I LOVE my prenuptial agreement!

Because it’s a stupid question, that’s why. Maybe she was on hormonal birth control and it failed (which, yes, can happen even with perfect usage). Maybe they used a condom and it was 1- defective, 2- he didn’t use it properly or hell, even 3- he intentionally had a condom fail so she’d get pregnant and then his useless ass would be supported*.

Speaking in a general sense and not specifically about the OP: Last time I checked, pregnancy is not 100% preventable** and is not 100% controlled by the woman. It takes two to tango and all that.

But hey! Tell us all about your life. I’m absolutely sure we could all Monday morning quarterback your choices, mistakes and errors in judgment and even insinuate that they’re basically all your fault when there’s no way we can actually know that! :slight_smile:

  • No, I don’t actually think this one is probable at all and is ridiculous. But hey, I’ve heard it suggested before about women (“trapping” a man with a child by poking a needle through the condom wrapper), so why not include it?

** and before anyone mentions abstinence, a woman could be raped, deceived by a partner (we’ll just do oral, I promise! … Babe, I wanted you so bad, I couldn’t help it. Don’t be mad!), etc.

Oh, and a PS-

Kudos for calling her reply “hysterical”. It’s a great way to totally dismiss her entire post without even needing to actually think about her points. :: high five :: These females have no emotional control, amirite?

Yet another hysterical response to yet another simple, straight forward question.

Your questions have been nothing resembling simple or straight forward. They are fraught with subtext.

Wait- I just realized. He must think that woman could shut down her body and prevent pregnancy… if she really wanted to.

I honestly do not see why this kind of prenup is “vile”. I think it’s both smart and wise.

Good for you, Foxy40! I wish more people did prenups like that.

Such as?

Why did she “allow” him to impregnate her?

That suggests carelessness and bad judgement on her part, when chances are it was beyond her control. It’s a puritanical subtext.

Perhaps you misunderstood my question. It was and, since it has yet to be answered, remains: If the OP knew from the gitgo that the guy was a bum, why did she allow him to impregnate her?

I get your question. Allow implies control. You can have sex without expectation or intent of pregnancy. Sometimes, though, accidents happen. You can’t “allow” something that’s not in your control.

You can (generally) control who you allow to have sex with you. You can’t always cobtrol who you allow to get you pregnant.

It’s a blame the woman attitude.

We don’t know that she did “allow him to impregnate her.” That is an exceptionally peculiar phrase. It suggests really weird ideas about women and sex, that women somehow approach sex differently than men and somehow bear more responsibility for any resulting pregnancy. I am sure you don’t believe those things.

Sex happens for a lot of reasons, and pregnancy can result because one or both parties desire it, because both birth control isn’t used, is used improperly, or because it fails. Only a tiny minority of women set out to get pregnant and then find a man to provide the sperm, which is what your phraseology suggests.

You might get a better answer if you asked a different way, but remember that she has a daughter that she loves. Chances are, she may regret the choice of father and the last sixteen years, but she is actually quite glad to have the resulting daughter. To suggest that someone ought to have aborted or never conceived a beloved child is rather offensive.

Unless her boyfriend raped her or her birth control failed, getting pregnant by him was not beyond her control. Moreover, not having unprotected sex with bums (whether they be of the male or female variety) does not mean you’re puritanical, it simply means you’re smart and responsible.

Who said it was unprotected? Why do assume it was? That would have been the straightforward question: was it an accident?

Yours made assumptions.

Aww, I’m sorry you have no actual responses to the points I’ve brought up. :frowning: Unfortunately, your repetition of this deflection is super obvious and reflects poorly on your argument (or lack thereof) instead of mine. {{{{{{{{{hugs}}}}}}}}}

And as we all know from the television masterpiece, “The Fresh Prince of Bel Air”, you should never make an assumption. You’ll be an ‘ass’ and the ‘ump’ will ‘shun’ you.

Why they married is not relevant. What is relevant is that they freely made a domestic contract when they married that set out the financial terms of separation, and they have now separated.

No, it didn’t. Nothing in the OP’s narrative even remotely suggested that she “accidentally” got pregnant. And if she had, she could have answered my simple and straightforword question with a simple and straightforword: ‘I didn’t; it was an accident.’

Your question is utterly irrelevant.

And it is not straightforward or simple. And the merry go round starts up again.
ETA And I disagree. She only married him because of the pregnancy and didn’t love him. Hardly seems like she was planning a baby with him.

What the hell business is it of yours why someone got pregnant 16 years ago? What are you trying to say, anyway? That because THEY had an unplanned pregnancy that SHE deserves to live in squalor?