Child support in the era of abortion

[Munky]

Her life is at risk from either carrying a pregnancy to term or having an abortion.

'Absolves her of responsibility and consequences'. Well, except for the whole 'invasive medical procedure with the possibility of death' thing. Cause that's certainly not a consequence.

Are you seriously using that as an excuse? We're not in the 18th century anymore. There are literally hundreds of thousands abortions performed each year because she doesn't want the kid, not because her life is at risk, and the life-threatening abortion doesn't deter her either. That excuse has grown tired.

 

[Munky]

Both, but primarily hers.

You still do not get it? It has been said 9 different ways. Final word is the woman's.

Actually, you don't get it. Her final word concerns her body, not his financial assets.

 

[CitizenKain]

Are you seriously using that as an excuse? We're not in the 18th century anymore. There are literally hundreds of thousands abortions performed each year because she doesn't want the kid, not because her life is at risk, and the life-threatening abortion doesn't deter her either. That excuse has grown tired.

No where near as tired as you claiming that men are being taken advantage of for having to support a child they fathered. If you want to be a deadbeat go ahead, but expect to pay for it.

 

[Munky]

No where near as tired as you claiming that men are being taken advantage of for having to support a child they fathered. If you want to be a deadbeat go ahead, but expect to pay for it.

Funny how you jump at the shaming "deadbeat" language when it comes to men, and yet excuse deadbeat women who leach off other men. These women have every opportunity to avoid parenting:

1. "Take and forget" contraceptives, like the pill or IUD
2. Easily-available abortion, paid for by the tax payers I should add
3. The option to give up the kid for adoption shortly after birth

The only way she keeps the kid is if she intentionally chooses so. Don't feed me all that "her body" BS, because after the kid is born it has nothing to do with her body. If the man doesn't want the kid and she refuses to give up the kid for adoption, then she is solely responsible for that decision. Lose the feminist blinders before heading into a rational discussion.

 

[CitizenKain]

Funny how you jump at the shaming "deadbeat" language when it comes to men, and yet excuse deadbeat women who leach off other men. These women have every opportunity to avoid parenting:

1. "Take and forget" contraceptives, like the pill or IUD
2. Easily-available abortion, paid for by the tax payers I should add
3. The option to give up the kid for adoption shortly after birth

The only way she keeps the kid is if she intentionally chooses so. Don't feed me all that "her body" BS, because after the kid is born it has nothing to do with her body. If the man doesn't want the kid and she refuses to give up the kid for adoption, then she is solely responsible for that decision. Lose the feminist blinders before heading into a rational discussion.

They aren't leeching off men, men are upholding their responsibility to the child. Here is a very simple way to avoid having to make child support payments. Why, its even simple enough that someone like you can understand it.
Step One: Don't have sex with someone if you can't handle the consequences.
Its even less steps then your plan!

Can't understand it yet? If the manchild doesn't want the kid and she doesn't want to give the kid up for adoption, then he has to help raise the child. This isn't feminist blinders, this is called rational thinking.

 

[Carmen813]

The reason women should completely control this choice is because it is her body. Both pregnancy and abortion can result in death. The risk of death trumps any potential financial risks for the father. Men who consent to sex are accepting the risk of a pregnancy. Perhaps the only situation where I could agree with this OPs logic is if the man was raped by the woman.

It's also worth noting that it is the man who placed the woman in the position of having to make this choice, something I haven't seen other individuals yet pointed out.

 

[cybrsage]

The reason women should completely control this choice is because it is her body. Both pregnancy and abortion can result in death. The risk of death trumps any potential financial risks for the father. Men who consent to sex are accepting the risk of a pregnancy.

As is the woman, yet she can decide to have no responsibility at all, and also decide if the man has any responsibility at all.

It's also worth noting that it is the man who placed the woman in the position of having to make this choice, something I haven't seen other individuals yet pointed out.

Except for rape, the woman was an equal party to the choice. Yet she gets 100% of the power to decide if he has any responsibility or not. He has no say at all in his responsibility.

Equality is being treated equally by the law. When one party has 100% of the power to decide what the other party does when both parties are equally responsibile, equality is not found.

 

[cybrsage]

They aren't leeching off men, men are upholding their responsibility to the child. Here is a very simple way to avoid having to make child support payments. Why, its even simple enough that someone like you can understand it.
Step One: Don't have sex with someone if you can't handle the consequences.
Its even less steps then your plan!

Can't understand it yet? If the manchild doesn't want the kid and she doesn't want to give the kid up for adoption, then he has to help raise the child. This isn't feminist blinders, this is called rational thinking.

So you support forcing a woman to not have an abortion if the man wants the child? Following your one step plan, you must be.

 

[CitizenKain]

So you support forcing a woman to not have an abortion if the man wants the child? Following your one step plan, you must be.

Lets see, does what I posted say that...nope.

Once again, you are trying to force equality onto something that is inherently unequal, it doesn't work. You're upset that men once the power to decide all of this, and women deciding anything on their own is deeply upsetting to you.

 

[Carmen813]

As is the woman, yet she can decide to have no responsibility at all, and also decide if the man has any responsibility at all.

Except for rape, the woman was an equal party to the choice. Yet she gets 100% of the power to decide if he has any responsibility or not. He has no say at all in his responsibility.

Equality is being treated equally by the law. When one party has 100% of the power to decide what the other party does when both parties are equally responsibile, equality is not found.

The consent to have sex also includes an acceptance of the risks inherent to that decision, such as pregnancy, contracting disease, ect. You are basically of the opinion that a man should get two decisions: to consent to sex and parenthood as separate decisions.

I believe the OP is somewhat misleading as it implies that abortion is a routine procedure carrying no risk. The fact is that one a pregnancy occurs there are risks, regardless of if it ends in a birth or not. It causes a woman's body to undergo rapid changes that impact both her physical and mental health. Having an abortion does not mean a woman chooses "no responsibility," it means she chooses to accept the risks of that course of action. It is her choice to do with her womb as she will.

Perhaps a more accurate title would be "Child Support in the Era of Loveless Sex."

I think we are also getting so narrow in scope as to discuss a situation that is relatively rare. It's likely most women will consider the father's desires when choosing to carry to term or abort. That doesn't mean she should be required to ABIDE by the man's choice given that if he disappears she incurs all potential risks.

At the end of the day even in this situation men do have a choice about fatherhood. They can always refuse to pay child support and accept the consequences of that decision as well. That may be a shitty choice, but it is a choice nonetheless.

I'm not really convinced by your statements about equality. Equality is an ideal, not a destination, and there will always be situations where it is murky at best and unobtainable at worst. There are many laws that do not treat people equally along various characteristics. There are also laws and policies that exist where individuals give up or lose their rights for various reasons without fully understanding the repercussions...for example, when signing a software licensing agreement.

Remember that those father's who create children they do not provide for place that burden upon not only the mother, but society as well. In these rare cases, society has to choose what is best for society as a whole; not necessarily for the individuals involved.

 

[cybrsage]

Lets see, does what I posted say that...nope.

So then you think men should be denied equal rights under the law. You cannot have it both ways, you know.

Once again, you are trying to force equality onto something that is inherently unequal, it doesn't work.

I removed the stupid part so the conversation could continue.

You are right, the law creates an unequal situation. Here are the possible situations:

1. Man and woman want child.
2. Man wants child, woman does not.
3. Man does not want child, woman does.
4. Man and woman do not want child.

In all of those situations, only the woman gets to decide is there is going to be a child. In all of those cases, only the woman gets to decide if the man is forced to take responsibility for the child. In all of those cases, only the woman has the legal option to not be responsibile for the child.

You say it is an unequal situation, and I agree. Legally, the woman can decide not to take responsibility for her actions and legally the man has no choice but to do what the woman decides - he is legally forced to take responsibility when she is legally allowed to not take responsibility.

You claim this is the right thing to do. Why do you claim it is ok to force men to do what women are not forced to do, which is to take responsibility for their actions?

 

[cybrsage]

The consent to have sex also includes an acceptance of the risks inherent to that decision, such as pregnancy, contracting disease, ect. You are basically of the opinion that a man should get two decisions: to consent to sex and parenthood as separate decisions.

Yes, I am saying that men get the same rights as women.

At the end of the day even in this situation men do have a choice about fatherhood. They can always refuse to pay child support and accept the consequences of that decision as well. That may be a shitty choice, but it is a choice nonetheless.

Correct, legally, women are allowed to choose to be a parent but men are not allowed to choose.

Remember that those father's who create children they do not provide for place that burden upon not only the mother, but society as well. In these rare cases, society has to choose what is best for society as a whole; not necessarily for the individuals involved.

Irrelevant. Equality means equality, not "equal if it is not a bother to others". Remember, slavery was very good for the southern economy...it was still wrong to treat some people as not equal to others in the eyes of the law.

 

[Carmen813]

Yes, I am saying that men get the same rights as women.

Correct, legally, women are allowed to choose to be a parent but men are not allowed to choose.

Irrelevant. Equality means equality, not "equal if it is not a bother to others". Remember, slavery was very good for the southern economy...it was still wrong to treat some people as not equal to others in the eyes of the law.

Men are certainly allowed many decisions about becoming a parent. What they aren't allowed is complete control over a woman's womb and body, which is what you are advocating for. In other words, you are advocating for a form of slavery. Having consensual sex means you consent to the benefits AND risks of the activity.

Regarding "equality means equality," I can't help but state that your position strikes me as naive and simplistic. Equality is an idea, not an absolute, and it's unpersuasive to spout simplistic statements like that. As I said, there are situations where achieving complete equality is not realistic or obtainable. There are several instances of this in our society, and frankly, if you are really concerned about equality there are much more important issues at stake.

Believing that men should be able to absolve themselves of the rights of fatherhood simply because they don't want to be one is a position I imagine you will have difficulty winning majority support for. Likewise, I doubt you will find that a majority believe that woman should be forced to have a child if the father wants it but she does not.

 

[cybrsage]

Men are certainly allowed many decisions about becoming a parent.

Really? So if a man does not want to have responsibility for a child he can walk away and not pay support? Which nation is this in, not the US.

What they aren't allowed is complete control over a woman's womb and body, which is what you are advocating for.

No, I am not. I am saying if the man does not want responsibility for the child he should have the same right the woman has, which is to not have to be responsible for the child.

Having consensual sex means you consent to the benefits AND risks of the activity.

Unless you are a woman, then you can decide to not have responsibility. If you are a man, you have no choice. Notice the lack of equality there.

Believing that men should be able to absolve themselves of the rights of fatherhood simply because they don't want to be one is a position I imagine you will have difficulty winning majority support for.

Equality does not require majority support. If it did, blacks would still be slaves in the South.

Regarding "equality means equality," I can't help but state that your position strikes me as naive and simplistic. Equality is an idea, not an absolute, and it's unpersuasive to spout simplistic statements like that. As I said, there are situations where achieving complete equality is not realistic or obtainable.

It is easily obtainable. The law simply needs to be changed so a man can say he does not want responsibility. Woman already have this right, why not men?

You have yet to explain why men should not have the same ability to throw off responsibility as women already have. So far you have said "cause they are men", which is not good enough. And please, stop bringing up men forcing women to carry the baby to full term, you know that is not the item we are discussing, so stop trying to deflect.

 

[boochi]

Hypothetically, what if a man was passed out drunk and woman climbed on his morning wood and gets pregnant after he unknowingly blows his load? Should he be obligated to support the child?

 

[nonlnear]

Hypothetically, what if a man was passed out drunk and woman climbed on his morning wood and gets pregnant after he unknowingly blows his load? Should he be obligated to support the child?

Obviously. He should know better than to associate with rapists. That's just asking for it.

 

[KlokWyze]

If a woman gets pregnant, it's her choice and her choice alone to either have a child or an abortion. If she chooses the former, why, then, should a man be held responsible for her decision and be forced to pay child support? It's simply unreasonable that he has absolutely no say in the matter, yet if she chooses to bear a child, he is held fully accountable for her decision.

I see a few solutions to this problem:
1. Outlaw abortion. The problem no longer exists.
2. End mandatory child support payments.
3. Give men a say in the fate of their unborn children.

Maybe he should have pulled out early?

/endThread

 

[Jhhnn]

Any reasonable man understands that having sex may result in pregnancy, and that they will be held financially responsible prior to engaging in such activity. That's irrespective of whatever choices women have in the matter if pregnancy occurs.

Just because women are perceived to have greater choice should pregnancy occur, it changes both parties' obligations not in the slightest. The truth is that abortion has been practiced since antiquity, if not with the certainty of modern methods.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_abortion

There's really nothing new going on, other than more elaborate attempts to justify male weaseldom...

 

[Darwin333]

The reason women should completely control this choice is because it is her body. Both pregnancy and abortion can result in death. The risk of death trumps any potential financial risks for the father. Men who consent to sex are accepting the risk of a pregnancy. Perhaps the only situation where I could agree with this OPs logic is if the man was raped by the woman.

It's also worth noting that it is the man who placed the woman in the position of having to make this choice, something I haven't seen other individuals yet pointed out.

Oh the irony.

 

[Nebor]

They aren't leeching off men, men are upholding their responsibility to the child. Here is a very simple way to avoid having to make child support payments. Why, its even simple enough that someone like you can understand it.
Step One: Don't have sex with someone if you can't handle the consequences.
Its even less steps then your plan!

Can't understand it yet? If the manchild doesn't want the kid and she doesn't want to give the kid up for adoption, then he has to help raise the child. This isn't feminist blinders, this is called rational thinking.

I would jury nullify the shit out of a murder case where a guy killed a woman talking like that.

I've had a friend who was dating a seemingly normal girl, then all of a sudden a pregnancy came up and she became a different person, becoming intentionally cruel, saying "I've got you now," and acting like she owned him. She intended to treat him like a slave under the constant threat of taking him to court if he disobeyed. Fortunately, through family connections, he was able to show her that she would lose the extortion game and forced her to have an abortion. But the system as you see it (and it currently exists) is totally fucked. Male birth control can't get here fast enough.

 

[umbrella39]

Will continue to point and laugh at the little boys here that are still way out in left field on this issue. I love when the entitlement generation thinks they have all the answers and are going to change common sense especially in regards to this issue. Grow up already you children.

Get some first... then worry about the aftermath. Bunch of inane hypotheticals being posted here. This topic comes up every year, it is now and always will be a moot repost until guys start ovulating...

 

[Nebor]

Will continue to point and laugh at the little boys here that are still way out in left field on this issue. I love when the entitlement generation thinks they have all the answers and are going to change common sense especially in regards to this issue. Grow up already you children.

Get some first... then worry about the aftermath. Bunch of inane hypotheticals being posted here. This topic comes up every year, it is now and always will be a moot repost until guys start ovulating...

I dare say that kind of thinking is part of the problem.

The opposite side of this issue really likes throwing insults like "deadbeat" and "you can't get laid anyway blah blah blah."

We should see RISUG\Vasalgel available in the US in the next 2 years, and that'll be a game changer. Plus there have been some pretty significant male birth control pill breakthroughs at UofK lately. Though some people will worry what even lower national birth rates will have horrible long term effects on our nation in regards to social security, jobs, etc., I think most people think in more personal terms.

 

[cybrsage]

Will continue to point and laugh at the little boys here...

Why are you pointing and laughing at yourself? I mean, I understand why the rest of us are pointing and laughing at you, but I did not expect you to follow along?

Copying what the cool kids are doing does not make you one of the cool kids.

 

[umbrella39]

I dare say that kind of thinking is part of the problem.

The opposite side of this issue really likes throwing insults like "deadbeat" and "you can't get laid anyway blah blah blah."

I can only relate to my own way of thinking as a younger member of the baby boom generation and my like minded idiot friends. I shared the same mindset being displayed here and was that child that needed to grow up. I find it hard to reconcile this attitude once a man is sexually active and has grown up.

My opinion completely changed once I started getting some and got a girl pregnant and realized that rightfully so, I have NO say in this matter whatsoever if she wants to carry to term or not. I also quickly realized that if she does want to carry the child to term, I know I am rightfully responsible for this child until he is 18 and then some.

You play, you pay. EOS. EOT.

 

[cybrsage]

I have NO say in this matter whatsoever if she wants to carry to term or not. I also quickly realized that if she does want to carry the child to term, I know I am rightfully responsible for this child until he is 18 and then some.

You play, you pay. EOS. EOT.

Are you saying this is fair and known as equality?