One-Night Stand Ends With Pregnancy, And Now He Wants Her To Abort While She Demands Child Support

A one-night stand led to an unexpected pregnancy, and now this woman is faced with a difficult decision: keep the baby, or follow the father’s demand for an abortion.

Though she’s financially stable and has the support of her family, the father is insistent that she terminate the pregnancy.

His pressure has escalated to the point where his family is also calling her to convince her to abort, but she’s resolute in her choice to keep the child.

Now, as she prepares to raise the baby on her own, she’s questioning whether she’s doing the right thing.

The OP’s decision to continue her pregnancy and seek child support touches on fundamental issues of bodily autonomy, shared responsibility, and the legal realities of reproductive and parental rights.

She discovered her pregnancy after a one‑night encounter, chose to carry the baby despite the biological father’s vehement objections, and now faces pressure not only from him but also from his family.

That pressure, especially when coupled with harassment, highlights a broader conflict between individual rights and the expectations others place on reproductive decisions.

Legally, the power to decide whether to continue a pregnancy resides with the person who is pregnant.

In many jurisdictions, a pregnant birth parent has the right to make decisions about their body, including whether to terminate or continue a pregnancy, without needing the biological father’s consent or approval.

A seminal legal principle in this vein is reflected in Tremblay v Daigle, where the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a man has no legal recourse to prevent his partner from obtaining an abortion, affirming that reproductive choices belong to the pregnant individual.

Once a child exists, however, the legal landscape shifts. Fathers who are biologically related and later assert their role do not generally have the right to compel an abortion, but they may be obligated to support the child financially.

The Dubay v. Wells case encapsulates this reality: although a man may object to becoming a father, courts have upheld that he must fulfill child support obligations after birth, as public policy prioritizes the child’s welfare over parental preferences.

This principle underlines why the OP’s intention to file for child support stands on solid legal and ethical ground; it recognizes both parents’ responsibilities once the child is born.

Beyond legal frameworks, research shows that a partner’s refusal to support a pregnancy, emotionally, financially, or in health care decisions, can correlate with adverse maternal health outcomes, including depressive symptoms and reduced care engagement during pregnancy. SpringerLink

The OP’s situation, where the father initially blocked contact and later reacted with pressure and harassment, illustrates how rejection can compound stress during an already vulnerable time.

These effects underscore that supportive, respectful communication around pregnancy decisions benefits both parental well‑being and, indirectly, child development.

Importantly, reproductive autonomy is recognized as a human right in many international frameworks, emphasizing the right to make informed choices without coercion or discrimination. OHCHR This reinforces that while partners can share opinions, they cannot override the pregnant person’s autonomy without violating fundamental rights.

The OP’s decision to keep the baby is protected both legally and ethically; she should continue prioritizing her bodily autonomy while documenting all interactions with the father to guard against harassment.

If communication with him remains strained or hostile, she might consider setting boundaries (e.g., mediated communication or limiting direct contact) and seek legal guidance on pursuing child support and custody once the baby is born.

Focusing on creating a stable, supportive environment for herself and her future child, with the support of her family and professionals, will serve her well long‑term.

At its core, this case highlights a clash between a person’s right to choose and another’s emotional reaction to that choice.

The OP expressed her intentions clearly and acted in a way consistent with her values and circumstances.

While the father’s disappointment and fear about parenthood are understandable, reproductive decisions, especially ones as profound as carrying a pregnancy to term, belong to the person whose health, body, and future are directly affected.

Balancing those rights with respectful communication and shared responsibility, once appropriate, offers the best foundation for constructive co‑parenting.

Here’s how people reacted to the post:

These commenters argue that while the OP is not in the wrong for keeping the child, pursuing child support crosses a line.

These Redditors strongly defended the OP, stressing that child support is the rightful claim of the child, not the mother.

These commenters, while acknowledging the OP’s right to choose, criticized the idea of forcing a man into parenthood and financial responsibility if he doesn’t want to be involved.

These Redditors were firmly in support of the OP, stressing that the man had no right to escape responsibility.

This story highlights a deeply complex situation about personal choice, responsibility, and the consequences of actions taken in the heat of the moment.

Was the OP justified in keeping the baby and seeking child support, or should they have considered the father’s stance more seriously?

How far should the father’s wishes be respected when he wasn’t involved in the decision-making process from the start?

Can the OP’s decision to pursue child support be seen as fair, or does it raise ethical concerns? Share your opinions below!