation of 'accidents happen', I feel my daughter definitely has power, my sons/brothers don't.

reply to post by chrismir


In a perfect world, I would agree. Plenty of people every day are screwed over by people they trust. It's gotten so bad..... Can't even lend people money without writing up a contract. It has gotten to the point for me, that I will never ever lend money out again. Not worth the aggravation.

I keep my circle small these days, if one needs money, and I have it, I give it to them. They usually pay me back anyways, which is a pleasant surprise. Better than lending money out, expecting to be paid back, then getting stressed when they don't.

reply to post by luciddream


If you prefer having premarital sex you should take responsability too. If disagree you can always do it by yourself.

reply to post by dollukka


I completely agree. Let's examine that quote...

If [woman] decides upon finding out a pregnancy has occured, to keep the child, then she accepts full responsibility for said child.

Brilliant! Stick your dingaling in a woman and run at the first sign of swelling! Why didn't I think of making a contract with every woman I've been with!? The reason I didn't is because it's creepy and the fact is, if you don't use protection then all of the horrible possible consequences are your fault, as much as anyone elses.

I know too many good men to let you taint us as sh*t.

Before any such contract can be written up and signed, your potential partner must answer the following question:

"Will you go out with me, tick yes, no or maybe"

/end sarcasm

Are you for real!?

"If [woman] decides upon finding out a pregnancy has occured, to keep the child, then she accepts full responsibility for said child."

As a woman, if I've had sex with a man who's made it VERY clear, contract or no, that he does not want children, I would take responsibility and not expect a thing, should I choose to go ahead with it. Doesn't make him a POS in my eyes.
The guy who says, "Oh yeah, I'll be there for you" and then splits, is a different story.
Sounds like I am in the minority here...

reply to post by curiouscanadian777


Yes because the child has legal rights as well and if you are one of the working poor, ie topped by assistance in any way, or become disabled, and you get put in the same situation my friend was, where the ministry was alerted to neighbors having to feed the children peanut butter sandwhiches because her wage only covered rent and utilities and maybe a weeks worth of food, so the ministry forced her, though she was proud and didn't wish to, accept the top up, which gave them another week or two worth of food and back to school, the necessities more or less. But instantly the LAW kicks in where father is expected to support. And a large portion of jobs are "working poor" jobs.

You can be as kind as you wish, but the Law is fair to the child and to the government. And for good reason. Women are not off any hooks, and so it is with men as well.

reply to post by Unity_99


Yes, fair enough. In that situation, say I've decided to have the child, not go after the father, who made it clear he did not want children - if I ever ask/end up having the gov't help, then THEY did NOT make that agreement. Therefore, they can and will and should go after the father.

If you want the fun times with zero responsibility i'd get your tubes tied along with regular tests to ensure that they haven't rejoined and look for a woman who has fertility problems herself to be doubly sure as i doubt many judges will look upon a contract like what you are asking and consider it legal so before you do decide check the legality of such a contract and if theres no legal precedent for such a contract be very wary of getting your trouser snake out

Originally posted by AccessDenied
deal with it and get a vasectomy. No worries.

this. looking into getting mine asap!

I have to ask, would you tell a women who has decided that she does not want children to just get a hysterectomy? What happens in the event that at a later time a person decides they are in a position to raise children responsibly?

Really? You can't even compare the two. Vasectomies are reversible. Hysterectomy is the the removal of body parts.

All I see here is a bunch of people wanting sex with out consequences. It doesn't exist. No birth control method is fool proof. You could have a guy with a vasectomy and a girl with her tubes tied and there is still a very small chance that sex between the two will result in a child. It may be a one in a million chance, but it has happened.
Always assume that whatever method of birth control you use will end up being one of the statistical failures.
If the person you are having sex with is the last person on earth you would want to have a child with, don't have sex with them.

Any time you have sex you either go into to it knowing that there are possible consequences or you abstain, end of story.

Also as a woman, any guy who leaves the birth control up to a woman who say's she is on the pill is an idiot.
Not because women lie about it, but because many don't know how to take it correctly. Taking birth control pills correctly is pretty complicated. If you don't take it at the same times everyday, it isn't going to work.

reply to post by calstorm


Also there are certain antibiotics out there that can counteract the pill.

Subjects such as these really get me concerned for the future of humanity.........If we don't take responsibility for ourselves and our own actions then who will?

Maybe I wasn't as clear in the OP as I should have been, I apologize for that. I put it in the social issues section, because I am addressing the social issue, not a personal issue, I would have put it in rant if that was the case.

Telling people to do the obvious, like use rubbers etc, is not really addressing the social issue. All that is available now, and many don't do it. It is sad seeing so many single parent households out there, something sure seems wrong to me. I was merely putting out an idea that I had, I thought might improve that situation.

But if you are truly interested in preventing issues from coming up at all then you would put more emphases on the responsibility of both parties to prevent such things from occurring, not trying to address the after effects with a contract. Basically all your contract does is say that if for whatever reason the woman gets pregnant and doesn't agree to an abortion then she agrees to not make the man responsible for the child. If we are interested in preventative then you may find out from whomever you are with how they feel about abortion before you start sleeping with them. Be responsible for your own body, be responsible for the prevention of a life before it ever begins.