Loren Pechtel

Thats how I see it, unless she previously informed him that she would not abort.

Soyin Milka

There should be a way to do this.
Declining responsibility should also mean giving up any and all parenting rights over the child too however. Forever. No visitation rights, no shared guardianship, no birthday cards.

If I could be sure a man would leave me and my child alone when he declines responsibility for my child, I'd be okay with it. But that would mean he has to get out of my life right away and never try to come back. I want to be able to move on too.

Are you willing to give up your right as a father to be excused from the responsibilities? If you are, then I really don't have a problem with what you propose. Just find a way to make it into a managable law.

Soyin

AquaVita

That sounds fair.


I could never see myself doing that, but it would be nice to know that men had the option, should they choose to excersise it.

Feather

So does hysterectomy. Yes, yes; I know it's permanent for women, whereas vasectomies can be reversed (sometimes). So what?

Just because modifications to the bodies of either sex can be made to induce infertility doesn't mean either side suddenly has more of the responsibility of prevention.

Buddrow_Wilson

Lunachick,
I have never had a casual relationship. I would certainly feel compelled to be in a child's life if I was a part of creating it. Please don't assume I'm merely trying to rationalize a lifestyle equivalent to "fuck em and leave em". However, given that I would have no choice in the decision of abortion, I just don't see how it is just for me to be legally responsible for the female's decision.

Of course its also not fair that only women become pregnant, but I don't see that changing anytime soon. Honestly, the only way I can see advocating that the man is always responsible is if abortion is not an option (I mean legally, not if a woman doesn't believe in it). If someone doesn't agree with abortion, then I would have to respect that, but I do support the right to choose.

Women should basically have full control over the functions of their bodies, and although I can envision being upset over a mate terminating a pregnancy when I wanted to be father, I would not feel I have more than token input in this decision. To me this also means they have full responsibility of any child that is borne of them.

Do you really want someone that isn't willing to take responsibility for a life they helped create legally forced to be involved in the child's development?

I am very aware of how harsh this all seems, but I still don't feel a man should be legally compelled (morally, yes definately) to provide for a life he has no control over its existance beyond what was originally an equal responsibility (conception).

Don't hate me. I would NEVER do this to a woman, but I also do not want to be legally forced into it.

alek0

That's precisely what I had in mind. IMO, it is only fair if women can abort that men can decline responsibility but by doing so they should give up any parenting rights too.

There is another aspect of this - by requesting child support, a woman is basically ensuring that the man will have some parenting rights if he wants. The issue is that if you have to force someone to provide for the child, why would you want that person around your child, teaching him/her ethical values? Because you can't say "I just want your money, you can't see the kid". Is the money all that important, more important than the child? Or is it the desire to somehow punish the other side like "if I had to go through pregnancy, make the bastard pay"?

Pyrrho

Often, men simply make more money than women, and money is very useful in raising a child. Depending on the amount of money that each parent has, this can make a considerable difference in the child's quality of life. And if a woman does not demand money, the father may still demand parenting rights anyway, so if she decides to not ask for money, she gains nothing at all (unless, of course, we were speaking of a case in which she never told the father that he was a father).

And, of course, sometimes, some women have the attitude you describe, but it is by no means the only reason to require child support.

Pyrrho

A hysterectomy is more invasive than a vasectomy, so it is more expensive, requires more time to recover, and is more likely to lead to complications (including death; though that is unlikely for both, it is far more likely with a hysterectomy). With a hysterectomy, the doctor cuts into the abdomen, which is not something you really want to happen if you don't need it done, as it will never be the same afterwards. In the case of a vasectomy, the doctor cuts into the scrotum, which is just skin, and does not involve penetrating through muscle or other tissue.

As for the permanence, although sometimes a vasectomy can be reversed, it is not something you should ever count on.

So, if we were speaking of a monogamous couple who were both fertile, a vasectomy would be, by far, the better choice.

melinie007

I assume we are talking about mistaken pregnancies.

Obviously, if an element of fraud is involved (the woman deliberately missed a pill, deliberately wanted a child and was not honest about her contraception etc.) it seems wrong to hold the man responsible.

In mistaken pregnancies two have tangoed, as it were, and both are equally responsible for the resulting situation.

However:-

Abortion is NOT (always) a choice....

I think we need to distinguish between:
(1) A woman who thinks abortion is murder
(2) A woman who has no clear moral position
(3) A woman who thinks abortion is a free choice


In the case of (3) we can argue that the woman had the free choice to abort, didn't, and can't reasonably expect the man to pay money for that decision. I think if you genuinely believe that the fetus is a bunch of cells, but decide to keep the 'accidental' baby because you think about it and decide its the right time etc.. then it seems wrong to hold the man liable.

However, for the woman in (1) the same logic doesn't apply. We can't honestly say that because the woman wouldn't 'choose' to commit an act she considers murder, or at least immoral, the man should get off scott free.


In the case of (2)

Maybe fair enough... but such a position may make the woman make her choice based on this factor of the mans support.. it depends how we feel about this. In my opinion, the woman should make up her own mind on abortion being right or wrong, and if she decides it is permissible her own mind again on whether or not to have it or not.


I realise that the problem with all this is that the mans responsibility seems to being judged according to the womans belief system. I really don't have a practical answer to whether or not men should be liable for child support for pregnancies.

All I am saying is that acting as though this is a "Choice" women make is flawed -- it may be a choice for some but not for all.

alek0

IMO, those who think abortion is murder should abstain unless their partner is fully aware of their belief and is in agreement with it.

I'd also like to add that abortion is a legal option, and if a woman is not prepared to consider all the legal options for whichever reason, it is her responsibility to make it clear before such "to abort or not to abort" situation arises.