Male activists want 'say' in unplanned pregnancy, No money for you bitch Options

[woody]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/08/fatherho...t.ap/index.html

The National Center for Men has prepared a lawsuit -- nicknamed Roe v. Wade for Men -- to be filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter.

The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.

The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The activists involved hope to spark discussion even if they lose.

bout fuckin time

[M1N10N]

equal risk, equal protection

??

[Seussninja]

sounds about right

should be interesting

[kcroxyoursox]

the thing is, most guys who are in that situation probably wont voluntarily pay... punishing a woman with certain moral standards by not only making her have a baby, but now not getting support from the other half of the creator of the financial burden in the first place

[Spectatrix]

Oooh, that IS interesting. I *like* that.

I hope that wouldn't drive more women to get abortions... but I think if they were planning to keep the kid and the father declined financial responsibility, they'd probably go with adoption instead (if they couldn't afford care on their own).

[Billy]

It is a whole helluva lot easier for the father of the child to walk away than it is for a mother who carried the child for 9 months and went through all the hormonal stuff that goes along with childbearing. Adoption? Yeah right. Hold your child in your arms for the first time and then let's see you give it up. Some could. And some do. But for the majority of people, there is a really strong bond between parent and child. And as abortion is concerned, abortion is not an issue men should have any say on. We will never have to go through that, and thus we'll never really know what goes on afterwards. I have met people who have had abortions that are really emotionally messed up afterwards. So saying "hey, I got you pregnant, get an abortion or I'm leaving" isn't very fair.

To make a long story short, letting men take equal risk (unprotected or not protected enough sex) and not have to bare any of the burden is incredibly unfair.

[woody]

i'm out of the loop a bit, seeing how i never knocked up a girl...

if a guy signs his rights, does that leave him free from financial responsibilities?

This post has been edited by woody: Mar 9 2006, 11:54 AM

[nickluto]

In my opinion, if I wear a love glove, that's me saying "hey, i dont wanna have a kid, im taking all possible preventative measures on my end to make sure that doesnt happen"

if that happens and a girl gets knocked up somehow and wants to have a kid, i shouldn't have to be subjected to her will. if by some act of god we talk about it and decide to stay together and we both want the kid, sure I'll pay child support... it's my responsibility.

but its ridiculous to think that I'd have to pay in the event that I wont get to see the kid at all and she leaves never to speak to me again.

[JRockTTU]

I'm totally split on this issue. Billy has a VERY good argument, but so does Nick. What if the guy tries to protect from pregnancy, or the girl claims to be on birth control when she is not. What about the women who get knocked up on purpose so that they can live off of child support and government money?

[chook]

I'd say don't sleep with someone unless you are willing to deal with the consequences. My morals, probably because of my upbringing keep me from sleeping with a girl unless I love her and she is willing to have the child. Believe me that I do not want to have a kid now.

[pebkac]

I'm totally split on this issue. Billy has a VERY good argument, but so does Nick. What if the guy tries to protect from pregnancy, or the girl claims to be on birth control when she is not. What about the women who get knocked up on purpose so that they can live off of child support and government money?

Yes, but even birth control is 95% effective. No matter what happens, there's still that 5% chance. Now how would you prove that you weren't one of that unlucky few?

Personally, I find the proposition appalling. You helped make the baby, so it's your responsibility to help raise it.

Now as far as the government money and child support issue, it may be bad that some people are abusing the system to get out of work, but on the other hand, think of it this way: should a single mother with no one else to support her or her kid be forced to work 40 hours a week at a job instead of raising her kid?

[Throwdown]

awesome, i've been lobbying for this (and by lobbying i mean bitching) for years.

if a woman can choose what she does with the child, a man should be able to choose whether or not to support it if they can't come to an agreement. wanna talk about personal responsibility? if a woman has the right to choose what she wants to do with her child, she should take responsibility to support it.

now, if both parents agree to have the child and the guy decides afterwards he doesn't want to support it, he should be thrown in jail

[hodge]

In my opinion, if I wear a love glove, that's me saying "hey, i dont wanna have a kid, im taking all possible preventative measures on my end to make sure that doesnt happen"

if that happens and a girl gets knocked up somehow and wants to have a kid, i shouldn't have to be subjected to her will. if by some act of god we talk about it and decide to stay together and we both want the kid, sure I'll pay child support... it's my responsibility.

but its ridiculous to think that I'd have to pay in the event that I wont get to see the kid at all and she leaves never to speak to me again.

qft

[Spectatrix]

If there was any kind of deception involved (woman claimed to be sterile or on BC when she wasn't, etc.) then I definitely think that the father should be able to opt-out of financial responsibility. Otherwise, it gets a bit more complicated.

if a guy signs his rights, does that leave him free from financial responsibilities?

I looked into this a bit and it seems as though the non-custodial parent still has to pay child support if the custodial parent didn't consent to the other signing away rights. If they both consent to it, then there's no child support. That may vary from state to state, though...

[Dogmeat]

Any guy who wants to make a stupid bitch he stuck his cock in have a kid she doesn't want is just asking to make his life a living fucking hell. Because we all know damned good and well the stupid cunt-bitch is gonna lie her ass off in court about how he beats her so she gets custody of the kid she wanted dead so he'll be financially strapped to her for 18 years as payback for not letting her murder her own baby.