Welcome to Gaia! ::

Ok, I was just going to let this topic go, because I think Nopen got to the heart of what I would have said. Because I feel more for the men who wanted their babies but had no say when the pregnancy was terminated because let's face it, men don't get pregnant and unfair as it is [/whine], they don't get to choose if a woman stays pregnant like she's merely a vessel. The reality of the situation is that no matter what, women get the ultimate say on what happens with their bodies. And as was already pointed out, it's impossible to determine which men are just being sleezy deadbeats and saying they didn't want kids, and which ones genuinely talked with their SOs who then changed their minds.

Anywho.

But seriously, let's not drag Moses laws through the mud and make it sound like they were intended to let women give up children with reckless abandon. Because if that's what you think they're for, you obviously don't understand them, how they work, and why they came to be.

After many reports of newborn babies being found in dumpsters, dead in closets and other disturbing places, some states decided to form what are known as Moses laws. In the first two weeks from birth [or the time that particular state allows, some allow up to two months now], a woman can leave her child at a hospital, fire department, or police station, no questions asked. But it's only in that two week time period that it's allowed, after that, they will track down the mother and take legal action against her. They were intended to prevent the deaths of newborns that are the offspring of teenagers and young adults who were too scared to be big girls and tell their parents they were pregnant, give birth in secret and then just ditch the babies wherever they can. Sadly, the people they're intended to help don't even know the laws exist a good chunk of the time.




As to the rest of it, since it's not actually true, I can't answer it. EVERYONE is responsible to their children, male or female.

Taken from Childwelfare.gov which was current as of 2004.


In that same overview, they point out that these laws, depending on the state, also allow the father to give up the child. Only four states specifically say it can only be the mother.




The focus of these laws is protecting newborns, and in approximately 16 States*, infants who are 72 hours old or younger may be relinquished to a designated safe haven. Many other States accept infants up to 1 month old**, while North Dakota's safe havens will accept a child as old as 1 year.***


...


*Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin

**In 26 States: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

***Other States specify varying age limits in their statutes: 5 days (New York); 7 days (Georgia, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Oklahoma); 14 days (Delaware, Iowa, Virginia, and Wyoming); 45 days (Indiana and Kansas); 60 days (South Dakota and Texas); and 90 days (New Mexico).





And quite frankly, if you can't even get your facts straight, NO, your point does not stand because it has no basis in reality and fact. In order to make a valid point, you need to base it on actual information rather then assumptions and pure conjecture.

And if a man wants to keep the child and the woman gives birth to the child and doesn't want to keep them, she can give the child to the man and /she/ would have to pay child support. My friend's in that situation now. Child support laws are not gender-specific; it just so happens that men are the ones usually running out on their SO and their child and not the woman, because she /is carrying it for 9 months/.

If ANYONE, man or woman, decides to have sex, it is usually implied they understand AND ACCEPT all of the consequences that come along with it [STDs, and yes, children]. Slipping on a condom doesn't make either of them suddenly not responsible for any child that may result from sex; protection is not 100% effective.

And of course men don't get to make the choice as to whether or not a woman keeps a child [although couples should at least discuss it]! He doesn't gain tons of weight, he doesn't get morning sickness, he doesn't go through labor, he doesn't have his entire body morphed into something completely alien. Men have no right to make any decision regarding what happens to a woman's body.

Old topic, but it's been revived, so...

I believe that women should have the right to abort, regardless of her reasons - without even having to provide a reason. When she aborts, she pays a bit of money (if in the US) and then severs all ties with her fetus.

I believe that men should have the same rights. It's only fair.

The system I would propose works this way: It should be required for women who desire child support of some form to notify the father (or possible fathers) while it is still possible to get a legal abortion. If the father cannot be reached, the woman can choose to press charges. In this case, it must be proved that the father deliberately made himself "unreachable" during that time to avoid her and the pregnancy.

At this time, he has until the end of the legally abortable period to make his decision. If he chooses to be a father, he gets visitation rights and must pay child support. No messing around, either. He MUST pay child support or he loses visitation rights.

Or, he can choose to "abort." In this case, he signs away all paternal rights. He gets no visitation rights, nothing. His name is effectively stricken from all records pertaining to the child. And no time during the child's life may he request to see the child or attempt to do so. At no time may the mother request child support payments from him. Part of me also wants to say that, upon signing, he should be made to pay a "fine" to the woman equal to the amount an abortion would cost in that area. But I'm still wrestling with myself on that point.

If the woman chooses to abort, the man need not be notified or consulted. If the woman chooses not to notify the father during the time that a legal abortion is possible, she forfeits all claims to child support. He may later (once he finds out) press for visitation rights if he offers to begin child support as well.

There are some exceptions here. For example, if a woman can show that she did not notify the man for fear of her safety (say he has a history of violence and domestic abuse), she may still press for child support even if he was not notified in the correct time frame. He may also be denied visitation rights.

There's more to it, but it gets really specific. For the most part, though, that's my plan for reproductive equality. Obviously, some points can be open for debate and the whole thing needs to be translated into legalese, but yeah... lol.

I believe it is the womans choice to keep or abort the baby, but I also believe that there should be laws that help the guys who wanted her to abort. I believe that if there is absolutely no visitation then the man should only pay percentage of the required child support. I do think that as women we do use our reproductive power to much.......

My husband and I talked about what we would do if I got pregnant and because I really didnt know where I stood on anything at that point he told me that he would respect any decision I made. He told me that if he didnt agree he would just step out of the picture and let me handle it the way I chose. When I did get pregnant I told him I didnt think I could have and abortion or give up the baby for adoption. I told him that I would handle it myself and that if he didnt want to be in the picture he didnt have to be. I promised I wouldnt force anything on him. He chose to stay but I do stand by that decision I made to give him a choice because it was only fair. If he had left I would not have pressed for child support because to be honest, It would have just been my child not our child. He did stay and I am happy he did, my decision to handle the situation like that ultimatly made me feel more confidant in the fact that he wants to be here with us. I think everyone should have a choice.

I disagree with him. When a woman doesnt want a baby she has to have surgery and abort.. so how about when a man doesn't want the baby he has to pay? I would much rather have to pay a simple monthly allowance than carry/abort a baby.