snatchbalance

helensl,

If in can unmuddy the waters here a little. Let's generalise the situation:

1. Two adults enter freely into an agreement; call them X and Y.

2. Both X and Y are aware of the relative and respective risks associated with that agreement.

3. Y no longer wants to abide by the original stipulations the agreement with X.

4. Is X then responsible for the ramifications of Y's decision to deviate from thier original agreement?

SB

[ June 09, 2002: Message edited by: snatchbalance ]</p>

HelenM

snatchbalance

I guess it's hard for me to comment unless I know the consequences...

In this case the consequences are life-long. Is it ok for X to walk away from them? I find it hard to see that as anything but selfishness on X's part.

If they are minor, no big deal perhaps.

But how about this - even if Y's behavior is not exemplary, is it ethical of X to walk away and not help? Isn't that rather strangely selfish in a situation like this where supposedly X and Y cared for each other?

I'd say there are many factors involved in the specific situation you describe, which affect how we would think about what is 'ethical'.

You could change the specific situation to some simple contract; but that really isn't what we have here, is it, what with emotional involvement and a baby=lifelong serious consequences...?

I could derive some a priori principle but we do have to test it in specific circumstances (I mean, think through it) because that's when we realize whether it's truly tenable or not - imo.

Life is lived in real situations, not in hypotheticals. I've had so many situations where my real situations seem to break the rules, be exceptions, etc - that I'm somewhat burned out of trying to operate by 'principles' - and tired of being treated by them, too. I want to live at the level of 'this is real'.

And in what you described I couldn't go back to hypotheticals. I'd have to say "Yeah, but we're talking about a human being [the baby]...!"

love
Helen

snatchbalance

HELENSL,

Well, I tend to agree, there can always be all sorts of mitigating circumstances. And, I think, in most instances, most men would step forward and do what they can.

But the question remains, in light of the agreement described in the OP, is it ethical for the female to force the male into such a resposibility?

Remember, we are talking about legaly enforcable requirements. Once the case enters the legal system, the male does not even have a say in how much finacial support he will provide. If he does not comply with a set of arbitrary legal mandates, he will have his property confiscated and face other penalties.

From what I see, there are three parties involved, the man, the woman, and the child. For any number of reasons it seems that the wants and needs of the woman and child take precidence over the man's. Now, there may be many ways for you to justify this disparity; but, in light of the original agreement, IMO, you don't have a very strong ethical case.

SB

[ June 09, 2002: Message edited by: snatchbalance ]</p>

The Other Michael

Hi Helen,

Curiously enough, I've never been able to understand the "children will complete my life" mentality. They actually have negative attraction for me as I'm quite ready to avoid being around children, and took steps to make sure that they wouldn't be a factor in my life. This does of course mean that the human race suffers by not having the benefit of my genes, but I guess they'll just have to muddle through.

I think part of the problem here is we aren't doing a good job of breaking down the arguments.

On the one hand, some of us have been looking at the problem basically from a law of contracts basis. Man and woman made a contract, woman reneges, what recourse can the man have (or protections against the claims of the woman who has breached the contract)?

Then others of us are saying "but it's a human baby, how can the father abandon it and not support it"?

It's really two quite different questions.

cheers,
Michael

brighid

I am truly sorry to hear about this predicament you find yourself in. I understand because I was one of those women who found herself pregnant, albeit not after a long relationship and he and I had never talked about what we would do if I did in fact become pregnant. But that part of my situation is completely different from the issue at hand.

I can only speak of the part where a woman finds herself pregnant and although she is pro-choice finds herself unable to actually have an abortion. In theory, it is easy to talk about how one would handle this situation. It may be particularly difficult for this woman specifically because of the level of intimacy the two of your shared. Perhaps love even entered into the equation in that time period and therefore the feelings she has towards you as a man make it even more difficult for her to choose an abortion.

After I had my son and took a long hiatus from dating – 3 years … the relationship with his father scarred me deeply … but I digress… After that point I knew that I could have an abortion if I ever found myself pregnant again. At that point in my life there was no way I could have cared for another child and I was NOT going through that again. So, I went to the free clinic and got a healthy supply of birth control. My friends came over when ever they needed condoms or spermicide. The morning after pill is available through Planned Parenthood or ones doctor and any woman who does not want to get pregnant should have a supply on hand. You should encourage your current partner to get that in the event the IUD fails. I realize that most men don’t like to wear condoms, but if you do not want a child you have to protect YOURSELF. Either get snipped or sport a Jimmy. That is the ONLY way to ensure that you won’t some day find yourself in the situation you are in.

I am not sure if you should assign sinister motives to this woman who carries your child. I hate taking the pill and after a while my husband and I decided (for medical reasons) that enough was enough. Sometimes you just forget to take the damned thing and if that day also happens to be a fertile day she could very well get pregnant.

I am curious about what she has actually asked of you at this point. I am also curious about how you think you are going to handle this situation for the future. I know this is very personal and if you don’t want to share that I understand.

I also agree that a man should not be forced to be a parent and more often then not he resents the child and causes a lot of emotional damage. My suggestion to women who find themselves in a situation like this is to either not tell the man you are pregnant (depending on the depth of your relationship), tell him you are pregnant and that you don’t expect his support and do not seek it, or simply seek child support and no visitation. These things should really be hashed out before you start having unprotected or protected sex. These things shouldn’t be left to chance and there really is no reason they should.

I also feel that if a man fails to take the necessary precautions to protect himself from an undesired outcome, even in the event of a previous agreement (usually made prior to any level of intimacy or trust is developed) he can have no expectation that a woman SHOULD choose an abortion, and therefore has some culpability and responsibility for this new life. No woman actually wants to choose an abortion. It is a horribly painful procedure that will be with a woman for the rest of her life and an abortion generally does not cause a man any sort of physical or emotional pain or detriment and any that he experiences is not comparable to that of a woman. A woman should not be forced to either carry or abort a pregnancy. It is unfair (in a sense) that a man has little choice once conception has taken place. But he did have choices prior to conception and if he failed to partake of those protective choices he has been negligent. I don’t think he should be absolved of ALL responsibility because of any verbal agreement. Both partners chose to have sexual intercourse with the knowledge that a pregnancy MAY result from their actions. Both partners agreed to use the least amount of protection to prevent pregnancy and both knew this course could result in conception. So with this knowledge they proceeded and now the result is what they casually attempted to prevent. Regardless of any previous agreement there is a larger and more important consideration to consider and that is the future of a child they willingly created. Naiveté does not absolve one of responsibility.

Snatchbalance, no one can answer the tough questions you MUST answer for yourself. The consequences of unprotected or minimally protected sex are not trivial and in way form or another your choices will affect you (and now two other people) for the remainder of your and their lives. Now is not the time to quibble over the should haves, but time to address the real issue and the problems that will arise. Having been through this situation and some of the horrible aftermaths that COULD HAVE been avoided may I make a few suggestions that may be able to eliminate a lot of your own pain and that of the mother and the child?

Put your pride aside and do not allow yourself to come to ill founded conclusions without evidence – such as you “believe” she did this on purpose. Is this a convenient excuse for you to justify your actions, or is it actually truthful? Sit down and take a long, hard look at yourself and what you want for the future. Talk to men and women who have found themselves in this predicament and seek their advice and listen to their stories. You CAN make this situation good, even if it won’t be ideal. Marrying someone because of a pregnancy is wrong and I do not recommend it. Will you be able to look at yourself in the mirror, or rest your head on your pillow and sleep at night knowing you have a son or daughter in this world that you have abandoned? Realize that this WILL affect all of your future relationships with women. If you choose to lie about it, it will come out sooner or later and this will destroy all trust you developed in that relationship. Not to mention the destruction this kind of secret and action does to your own psyche. If you choose to participate in the life of this child as a parent you DO NOT have to have an obligation to the mother in the form of an intimate relationship. You can work out a legal agreement that protects both of you and is for the betterment of the child. This can become a positive and GOOD experience if you so choose it – even with a resistant parent. But you have to choose to make this situation a good one. If you place this as your top priority and honor that commitment always you will be a better man for it and your life will be enriched in ways you cannot even begin to imagine. You may live to regret either choice, but you can make a choice that is foreseeable and probable – positive or negative. If you were to decide to participate and co-parent this child I HIGHLY recommend counseling for both of you. It may seem inconvenient at first, but the few hours or weeks you spend working out a proper course will save you years of heartache down the line. I realize that I am injecting my own preference in this situation, but if I can save ANYONE the heartache and years of pain and torment I went through I will do it. The courts may very well force you to take responsibility in some form. If you want no contact with the child it is unlikely they will force it upon you, so take the initiative before things get to this point and be proactive. You don’t sound like a heartless bastard and if you spent 3 years in a deeply intimate relationship with this woman you must care about her and what happens. You need not end or harm your current relationship. It can be sustained, but you need to be honest with the mother of your child and this new love interest. It can be worked out but egos need to be put aside. If you would like any advice, privately or otherwise click on my profile, send me a private email and I would be more then happy to talk or lend any advice I can give.

Good luck,
Brighid

[ June 10, 2002: Message edited by: brighid ]</p>

HelenM

Originally posted by brighid:
I also feel that if a man fails to take the necessary precautions to protect himself from an undesired outcome, even in the event of a previous agreement (usually made prior to any level of intimacy or trust is developed) he can have no expectation that a woman SHOULD choose an abortion, and therefore has some culpability and responsibility for this new life. No woman actually wants to choose an abortion. It is a horribly painful procedure that will be with a woman for the rest of her life and an abortion generally does not cause a man any sort of physical or emotional pain or detriment and any that he experiences is not comparable to that of a woman. A woman should not be forced to either carry or abort a pregnancy.

I'm glad you said this, brighid, because I feel like people will think I have an agenda if I say anything which sounds anti-abortion, since I'm a Christian...

Really, though, I think that many women must be stunned at the extent of the after-effects of abortion, not having been adequately prepared, since it goes against the agenda of some people to make information on that available, beforehand. And it would go against the agenda of the parents of the pregnant woman, or the biological father, for her to have information that might put her off having one.

And she is the one who is hurt - and that bothers me.

I'm in favor of a pregnant woman who is considering an abortion being adequately informed beforehand, about the possible after-effects. Anyone who sees that as simply 'pro-life' (or use your own expression there) rhetoric reveals themselves to not really have the woman's best interests at heart, imo.

It is unfair (in a sense) that a man has little choice once conception has taken place. But he did have choices prior to conception and if he failed to partake of those protective choices he has been negligent. I don’t think he should be absolved of ALL responsibility because of any verbal agreement. Both partners chose to have sexual intercourse with the knowledge that a pregnancy MAY result from their actions. Both partners agreed to use the least amount of protection to prevent pregnancy and both knew this course could result in conception. So with this knowledge they proceeded and now the result is what they casually attempted to prevent. Regardless of any previous agreement there is a larger and more important consideration to consider and that is the future of a child they willingly created. Naiveté does not absolve one of responsibility.

Presumably the only reason men would forgo the high contraceptive effectiveness of condoms, say, is to increase pleasure and decrease inconvenience.

In doing so they make a choice and take a risk and ought to accept the consequences, imo.

Setting aside for these purposes whether sex outside marriage is 'sinful' - it would solve a lot of problems, imo, if a man and woman who are able to conceive didn't have sex until they were mature enough to take responsibility if from a naturalistic point of view the sex is 'successful' and the woman gets pregnant.

brighid

I don’t agree that men and women shouldn’t have sex before marriage. Sex is more then procreative and although it does have serious consequences there are ways of avoiding these consequences almost entirely. I think people are all too often too casual about the consequences and therefore put pleasure 1st and therein lies the problem.

I think people should be informed about all their choices and consequences. A woman who keeps a child she either does not want, is unprepared to care for, or out of some sense of guilt will have similar emotional consequences as the woman who has an abortion, either informed or ill informed. My experience with centers like Planned Parenthood are not like what you have described. I have no doubt there are other medical facilities that don’t take into mind the emotional consequences of abortion, but this is typical of all the medical procedures they perform on patients and it not simply a tool to push abortion on women. It is simply an ignorance or insensitivity within Western medicine that is often the culprit. Also, in today’s information age there is no reason a young or grown woman cannot fully research her choices before, or after conception.

I also credit the Pro-Life movement for the lack of availability of accurate information about abortion. 83% of Planned Parenthoods don’t even offer abortion services and even though abortion is legal in this country many women still have to travel far and wide in order to get one. If you live in an urban setting you will find it easier then in a rural setting. Abortion is NOT an easy choice. It is difficult. But the regrets women have 20 years down the line are often times unpredictable. The majority of women who have abortions do so after careful thought and research. We all live to regret decisions we made in the past, even when our intentions were the best and we were informed. The shame of having an abortion is also contributatory in the pain and regret a woman may feel years from now. These women find it difficult to share their thoughts, fears and hopes because of the stigma of being a whore, a murderer and some awful sinner. Repressing those feelings and failing to address them as they arise causes more pain then the actual abortion.

I am pro-choice and I don’t foresee this changing. This doesn’t mean I am anti-child or anti-life as the Pro-Life movement often makes us out to be (and I know you aren’t like this.) But there are circumstances where having an abortion is easier. Abortions would not be needed if men and women chose to prevent them in the 1st place and put prevention as their top priority. Pleasure need not be curtailed to any severe degree. In general, many men aren’t responsible for their actions or the consequences of their actions. This is also a huge problem. I know of many men who have the attitude that birth control is the woman’s responsibility and they refuse to wear a condom. Now, this is stupid not only from a birth control perspective but of a health perspective as well. Few women ever know they have an STD and “slutty” women don’t have the market cornered on STD’s. Monogamous relationship or not, a woman or man could have been infected with any number of STD’s and neither knows it. I always made it a point to be tested prior to engaging in sex with a new partner, during and after just to be safe. And in the event something did occur it could be addressed and I could also be confident it wasn’t ME passing anything along. Unfortunately, condoms don’t prevent everything …

Brighid

HelenM

Brighid

Your comments are very thoughtful and balanced and to be honest, I don't know how much women are prepared beforehand for abortion so I probably shouldn't have assumed it was, not very much.

I'm glad you posted on this thread.

love
Helen

brighid

Thanks Helen I am glad you have too!

Brighid

WJ

I used to be pro-choice and for the death penalty, then changed to pro-life and against the death penalty, which is where I feel the most consistent. Anyway, two quick thoughts/opinions (I have not read every single post).

Though I'm not an expert with respect to the law of contracts (promise for a promise) viz. these kinds of relationships, it seems that the development of such or at least some other type of written agreement would have helped (though I'm not sure how practical it was with the timing and all).

Since I'm not convinced the 'wanted pregnancy' will actually turn into a subsequent 'wanted kid' along with all the associated responsibility via the mother's 'current feelings', one fantastic way of dealing with the many aspects of this sticky wicket is thru adoption. A simple and sometimes not easy solution, but the alternatives, IMO, are worse-in this case.

First, you have a mistake (a lot of us were unplanned-mistakes). Then, you have a choice. It was nice to see that [pro]life was chosen, even if the biological father remains financially an 'unemotionally' uncommited...

In an ethical sense, who says we don't possess free will!?

walrus