Welcome to Gaia! ::

So, let's say you have a cleverly-written contract.

The key point: You tell the people to read the contract before they sign.

Telling people to read the contract first means that the person has the opportunity to be aware of all of the liabilities potentially imposed on them by agreeing to the contracts terms and conditions. Most people are too dumb to read a lengthy, cleverly-worded document especially if they are presented with the document then and there to sign. (But in real life, we sign contracts each time we get an email account with yahoo, each time we enter a sweepstakes, etc etc etc, who has the time to read their 20-page mumble jumble?)

If they do sign, they are liable for whatever the contract says if you decide to keep the child to term. (The contract is designed so that you are not obligated to keep the child to term, so you can still decide on whether to keep the child or not).

If they have signed, you have the kid, and at first they refuse to agree to the contract, you can then clearly point out what the person agreed to when he/she read the contract and the signature that confirms his/her agreement to these terms. You can clearly point out what their legal options are- including recommending that they let their own lawyer look at the contract with them.

If they don't sign when first presented with the contract, then you can proceed to abort. You can abort with a peace of mind that you've made your point- that the pro-lifers themselves feel guilty that they do not want to financially support the existence and sustainability of a new life.

Does that sound like fraud?

It doesn't sound like fraud to me, but contract law can be twisted like that. It just depends on how closely the court examines the contract -- so far we've got nothing violating the statute of frauds, so we're in the clear. Of course, if the lifers ARE hooked well enough to get their own lawyer to read through the contract, anybody with much of a brain(which I really hope a lawyer would have) would say "hey dumbass, don't sign this!" When do lifers listen,though?


And if we're on the same page about the clause allowing termination of the pregnancy, that would technically be a clause defining breach of contract, but would only leave you subject to nominal damages if anything. Some courts may set aside the entire contract,though.(Translation: you'd end up paying about a dollar or so if they find you in breach and uphold it. Kind of a slap on the wrist, if you will.)

Totally not a problem -- this stuff comes naturally, and my professor is absolutely AMAZING.

Of course, this is why I think everyone should have the opportunity to take a few lower-level business/law classes. It certainly makes things easier. (Okay so that's an understatement -- I've got both my fiance's roommates under contract for rent of bedrooms on the property. He's got me here through Spring Break in hopes that one of them screws up so I can serve the eviction notice.)