Darkchild Angel
Kimihiro_Watanuki
Darkchild Angel
Kimihiro_Watanuki
I think a man should have to options to "abort his rights" if he doesn't want the child. This, in a sense, is abortion for men. The man relinquishes all rights to the child. Custody, support, visits, etc. in exchange for having no responsibility for the child.
A man can already do this. If a man does not support the mother during the pregnancy, either financially or otherwise, if he does not acknowledge the child as his, if he has no contact with the child after birth, then a court cannot make the man pay child support. Courts can only go after "deadbeat" dads if they held themselves out as a father.
So if you find out your girlfriend is pregnant and immediate peace out, have no contact with her, don't see the kid after it's born, and never tell anyone you've become a father- then legally, you're nothing more than a sperm donor, and sperm donors don't pay child support. Only when there is some evidence of parenthood or fatherhood intentions from the man is a court able to make a guy pay.
I won't say you're wrong, but I'm wondering what this based on. I've seen a lot of men get ropes into child support, whether they acted like a parent or not. And child support cases more often get ruled in favor of single mothers against fathers who want nothing to do with the child.
This is based on my legal education and experience in family court and paternity cases.
3nodding It's most definitely true, at least in my state.
It's true that court tend to REALLY want fathers to support their children. The child is innocent, so why should it suffer just because its parents don't get along? But the key word is "parent" and "father". When I say a man has to have NO contact and contribute NO support, I mean it. Basically he has to publicly and privately disclaim all presumption of paternity. The actual genetic paternity of the infant doesn't matter if from the inception of the pregnancy the man was not intending to be a father or have any future relationship with his offspring.
Often times men get "screwed" in these cases because they stick around while the woman is pregnant, maybe contribute some money to her prenatal care or to child-care after the birth. They'll often acknowledge the child as their own to their friends/family/coworkers. In this situation, then the man is definitely creating a presumption of fatherhood and he MUST pay child support.
It takes a cold man to 100% walk away from a pregnant woman carrying his offspring, but if he doesn't want to be a father, he has to commit to not being a father 100%.
Okay then. Let's flip the situation around a bit. Say a man gets a woman pregnant. For a while, they both state their intent to keep and raise the child. Then, one day, the woman gets cold feet for whatever reason and has an abortion. The man doesn't find this out until later and now has to deal with the emotional and mental stress of the situation, essentially, on his own.
According to the legal system and I would say, most pro-choice people, his situation is simply just not as important and the woman is still justified in her actions because she has a right to physical autonomy. But, even as a pro-choice individual and a male, I am extremely turned off to the idea of having children because I could find myself in this situation.
What say you to that?