Is A Man Entitled To Fathers Rights In A Pregnancy?

July 5, 2009

So what both of you are saying that it is okay to strengthen the rights of those men who don't want to pay and don't want the kid. You want to enable what otherwise would be deadbeat deads and give them the legal means to protect themselves for their spinelessness.

All that accomplishes is to enable irresponsible behaviour and to shift some power from women who might trap a man with a child to those men who refuse to take responsibility. I still don't consider that to be fair.

It also essentially places the sole responsibility for protection into the hands of women. Honestly, if a guy is that afraid of getting a woman pregnant he needs to get a vasectomy or keep his penis away from women.

If both parents are made aware of the child's existence, then a decision should be made together. Abort or adoption. If a woman chooses to have a child alone, why should the man be forced? If a woman doesn't want a child, she's not forced to have the child, despite what the father may or may not want. How is it fair when it only works one way?

It's not even close to being about making excuses for deadbeat dads as you put it, it's about making the law far for both parents.

What I'm not seeing however is how this places the sole responsibility of protection in the hands of women. As far as I know, women still have a choice when they're having consensual sex.

July 5, 2009

Who said life was easy? This isn't about an easy life, this is about one human being legally enabled to impose their will upon another, that's generally considered wrong.

Suppose we make it a law that blue-eyed people can't get ticketed for jaywalking but brown-eyed people who do get cited can decide, if they wish, to have most of their fine paid by the nearest person with blue eyes. It's so stupidly unfair it's laughable.

According to your logic, in that scenario the brown eyed people should perhaps undergo an operation to change their eye colour to prevent the blue-eyed ones from being financially penalised.

I don't see that refusal to undergo a medical operation to terminate her pregnancy, constitutes a woman imposing her will on another. She's simply letting nature take its course. As is the man when he has unprotected sex with her. There are potential consequences for both in that they risk becoming parents when they weren't ready or willing to become parents.

July 5, 2009

Is having a child when the father says he wants nothing to do with it also neglect?

Only if one of the parents of the child doesn't exercise visitation and pay child support.

Pregnancy is one of the risks of having sex.

July 5, 2009

Pregnancy is one of the risks of having sex.

A woman can choose if a pregnancy results in a child or not, so a child need no longer be a risk of having sex. Indeed, for women it is not. Thanks for brining us back on topic.

July 5, 2009

According to your logic, in that scenario the brown eyed people should perhaps undergo an operation to change their eye colour to prevent the blue-eyed ones from being financially penalised.

I don't see that refusal to undergo a medical operation to terminate her pregnancy, constitutes a woman imposing her will on another. She's simply letting nature take its course. As is the man when he has unprotected sex with her. There are potential consequences for both in that they risk becoming parents when they weren't ready or willing to become parents.

Perhaps not something so permanent, more like wearing blue contacts to court.

Please stop muddying the waters with phrases like "As is the man when he has unprotected sex with her", use of contraception is not germane to the subject since we already determined that it doesn't change anything in the event of unwanted pregnancies.

As for nature taking it's course, bubonic plague was also nature taking it's course, shall we have another round of that as well? Indeed, unprotected sex is nature taking it's course, perhaps condoms are wrong?

July 5, 2009

Perhaps not something so permanent, more like wearing blue contacts to court.

Please stop muddying the waters with phrases like "As is the man when he has unprotected sex with her", use of contraception is not germane to the subject since we already determined that it doesn't change anything in the event of unwanted pregnancies.

As for nature taking it's course, bubonic plague was also nature taking it's course, shall we have another round of that as well?

You're accusing me of muddying the waters when you elect to compare pregnancy to bubonic plague? Come on clv - you can do better than that. Pregnancy is not an illness, so it's facetious to compare it to the bubonic plague.

You may very well dislike the fact that women have the final say in whether or not they go ahead with a pregnancy or terminate it. You see that as a power imbalance between the genders, and that makes you angry.

Are you angry about other power imbalances between the genders, or just this one in particular?

July 5, 2009

I believe that men should have more opportunities to embrace their role as a father. Visitation rights and custody are usually in favour of the women, there is something that could be made more equal.

I would love this to be a reality. I know so many men that are the better parent. I believe men and women both have something different to offer their children and should both be involved in raising them.

July 5, 2009

Is having a child when the father says he wants nothing to do with it also neglect?

Also is pushing the father out of the home and out of the child's life on a whim also neglect?

July 5, 2009

You're accusing me of muddying the waters when you elect to compare pregnancy to bubonic plague?

....

Are you angry about other power imbalances between the genders, or just this one in particular?

I'm just saying "letting nature take it's course" is a b*llsh*t argument, we routinely intervene in natural processes as we see fit. As for anger, none, in fact letting fathers "off the hook" would be bad for me personally because I know damn well who the public will come to with their hand out next - taxpayers like me.

But fair is fair and right is right. Sometimes it costs to do the right thing.

July 5, 2009

Also is pushing the father out of the home and out of the child's life on a whim also neglect?

I don't think it would be classed as neglect, but it could certainly constitute abuse of a different type.

Suddenly losing an important person from its life (and assuming that person did not abuse the child/place it at risk) would be extremely traumatic for a child. Imposing further trauma on that child by refusing to make arrangements for it to see its father so that the father/child relationship could continue and flourish would be emotionally abusive to that child.

I'm just saying "letting nature take it's course" is a b*llsh*t argument, we routinely intervene in natural processes as we see fit

I know we do, but it's hard to find situations (in which we do that) which are comparable to abortion. And again, I'm not opposed to abortion per se. My personal view is that it's the most practical solution to an unwanted pregnancy, but I'm aware that other people have a far more emotive stance towards it and regard it as murder.

I might oppose them pretty vigorously if and when they try to impose that value on others who are pregnant, don't want to be and decide to terminate. I don't see, however, how one can deny them the right to apply that value in their own lives. If they hold a fundamental view that abortion is murder, then from their perspective abortion just isn't an option.....regardless of how feasible and practical an option it might be for other people in the same boat.

July 5, 2009

So you're saying you've never had a one night stand? Where it was simply all about the sex, no strings attached? Accidents happen. It almost sounds like you view it as a punishment.

It is in no way about punishment, it is about taking responsibility for any actions you choose to take. Think before you act & know the views of the person you are having sex with.

July 5, 2009

So we do have a solution for those cases - I guess we just stumbled upon a fair way to take care of the money issue for men who opted out in the first trimester ; he's out of the picture and we deal with it from there in the way we normally would. Wow that was easy.

Sure, you can always abuse the social security net. You can also steal candy from children or steal money out of the blind and crippled veteran's hat who is begging on the street corner.

We try to provide for those who can't provide for themselves, that is especially true of children. It also means we have to suffer the parasites who don't need help but will still demand it so they don't have to use their own money.

There are even couples who aren't married where the woman will claim to not know the father, just so the government will have to take care of her kid. That makes me angry but I also feel pity for their kids that their parents are so greedy.

I agree, but sometimes the effort to get an unwilling parent to contribute eats into the involved parent's stamina and already limited resources. Eventually, most realize the efforts to get something from the uninvolved parent would be best spent on earning the money on their own and foregoing the inevitable headache I've seen and felt it become.

So then we are right back to a situation that could just as easily been some guy in the first trimester saying "No thanks, no fatherhood for me because I have better things to do than be a doner and/or wallet."

Please see my answer above to clv. It works similar to what Taramere described. I have been told that it can be a pain in the ass to deal with government agencies in those cases, but once you get the paperwork done it is much less stressful as the government will go after the father (or mother) for you.

If both parents are made aware of the child's existence, then a decision should be made together. Abort or adoption. If a woman chooses to have a child alone, why should the man be forced? If a woman doesn't want a child, she's not forced to have the child, despite what the father may or may not want. How is it fair when it only works one way?

You might have two people in this situation who want solutions that leave no room for compromise. Where it can only be one or the other.

It is not fair that a man is forced to become a father. But it would also be unfair to essentially hijack a mother and force her to carry a child to terms that she doesn't want.

And it makes sense to let the mother decide if she wants the child or not.

It's not even close to being about making excuses for deadbeat dads as you put it, it's about making the law far for both parents.

What I'm not seeing however is how this places the sole responsibility of protection in the hands of women. As far as I know, women still have a choice when they're having consensual sex.

I don't think you can make the law to be fair to everyone. What you can do is try to minimize the collateral damage. And I still is done by acknowledging the woman's right to choose. Even though some changes might be beneficial, if you would allow men to opt out, I still believe that this makes it easier for men to leave their children without financial support.

That doesn't benefit the mothers, it doesn't benefit the children and it doesn't benefit society as we will have to pick up the bill in some cases.

The only people who benefit are men who don't want kids. Frankly, then they need to make sure they can't have any.

Sure, women have a choice. But men do too. If you allow men to opt out, no questions asked, no responsibilites, no child support, it places the burden and cost of raising a child on the woman, along with the risk.

Without child support, there are no more consequences for a man when the woman gets pregnant. Without risk, it also means that there is virtually no reason for the man to do his best to avoid a pregnancy.

That is why I said that all the responsibility to avoid a pregnancy would be the woman's problem now.

July 5, 2009

Honestly.. if a man has a one night stand then he has the chance to not get a woman pregnant before he has sex.
He could use birth control that he is in control of.. A Condom..

How dumb is that guy that knocks up a one night stand ?.. in my book since we know the laws and know that if we get that one night stand pregnant we have to pay child support then it would be stupid to have sex without a condom..

How many chances does a guy need to be able to OPT out ?.. he gets his first chance while he is still thinking with the larger head...

Okay, and what if he USES a condom? I got pregnant last year after one RIPPED and then the morning after pill I rushed to take DIDN'T WORK.

What if the woman SAYS she's on birth control or has an IUD? What if he USES a condom, what if it tears or leaks UNKNOWINGLY? To assume that all pregnancies occur because the guy "was dumb for not using a condom" is ridiculous.

I definitely agree that men should have the option to deny parental rights. Sign away ALL parental rights for life, no contact, and no child support. Women can legally have it SUCKED OUT of the womb to avoid having a child, why are men monsters for not wanting to support a child they didn't want in the first place? I find it to be a major double standard.

July 5, 2009

It is not fair that a man is forced to become a father. But it would also be unfair to essentially hijack a mother and force her to carry a child to terms that she doesn't want.

Precisely, yet one of those is legal and the other is not; let's fix that.

I still believe that this makes it easier for men to leave their children without financial support.

We're not discussing that, this is about leaving a cellular mass without a future wallet to pick. Whether there is ever a child is at the sole discretion of the mother.

July 5, 2009

I definitely agree that men should have the option to deny parental rights. Sign away ALL parental rights for life, no contact, and no child support. Women can legally have it SUCKED OUT of the womb to avoid having a child, why are men monsters for not wanting to support a child they didn't want in the first place? I find it to be a major double standard.

Thank. You. God.

July 5, 2009

If a woman doesn't want a child, she's not forced to have the child, despite what the father may or may not want. How is it fair when it only works one way?

Exactly. It's a huge disparity, and our system weights heavily in favor of the woman.

So, if she winds up pregnant, she holds ALL the deciding abilities on the outcome. If the father wants the child, and she doesn't, too bad for him. If she wants it, and he doesn't, too bad for him.

Guys get royally screwed (no pun intended).

I'd love to see our system change and have a little (or a lot) more equity on this issue. I am sure if bio dads were allowed to opt out, I think we'd see a LOT less unwanted pregnancy in our society if women realized they had to foot the bill on their own.

Im MA, a man pays 25% of his gross salary for child support for one child, 28% for two, 33% for three... If a guy is earning 150k (which is not an uncommon salary for Boston), then he is paying her 37.5k a year in support. That's a HUGE amount, and far more than what it actually costs to raise a child, assuming the mother should be equally contributing.

July 5, 2009

Please see my answer above to clv. It works similar to what Taramere described. I have been told that it can be a pain in the ass to deal with government agencies in those cases, but once you get the paperwork done it is much less stressful as the government will go after the father (or mother) for you.

Oh, I'm aware and yeah, it was and is a pain in the ass. It is still, with my coopporation, unresolved almost half a year later.

An old friend of mine however, cannot do this so easily. Her ex does free-lance home improvements (Ever seen The Riches?) and does not report his earning to the IRS. He deals on a cash basis. The most she can get services to do to him has to do with taking his drivers license or putting him in jail. These options do nothing for her financial situation or his chances at being involved in the two kids lives.

They married because she was pregnant. He said he wanted to be a father. What if there had been the option for him in the first trimester to OPT out? I know she is pro-choice........

It is just something to consider.

July 5, 2009

Precisely, yet one of those is legal and the other is not; let's fix that.

But you can't fix that.

If the woman wants an abortion and the man wants the child, it's impossible to get both. Those wishes are mutually exclusive, it can only be one or the other.

We're not discussing that, this is about leaving a cellular mass without a future wallet to pick. Whether there is ever a child is at the sole discretion of the mother.

Already a child or still a cellular mass, that is a question of interpretation.

July 5, 2009

There are even couples who aren't married where the woman will claim to not know the father, just so the government will have to take care of her kid. That makes me angry but I also feel pity for their kids that their parents are so greedy.

I've seen that lots of times. The guy will still have contact with the child, who will know he's their father, but the authorities don't know about it. Dad will give mum the odd tenner here and there if and when he's in work....it can chug along like that for quite some time, until the two parents fall out and the mother stops contact between the father and child, lawyers and DNA testing are brought into the equation and everything turns decidedly messy.

Without child support, there are no more consequences for a man when the woman gets pregnant. Without risk, it also means that there is virtually no reason for the man to do his best to avoid a pregnancy.

Also, what happens if a child instructs a lawyer (as they can) to challenge the "opt out" legislation with reference to its convention right to family life? Or if the father has a change of heart when the child turns 10 and decides that he wants to "opt back in" - does he have to pay backdated child support?

Perhaps the three month opt out thing is something that would be workable in the US (though with all the religious fundamentalism and the drive towards criminalising abortion that seems to go on there, I have my doubts). In any EU country, it would be an unmitigated disaster.

July 5, 2009

I definitely agree that men should have the option to deny parental rights.

In saying that, you're saying that men should have the option to deny parental responsibility, whenever they see fit. That's absolutely nonsense.

If you take the risk of getting pregnant or catching an STD by having sex, you should own the consequences, regardless of what those are.

July 5, 2009

In saying that, you're saying that men should have the option to deny parental responsibility, whenever they see fit. That's absolutely nonsense.

If you take the risk of getting pregnant or catching an STD by having sex, you should own the consequences, regardless of what those are.

Nope, just during the same time a woman has to do the same.

July 6, 2009

clv, how is it equal or fair that if a woman wants a baby, she's the one who has to be pregnant? It isn't fair that the man can't carry that burden!!!

Those of you who are calling this a double standard and arguing men and women should have equal say are missing the obvious--the roles of women and men are not symmetrical when it comes to either sex or child bearing. There is no reason to think that they should have symmetrical rights or responsibilities. The woman should have the ultimate say about whether she gives birth to a child, and rightly so. A man needs to be aware of that going into a sexual relationship.

With the burden of childbearing also comes the right to decide.

If you call this some kind of preferential treatment, show me all the men who are beating down the door to have a chance to be pregnant and give birth so they can be the ones to decide.

July 6, 2009

Nope, just during the same time a woman has to do the same.

So does that mean that you think the woman and child should be allowed to sue for damages and financial compensation when the man convinces the woman not to have an abortion and then abandons his parental responsibilities to his child following divorce or the couple's break up?

July 6, 2009

clv, how is it equal or fair that if a woman wants a baby, she's the one who has to be pregnant? It isn't fair that the man can't carry that burden!!!

Those of you who are calling this a double standard and arguing men and women should have equal say are missing the obvious--the roles of women and men are not symmetrical when it comes to either sex or child bearing. There is no reason to think that they should have symmetrical rights or responsibilities. The woman should have the ultimate say about whether she gives birth to a child, and rightly so. A man needs to be aware of that going into a sexual relationship.

With the burden of childbearing also comes the right to decide.

If you call this some kind of preferential treatment, show me all the men who are beating down the door to have a chance to be pregnant and give birth so they can be the ones to decide.

??? I don't even understand this argument. Because a woman is the one who has to go through child birth, she should be the one to make all the decisions? To argue that the father be given the same rights as a woman during pregnancy is wrong?

To hell with fair. Because you have a penis instead of a vagina, you're screwed. Thanks for taking another **** all over men.

July 6, 2009

Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, you provide protection, your own if necessary.

If you really don't trust the person you're sleeping with, or have a problem with an accidental pregnancy, perhaps you shouldn't be having sex with that person? I dunno, it's a silly concept, really....y'know, sexual responsibility.

I was raised to not have sex unless I was willing to deal with the consequences. For a man, that might mean paying child support.

Sign In

Is A Man Entitled To Fathers Rights In A Pregnancy?

Recommended Posts

malcom5

Taramere

nittygritty

clv0116

clv0116

Taramere

Forever loving life

Woggle

clv0116

Taramere

Forever loving life

Stockalone

PinkKittyKat

clv0116

clv0116

Jilly Bean

sally4sara

Stockalone

Taramere

Star Gazer

clv0116

Storyrider

nittygritty

malcom5

Treasa

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...