Welcome to Gaia! ::

I've been thinking about this for a long time. Abortion is legal, right? This means that a woman has the right to chose whether she wants to be a mother or not. If she doesn't want to be a mother, she has the option of terminating the pregnancy.

What about the fathers? Why don't men have a right to chose not to be a father? We are supposed to have equal rights! Women are always going on about not being treated equally. Why is it only an issue when women are NOT benefiting from the results?

If a woman chooses to give birth to a child that the father doesn't want, he has to pay child support for 18 years. I think a father should have a right to say no. Especially because he has no say in whether or not the pregnancy is terminated.

It sound horrible, but it's fair. If women can chose not to be mothers, men should be able to chose not to be fathers.

Nairu - that's true, I agree.
But then there are also the opposite situation, specifically like VE said: That it's unfair that a woman can choose to give up the parenting by aborting, but the man cannot: whether the couple lives together or not, he'll still have the duty of either taking care for the child or paying child support. True that it's not fair but I don't know how it should be done. The woman still should have the ultimate choice, as it affects her body.

There are also birth risks, a mother can die during birth depending on certain factors like her age and such.


I'm sure if the father really wants the child, there can be something worked out. The mother may not realy want to make amends with a father in the future, having a part of their flesh walking around with a man she didn't want to have anything to do with can pain a person for life. The issue of abandonment and an augmenting sense of attachment that might lead the mother back to a child in the future that she didn't want presently, and face rejection from that very child.

However, if the father assumes full responsibility to take care of the mother, diet, rest, work, during the gestation period, and raise the child, support entirely without any help of the mother, and even pay for the labor she'd go through (like a surrogate), there isn't much room for denial on the woman's part.

She still can choose to not put her body through it. The damage is permanent. Unlike a temporary payment of 18 years. The risks are a lot less appealing than another bill for a set amount of time.

Both parties are going to feel it's unfair one way or another, cause that's simply how people are. Naive in their own way because they didn't get exactly what they want. The best you can do is come together and reach an agreement.

Because during those 18 years the mother doesn't have to spend much of her time and money for the child?
Pregnancy means your whole life is changing. It doesn't end at child-birth. It's only the beginning. Paying child support is much easier than raising a child, especially on your own, mind you.

Really, dragging a woman who want to have a baby to have an abortion by force is a brutal thing to do. So is making a woman carry and give birth to a child she doesn't want.

But what about when they break? cry

Guys shouldn't be able to tell women what to do with our bodies.
If the father doesn't want the child, maybe he should have been more responsible and made sure there was no way the women would've gotten pregnant (condoms, contraceptives, birth control), and if they were just that stupid, they deserve to pay child support.

Then the woman should have done the same. If she didn't want to be pregnant then she should've taken appropriate measures to not get that way (i.e. birth control, not having sex...) but if she was just that stupid they should just deal with the consequences. I hate the idea of abortion being used as the "get out of jail" free card for women.

It is not in their body, so I think they should have no say. Now if we can implant the child in the male urethra (largest part of the sex organ other than the scrotum) then he can have the choice.