Very well said, perdix!

Dad or not....it's called descentcy. Some people lack that quality.

Some people also lack decency

Cause you know the whole story, right? Maybe he even had a valid reason for ending it. Pregnancy hormones can excuse a lot, but not everything. Granted, terrible timing, but depending on the reason, I could understand him not caring. And its not like he left her stranded there in labor. Pretty sure she'd have included that if he did.

14 - So the biological father DOESN'T have the right to do what he likes? :/ It doesn't matter whether he's the father or not. This is not just to do with breaking up - whether dad or just boyfriend, breaking up isn't necessarily even a bad thing - this is to do with dropping such a massive bomb at such an important and already stressful moment. If he had doubts he should've voiced them earlier.

Can you focus on the bigger picture? It's not a matter of whether OP's boyfriend is the baby-daddy or not. This is her FML, have some respect for the woman and stop making assumptions about her personal life.

After seeing your logic, you have a fitting name, Mr_Satan.

Nail on the head there, Alissa. I am Satan, because I don't pass judgement on a person based on one thing they've done with limited knowlegde of the situation.... I'm such an asshat... /sarcasm Maybe he is just an asshole. Maybe she's a brute who's twice his size and beats the shit out of him on a regular basis, and he figured she couldn't catch him with her water broken... probably not, but you never know. PS - Love that word. Asshat. ******' great!

And congratulations on your beautiful new baby, OP. I hope you're both healthy, and that your labor was smooth and uncomplicated.

Yep! Vaginas DO work (as well as penises) without metal on a finger and a certificate in a drawer somewhere! Shocking, huh?

Thank you!

her husband could have left her just as easily it would just cost more. it is ignorant to think that marriage would have stopped this fml or any other bad relationship situation.

I agree you should wait and be committed but, gotta say, marriages don't guarantee that. Lots of people think loads about it beforehand and are sure they're committed but then something changes and they realise it's not right for them anymore...and of course many people are completely committed but don't want to get married. So I don't think marriage really has much to do with it.

#41, maybe if you are poor, but if you are middle-class or higher, divorce is a huge financial disincentive to ending a failed relationship.

So only poor people should get married?

#53, not exactly. If you are not poor, you'd better be damned sure you are marrying the right person, because if it fails, you are going to slide down the economic ladder (you may even become poor.) If you are poor, there is really no difference (from a financial point of view) between living together and getting married.

Admittedly, I don't know much about how divorce happens so this will probably seem really naive...but I think, there's no reason for divorce to be that expensive? If both people could be grown up about it and talk fairly about assets and stuff then they wouldn't need to spend so much on lawyery things, right?

I get that there are other things too like changes in tax or benefits or whatever financial thing marriage affects but I wouldn't have thought it would be enough to make someone stay in a broken marriage...otherwise everyone would just marry their friends for the financial benefits.

you are 100% right. My fiance and his ex had a divorce with no lawyers etc. They figured it out themselves and went to court together. They (we all actually) are still friends, marriage just didn't work for them.

#59, yes, you are naive. Sure, some divorces can be handled amicably and cheaply, but many get nasty and expensive. The money worries are just one shackle keeping people in loveless marriages, the bigger one is worries over access to your own children (and whether it is better to "stay together for the sake of the children".) The latest research is that children are generally better off if their parents are miserable and together rather than separate and happy. The exceptions include if the parents' relationship is physically abusive. You'd like to think that kids would be better off with happy parents, but the research shows otherwise.

#75 - Jeepers, I hope you're being sarcastic and not sincere!

Oh, I meant naive about the actual process of divorce and the financial laws as I'm not sure what they are, not about messy divorces - I stand by that 100%. I know it's not very common but still, I don't think there are very many legitimate excuses to not be civil to each other, work together for the greater good and generally not act like a spoilt child. Also, most research DOES suggest that parents should split up and work together rather than stay together and fight...that I AM sure of.

To clarify, obviously every family is different and deals with divorce differently. Divorce affects children whether it's a 'good' divorce or a bad one and if parents can live as friends then it may well be better to stay together but, in the majority of cases, it's better to split up, be honest and make clear arrangements for childcare, etc. That doesn't just apply to houses where parents are fighting, just being unhappy is enough to affect children too.

You don't need a piece of paper to say you love someone. Historically marriage was really just a contract to say that a man owned a woman and that she did not have a decision. Love has nothing to do with a piece of paper and a ring, it has to do with the people in it, there isn't much difference between breaking up and a divorce. It just makes things more expensive

I had a friend who got pregnant at 18. She got married a few weeks before the baby was born. Not even a year later they got separated. I don't think they really loved each other, I think they just wanted to stay together for the kid. Didn't turn out so well in the end...

My husband left me while I was pregnant. Got back together months later and left me for another woman while our daughter was having her chest opened up in surgery. I still ended up paying for the divorce. Marriage and commitment means NOTHING if you can't read your partner's mind. So drop the old fashioned bulls**t and accept reality for what it is.

But it still doesn't guarantee the spouse will stay. My husband expected me to stay married just for financial reasons while he went and boned other women. Refused to pay for any part of the divorce and has still not paid what the court ordered him to pay me. He literally did jail time trying to avoid it.

Sadly, there's lots of examples of divorce being expensive. Not necessarily because of lawyers.

#117, I didn't say marriage was a guarantee, but the consequences of divorce forces the couple to stay together in many, many cases. #99, your supposed "common sense" feelings are simply wrong (even though I, too, wish you were right). Studies have shown that, except in cases of physical violence and substance abuse, kids fare better if their parents stay together, even if they are constantly bickering or not talking at all. After all factors are considered, this is better for kids than having divorced parents. Go figure.

I didn't say they were my 'common sense feelings'...I said it WAS research. There have indeed been studies on both sides of the argument with varying results, however, most research, including recent research, suggests parents are better off separating (not to mention hundreds of testimonials). Do you not believe me or something? Just Google it.

#126, OK, I'll look. I hope you are right.

I don't know about studies, but as far as I'm concerned, my father being "happily remarried" didn't make me happy at all. So, from my point of view, perdix may be right. My father once told me that he would have been a bad father if he hadn't left my mother, because at the time he wasn't happy with her, but from what I remember, he was a better father when he was still "at home". I think many unhappy couples who don't get divorced do it for their children, so they try to be the best parents even though their marriage sucks. Children are not responsible for their parents' choices, so they shouldn't have to be the ones suffering the most. Because I'm almost sure that if OP's boyfriend abandons her and his child (assuming the baby is his), the biggest lost will be for the child: you can have many lovers/boyfriends/..., but you only have one mother and one father (except for gay couples, but that's not the point here).

Wow...you've never had a baby, have you? The only thing at this stage that receives unconditional love is the child. Babies are kind of like narcissistic soul sucking demons until they're older. My infant just started showing affection now, and she's 6 months. It's also few and far between at the moment. Her older sister was about the same. Being a parent is hard work. It's so worth it, but the only thing ever guaranteed unconditional love is the child.

Haha, children DO have unconditional love (as much love as a parent does anyway) they just don't think to demonstrate it as much. When they're babies is actually the time when they DO show it as, although they're naturally egocentric, their whole world still revolves around you. If you can't see it now then good luck when they're teenagers...