Very sad.
I take it no one bags up when punting in the Philippines then?? 
”The men like us to drink alcohol. They get angry if you want a soft drink,” she says. She has become adept at pouring drinks on the ground when the men aren’t watching; being drunk would be dangerous
Shame she has not become adept at insisting on using a condom.
It take 2 to tango, if your a girl in the sex trade in the poorest part of your country, then you should know that having a child is the last thing you need.
This article is just another man bashing piece of rubbish from the guardian, fed up with everyone jumping on the “white man bad” wagon.
The women in this article are just as much to blame. If they insist on using a condom but then get rejected and lose work then so be it. Risking becoming pregnant for a few dollars is not worth it, no matter how poor you are.
+1
Men who don't take responsibility for their children are cunts and men who have bareback (especially with such "high risk" prossies) are idiots. However, the WGs who also think it's a good idea to do BB and do nothing to stop pregnancy or giving birth are even more stupid.
Sad cases like the ones in the article must be fairly uncommon in the sense that surely most of the time, the WG will have no idea who the father is because they'll have fucked so many guys and even if they do know, it'll often be unlikely they'll find them again. In most cases, trying to say the father is a specific guy will just be a desperate shot in the dark and one that they'll make to many punters. While I'm sure there are loads of genuine cases, on most occasions when a WG claims that a child is a punter's, it'll just be a scam.
Even some of the cases in the article sound like they could be a scam:
In the case of the twins "Melanie and Madeline", the twins claim they don't want his money, yet he suggests otherwise:
Asked about the email in which he had suggested the twins be adopted, he said: “
After I had supported the twins, purchased a house and provided at least some means of continuous income, I then continued to get further requests for money. I had nothing to give and knew that if I somehow managed a small amount that the requests would continue… Adoption had been mentioned to me as a solution from the Philippines – it was not my original idea.”
In the case of "Justin":
"Jasmine and Justin have no proof of their parentage. Even if Franz had been willing to sign their birth certificates, he was not there when they were born. The Home Office states that children born overseas to a British father can become citizens “provided there is satisfactory evidence of paternity”. That means birth certificates, DNA tests or “any other evidence… the home secretary considers to be relevant”.
If his siblings were prepared to take a DNA test, Justin could satisfy that test. But he isn’t sure that he wants to – he’d just like to meet his family."
At least in one of the other cases they claimed they couldn't afford a DNA test (even though saving up for one would probably be the best financial decision/investment they could ever make - of course that assumes the father would keep his word which obviously isn't guaranteed).
A Filipina has the right to sue the 'daddy monger' for financial compensation.
Reciprocal agreements for collection of child support exists for some countries but not for others. For example, UK has a reciprocal agreement with the Philippines for the collection of support while the USA does not.
However, the Filipina can obtain a child support order from the Court in the Philippines and file it with a USA Court for recognition and enforcement
The article in the OP says:
"The UK is also party to international agreements that mean child support orders can be enforced by Filipino mothers against fathers in Britain – in theory. In practice, this is a fiction. The mothers would need a court order in Britain or the Philippines; hiring a British lawyer to bring a case would be impossible, and taking action in the Philippines would almost always mean paying a bribe."
