Abortion supporter wants fathers to have financial "abortion" rights

Shall I begin with the risk to the life and health of the maternal parent from childbearing, which is not shared by the paternal parent? And continue with the colossal life disruption that pregnancy can produce? Not to mention discomfort, nausea, etc. for many months, followed by disrupted hormones, bone loss, long-term health consequences....



This might just turn into a long, and potentially ugly comment thread. I'll leave it there.

Reply

I don't get the picture with the story.



Did this woman choose to end her pregnancy, thereby saving the world's gene-pool a little pain from the perpetuation of poor fashion sense? Did her boyfriend decide she didn't deserve a baby because her hair is so bad?



Otherwise, I tend to think that babies are a by-product of sex. If you don't want one, don't do it. (Sort-of) saves a lot of debate.

Reply

Take a look through this site before you start taking about all aspects of "everything else" being shared:

http://www.fistulafoundation.org/aboutfistula/



While that may be true for some select male individuals who choose to be involved - it's simply not the case with the majority of women on this planet.

Reply

A friend of mine who was already a single divorced mother of a son went off to a dude ranch and had wild, casual sex with a cowboy. She had a daughter 9 months later, sent the cowboy a birth announcement, and never heard from him again.



Some of our friends asked her why she didn`t go after him for child support -- she said, "He wasn`t looking for a baby, he was looking for sex. When I got pregnant, instead of having an abortion, I was the one who decided I wanted another baby. I gave him a chance to be involved, and he wasn`t interested."



I`m not defending guys here who say, "Yes, I`ll support our child. Oops, changed my mind -- she`s yours -- bye!" I think it`s very case-by-case. Lots of friends thought she was wrong, and even stupid, but I always thought that my friend`s particular case was a feminist empowerment story: her body, her choice; her daughter, her responsibility.

Reply

I'm uncomfortable with your notion that coerced incubation is NOT okay, but coerced termination IS. Why the distinction?

Reply

I tend to agree with Jay. While I do not believe that fathers should have a say in the decision to abort or not, I do think they should be able to terminate their parental rights and responsibilities if they choose. Who knows, maybe it would force women to choose better fathers for their children? If a man is so weasely that he would relinquish parental rights, who wants them to father their children anyhow?

Reply

I don't understand the idea that a guy can have a night of fun and disregard the consequences by being able to choose to NOT support the child he helped to create.



I feel the same way about a girl being able to choose to have a abortion over the desires of a father who wants to keep the baby - she shouldn't be able to.



What's wrong with one of the involved parties choosing to honor the life of a baby -- and the other party being forced to accept the consequences of having sex? It all boils down to people not wanting to take responsibility for their actions.



If everybody would just THINK before they drop their pant(ie)s, this crap wouldn't happen to the poor children who suffer the worst in all of this.

Reply

I agree with Daum. If I, as a woman, can decide whether or not to continue with an unplanned pregnancy without the father's input, then why can't a man decide to not support a child if he disagrees with the mother's choice?



Yes, it takes 2 to tango. But with the options stacked clearly in the woman's favor, why not give men the power to opt out, too?

Reply

Let me propose two extreme cases: First, a man and woman had consensual sex "one last time" at the end of a relationship. He wore a condom and then threw the condom into the trash after having sex. Without his knowledge or consent she froze the condom, took it to a fertility clinic, and had one her eggs fertilized and was impregnated. She then sued for child support and won.



Another case: man in Texas is married for 12 years. Has three children with this woman. Finds out not a single one of those kids are his -- they're all the children of a family friend whom the woman has been having an affair with for pretty much their entire marriage. The man goes to court after their divorce, saying that since this DNA report proves I'm not the father, I shouldn't have to pay child support. Get it from the biological father. The father loses the case.



If we want to argue about procreative issues purely on the basis of individual choice, it's clear in these cases that both men's rights were violated. But our courts -do- grant special privileges to women on the basis of traditional moral judgments, perception of the woman as more vulnerable, etc.



What about the more mundane rights abuses -- for example, a woman claims to be on birth control pills but is not, or has been taking them then "forgets?" Are men's rights respected in these cases? Never.



Arguments purely on the basis of individual rights will ultimately detract from the privilege the current court system bestows upon women, which also means that abortion arguments purely on the basis of individual rights are flawed as well (since the court system is biased against men when it comes to procreative issues). But then, there's no such thing as -individual- rights. All of our rights are located within a social context and, as a result, entail responsibilities as well.

Reply

In theory, it would be nice if both parents could opt out of parenting if they did not want a child (and the mother did not want an abortion). While this is actually possible in most states, socially a mother is expected to care for any born progeny.

The notion that child support is for the mother is incorrect. Child support is for the child. In Canada, it doesnt matter if the woman sues for child support - the child can ask for it (in some states here also).

It IS unfair that a father can be forced to pay for a child he did not want - just as a mother can be. Not wanting to have a baby and choosing to have an abortion are two different things.

I say the best solution to this is instead of agaiting to have the law changed in a way that will clearly only hurt the children, men should agait the pharmecutical companies for effective birth control for men - the male Pill, patch, etc.

Let's also forget for a moment that the logical extension of this arguement would allow a man to have control over a woman's body and focus on what seemed to be the author's intentions.

Say the man signs away responsiblity in the first trimester and then changes his mind once the baby is born and wants to be a full part of his baby's life? I ask all the fathers (even married ones) if there was ever a time they got cold feet about what to them was probably an abstraction.

What about if everyone is on-board and then the inital tests for defects came back positive? Does the father get to opt out because he doesnt want to pay for a disabled child or have one? Do rapists get to opt out if they accidentally get a woman pregnant?

Also, if we want to be really "fair" lets say the mom doesnt want to have a child but doesnt want an abortion. If she opts out first (I filed first!) does the onus then fall on the father to either abandon the baby to the nearest hospital after birth (an accepted way for women to abdicate responsibility) or go through the process of having the baby adopted?

And once again - what happens when either of the parties changes their mind? Current law allows for a relativly long time for parents to make a serious decision like termination of parental rights/responsibilities. This would require a fairly quick decision.

Also, what happens if (as is increasingly the case when women are on forms of the patch birth control) women do not find out they are pregnant until after 12 weeks? or at 11 weeks 6 days? How long does the man have to decide?

Lastly, a case could easily be made that this is just another way for men to try and gain control over a woman's reproduction and/or life - agree to have an abortion/do what I say or I will make it even more financially difficult for you to do what you want.

Reply

Ok---a man shouldn't have control over a woman's body, I agree. But, by the same token...why should a woman have control over a man's wallet? Maybe if men had the choice to opt out like a woman does(by abortion), it would force everyone involved to be a little more selective about who they sleep with.

Reply

It is true that life is not fair. It is not fair that women have to go through pregnancy and childbearing to have a child. And maybe a man thinks it's not fair that he doesn't get any choices once he has his sperm leave his body and go into a woman's body but that's how nature works. Women have a right to their bodies and men have the right to theirs. But once the sperm has left his body and into hers his choice is over and once a baby is born from her body her choice is over. That may not be fair but that is how it works. Once a baby is born both parents need to take responsibility.

Reply