In the Philippines, the question of whether an unmarried father is legally obligated to provide financial support to the pregnant mother carries significant weight under the Family Code, jurisprudence, Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Law), and related rules of procedure. The short answer is yes — the putative father can be compelled to provide financial support during the pregnancy itself, even before the child is born and even if the parties were never married, provided paternity is admitted or sufficiently established.

This obligation arises from the confluence of the child's constitutional and statutory right to support, the presumptive personality of the unborn, and the State's policy of protecting women and children from economic abuse.

1. Constitutional and Statutory Foundation

The 1987 Constitution (Art. XV, Sec. 3) mandates that the State shall defend the right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their development.

Article 194 of the Family Code defines support as everything indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing, medical attendance, education, and transportation, in keeping with the financial capacity of the family.

Article 195(4) explicitly states that parents are obliged to support their illegitimate children. The use of the word “parents” includes the biological father even if the child is illegitimate.

2. When Does the Obligation to Support Begin?

Article 203 of the Family Code provides:
“Support is demandable from the time the person who has a right to receive it needs it for maintenance, but it shall not be paid except from the date of judicial or extrajudicial demand.”

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the right to support is ongoing and arises from the moment the need exists. Since the fetus requires nutrition, medical care, and other necessities from the moment of conception, the need for support technically begins during pregnancy.

The Civil Code (Art. 40–42), which applies suppletorily, considers the fetus as already born for all purposes favorable to it if it is alive at the time of complete delivery. Support is undoubtedly a right favorable to the child. Thus, the unborn child already possesses legal personality to be a recipient of support.

3. Support During Pregnancy Even Without Prior Recognition

Recognition of an illegitimate child is ordinarily done after birth (Art. 172, Family Code). However, the absence of formal recognition does not extinguish the duty of support during pregnancy.

In numerous cases (e.g., De Jesus v. Syquia, G.R. No. L-3910, November 28, 1951; Mangulabnan v. IAC, G.R. No. 79771, April 6, 1989; People v. Sagun, G.R. No. 133573, September 20, 2000), the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the father of an illegitimate child is obliged to support the mother for pregnancy-related expenses and the unborn child even before compulsory recognition is obtained.

The Court has emphasized that the duty of support is personal and cannot be evaded by denying paternity when evidence exists.

4. Provisional Support (Support Pendente Lite)

Under the Rule on Provisional Orders (A.M. No. 02-11-12-SC) and the Rule on the Writ of Amparo/Habeas Data in family cases, the mother may file a verified application for provisional support simultaneously with, or even before, the main action for compulsory recognition and support.

The court may grant monthly support, maternity expenses, prenatal check-ups, hospitalization, and delivery costs pendente lite upon a prima facie showing of paternity (text messages admitting paternity, photos together during pregnancy, witnesses, ultrasound results bearing the father’s name, etc.).

The Supreme Court in Gotardo v. Buling (G.R. No. 165166, August 15, 2012) upheld the grant of support pendente lite even while the issue of paternity was still being litigated.

5. Protection Order Under Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Law)

This is the most powerful and fastest remedy available to unmarried pregnant women.

Section 8(e) of RA 9262 authorizes the court to order temporary or permanent financial support to the woman and/or her child as part of a protection order.

“Economic abuse” under Section 3(a) includes “withdrawal of financial support or preventing the victim from engaging in any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity… that deprives the woman and/or her child of financial support legally due them.”

The law explicitly covers women in dating relationships or sexual relationships, past or present, regardless of marriage (Section 3).

Thus, if the woman is pregnant by a man with whom she had a sexual or dating relationship, refusal to provide support during pregnancy constitutes economic abuse, punishable by imprisonment and fine.

The barangay protection order (BPO) or court-issued TPO/PPO can include immediate financial support within 24–48 hours in urgent cases.

Many unmarried mothers successfully obtain ₱10,000–₱50,000 monthly support plus full maternity expenses through RA 9262 protection orders.

6. Amount of Support

The amount is determined by:

The needs of the unborn child and the mother (prenatal vitamins, check-ups, healthy food, maternity clothes, hospitalization, etc.)
The financial capacity of the father (Art. 201, Family Code)

Typical awards range from ₱10,000 to ₱100,000+ per month depending on the father’s income or lifestyle (condominium ownership, luxury cars, business interests, etc. are taken into account).

The Supreme Court in Lim-Lua v. Lua (G.R. No. 175279, June 5, 2013) and Spouses Mendenilla v. CA emphasized that the lifestyle the father has accustomed the mother/child to is a major consideration.

7. Criminal Liability for Non-Support

Failure or refusal to provide legally required support to an illegitimate child (born or unborn) is punishable under Article 195 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by RA 9262, with imprisonment ranging from arresto mayor to reclusion perpetua depending on the circumstances.

RA 9262 increased the penalty when committed against a pregnant woman.

8. Practical Procedure for the Mother

If the father admits paternity → execute an affidavit of acknowledgment/admission of paternity and agree on support extrajudicially (notarized).
If he refuses → file any of the following (or all simultaneously):
- Petition for compulsory recognition with support (Regional Trial Court – Family Court)
- Application for support pendente lite
- Petition for TPO/PPO with financial support under RA 9262 (Family Court or Municipal Trial Court)
- Criminal complaint for violation of RA 9262 (Prosecutor’s Office)

DNA testing can now be compelled by the court under the Rule on DNA Evidence (A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC) if the father continues to deny paternity.

9. Key Supreme Court Doctrines

De Jesus v. Syquia (1951): The father is liable for the support of the mother during pregnancy and confinement expenses.
People v. Sagun (2000): Duty of support exists even before judicial declaration of paternity.
Gotardo v. Buling (2012): Support pendente lite may be granted upon prima facie evidence of filiation.
Lim-Lua v. Lua (2013): Lifestyle previously enjoyed is the standard for support amount.

Conclusion

Under Philippine law, an unmarried father is legally required to provide financial support during the pregnancy of the mother of his child. The obligation is rooted in the child's right to support from both parents (Art. 194–195, Family Code), the presumptive personality of the unborn (Civil Code), the provisional remedies available in court, and the strong protection afforded by RA 9262 against economic abuse.

Refusal to provide such support exposes the father to civil claims for support (including retroactive and maternity expenses), protection orders with immediate financial relief, and criminal prosecution.

The law is unequivocally protective of the unborn child and the pregnant mother, regardless of the parents' marital status.