Buddrow_Wilson

BTW I realize that scenario is very extreme, has no chance of ever occurring in reality, and would be unfair if a woman were to deny the father for arbitrary reasons. I have a suspicion there is no perfect answer here.

Loren Pechtel

Originally posted by Soyin Milka How would it work?
Can a man decide at anytime during pregnancy that he doesn't want to be the legal father or would there be a time limit?

I would say something like 10 weeks pregnant, minimum 1 week notice. If she knows but doesn't tell him he still gets the chance even if abortion is now not possible.

Would the man's decision not to be the legal father imply he also waives his rights as the father?

Of course.

What happens if the man is unaware of the pregnancy and learns about it only after the childbirth?

If she knew and didn't tell him he retains his rights no matter what.

What should happen if a man changes his mind years after childbirth and now wishes to have a relationship with the child?

He can ask, she has no obligation.

I'm also worried any way out after conception would make it less important for men to be concerned about preventing conception in the first place.

Unless he was oopsed he should be liable for half the cost of the abortion, including time off work.

Derec

I guess theoretically here as well, only that the courts don't pursue that enough.

Quote:

....then the man should be able to do so?? What planet are you on?? Far more men are more capable of completely getting off scott free than women are. Crikey.

I am talking legally. A woman can get scott free legally by giving a child up for adoption, a man has no such recourse.

In the US, a man that fails to pay child support is jailed even if he wants to pay it but is unable to (in effect that is a debtor's prison). So in order to get off scott free he has to run and hide.

UMoC

Derec

A very bad scenario. You basically advocate that men should have no inherent parental rights whatsoever and any parental rights they get are generously given to them by the mother. That is very sexist and in no way conducive of the idea of equal rights for men and women.

Men should have the same parental rights as women and also the same possibilities of absolving themselves from responsibility. Everything else is inequality.

UMoC

Pyrrho

I believe you are thinking of cases where the man and woman are married. In such cases, the law (in the U.S.) says that the husband is the father whether he is or not. I don't think that it applies to cases where the man and woman are not married. If you believe I am mistaken, please provide a source for your claim.



"Sperm donor" is something that is regulated. If you masturbate into a cup and give it to a woman so she can get pregnant, I suspect that you do not legally qualify as a "sperm donor", but instead are considered to be a father. If you do not go through a "sperm bank" or other such recognized entity, you should consult with a lawyer before you "donate" your semen to someone for the purpose of her becoming pregnant. Probably, if it were otherwise, many men would claim to have been "donors" when they were actually fathers in the usual way.

Pyrrho

A woman never gets off easy if she is pregnant. A fetus will be pulled out of her abdomen either at birth or during a miscarriage or abortion. And, you are mistaken about what a woman can legally do with a child. A father has parental rights, so he must agree to give up the child for it to be adopted.



The reason why a woman can decide on an abortion is because it is her body that is involved in the pregnancy, not the man's body. Basically, adults have the right to decide whether or not they will have elective surgery on themselves, not others. This is why there is not sameness in what men and women can do.



She can't. A woman who gives up her rights to her child does not force the man to give up his rights to his child. If a woman wants to give up her child for adoption, and the father wants the child, then the father gets the child (this is all assuming that the courts have not declared either parent to be unfit). The simple fact is, many men don't want their own children, and that is why people tend to think of the mother as being the one who cares for the children.

Part of the problem in what you are thinking is this: If the father has custody of a child, then the mother can be required to pay child support. The person who pays child support is the one who does not have possession of the child. This is because, presumably, the one who has possession of the child is going to be spending money on it anyway. Child support payments are to make both parents make a financial commitment. Of course, often, in the U.S., the child is left with the mother.

Derec

It also applies when a man and woman are dating, he thinks he is the only guy she slept with and signs the birth certificate. Him signing the birth certificate should not oblige him to pay child support for 18 years especially because he signed it under false pretenses.

Also just being married to a woman should not make a man liable to paying child support to his cheating wife.

Also men can lose paternal rights if they are not biological fathers but women still get the child support.

Why any man would chose to get married as long as such sexist laws are on the books is beyond me.

I am also disapointed that California governor Davis vetoed a "paternity fraud" bill.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...ity021002.html

One more reason to recall him.

Quote:

I don't think that it applies to cases where the man and woman are not married. If you believe I am mistaken, please provide a source for your claim.

See the link above, it mentiones a case from Georgia.

Quote:

"Sperm donor" is something that is regulated. If you masturbate into a cup and give it to a woman so she can get pregnant, I suspect that you do not legally qualify as a "sperm donor", but instead are considered to be a father.

The woman was a lesbian so it was pretty clear that it was a case of being a sperm donor not a father in a regular sense. He just wanted to help a friend, but I guess no good deed goes unpunished

Quote:

If you do not go through a "sperm bank" or other such recognized entity, you should consult with a lawyer before you "donate" your semen to someone for the purpose of her becoming pregnant. Probably, if it were otherwise, many men would claim to have been "donors" when they were actually fathers in the usual way.

In this case the situation is quite clear and probably not even disputed by the mother.

I don't understand how you can sit here and defend what are blatant abuses of the child-support system (duped dads and sperm-donor cases)

UMoC

Soyin Milka

Hm.
Your scenario puts a lot of control into women's hands, but I'm pretty that many men and women would object to it. The men because it guarantees them no parental rights for a long time. The women because they can't be sure a man won't decline fatherhood before childbirth. Knowing if wheter or not the father will stick around to help raise the child is an important factor in deciding to have or not said child.

Interesting idea anyway.

Soyin

Soyin Milka

I have a suspicion my work here is done then
But seriously, I don't know how the laws about reproduction could be totally fair because, from the start, biology and reality are not.

Soyin

Soyin Milka

I'm gonna nitpick, but not only for the purpose of tormenting you I promise. Your answers are good (well according to me) with the exception of the last one.

I don't think this is what you believe, but it could sound like you're equating being liable for half the cost of abortion (including time off work) with doing his fair share for the man. To me, that would make as much sense as saying because he guy pays half the cost of contraceptive pills, he's doing his fair share for contraception. The woman is still doing who had to go through with the procedure or to take the pill.

There's also the problem of getting the guy to pay the money. It's difficult enough already to get some men to pay child support. A guy not responsible enough to do what he can to prevent conception might not be responsible enough to cooperate with the bills. That sounds like more court time again for women. I'm also not sure it would be easy for a woman to prove a man's claim he was "oopsed" is false.

I need a better answer on that one. That one seems to add a burden of proof on the woman and does little to prevent the burden of contraception to fall completely on her.

Soyin