For the men, I beleive that you have to pay child support. The main point being missed is that it is not for the benefit of your previous partner, it is for the child. It should not be viewed as compensation for the women, but for the benefit of the child. Would it make it easier if the mom had to produce receipts proving that the money was spent on the child? I wouldn’t mind that as I am sure that there have been misspent funds.

For the women,I believe we have to take more responsibility for our own bodies. Because women have always had and always will have the closer biological relationship with the fetus and then the baby, and it is our body, we have to take a greater share of responsibility for preventing unwanted pregnancies. It will obviously affect us more regardless if we have the baby or an abortion. Neither one is any picnic.

Girls, let’s examine your choices. First, (barring rape) you always have absolute protection through abstinence (a little morals would help a lot here). Second, how about talking about the possibility with your partner, and making these decisions beforehand? If you can’t address these types of issues, try step number one until you can. Third, is contraception. The pill is 99% + effective today, AND can be used in conjuction with other contraception tools (male or female). This shoud be able to eliminate the overwhelming number of unwanted pregnancies. Therefore, in the event you disappointedly become pregnant, you should either be embarrassed by your lack of responsibility or proud in that your baby is virtually a freak of nature against almost impossible odds. Girls, shame on you if you are in this situation because it was absolutely in your control to prevent it (regardless of what the man did or did not do). A life depends on you (yes I am pro-life). Girls, you are completely capable of controlling your own destiny (without resorting to abortion). Get off your butt, and be responsible for your life, and for your potential children..! I’m done.

Pregnancy lasts only nine months, but they can be nine months of pure, life- and health-threatening hell in which the woman’s BODY, the shell that makes her life POSSIBLE, is changed to an incredible degree. It is not like growing hair or fingernails, where you just go on with your life and let it happen. It is a HUGE DEAL. For many women, their bodies are never the same again–not because they don’t lose the weight, but because they, for instance, didn’t get enough calcium during pregnancy and their teeth suffered for the lack. I thank my lucky stars my pregnancy was very easy and happy compared to many other womens’ experiences and yet it was STILL an ordeal. A woman should be able to end that if necessary. This is something that no man has ever gone through or will go through.

Child support lasts, presumably, 18 years. It involves money. Money is very important in this society. It is TERRIBLY hard to live without it and I thank those same lucky stars I have never had to try. Yet, giving up money every month for 216 months (lots longer than a pregnancy) to support a child you never wanted is not comparable to being pregnant. At best, it’s an annoying, galling, unrewarding but affordable bill to pay. At worst, it could cripple a man financially and lead him to make terrible choices, such as doing illegal things to get money or having to choose between paying child support and paying his rent.

A fair comparison to a man paying child support for his child, whom he didn’t want but the woman refused to abort, would be: a woman paying child support for her child, whom she didn’t want but carried to term anyway since the father wanted it and undertook to be the permanent, sole custodial parent. It’s not exactly the same since in either scenario, the woman carries and gives birth to the child, but it is COMPARABLE. Pregnancy and child support are not comparable. It’s not even apples/oranges. It’s apples/hockey pucks.

Another difference between the scenarios of a woman or a man paying child support for an unwanted child is that the woman had the option, while she was pregnant, of having an abortion. But from that, it does NOT follow that a man’s refusal to pay child support is the equivalent of a woman’s refusal to continue the pregnancy.

There is no experience a man can have that is comparable to a woman carrying an unwanted pregnancy. Being forced to donate a kidney? Having his body used to grow body parts for other people? Silly comparisons. There is NOTHING COMPARABLE.

This is really a tricky moral question and with all due respect to this being Meryl’s blog (and me having come here for the first time ever, today, starting with Bitch, Ph.D. and going through at least one other blog), I don’t agree that there is any answer that covers all cases. Nor can I agree that adoption is the easy way for all concerned, plus a second, infertile couple, to be satisfied. I really just can’t figure this one out but I wanted to point out how different the two things are: the right to end an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy, vs. the right to refuse to pay for the support of a child one did not intend to father. Not the same thing, or even close.

I do believe in a woman’s right to choose. I also, however, believe in a man’s right to disagree with that choice.

I think that if a woman knew that a man could legally say, “Sorry. Not my decision, not my responsiblity,” then there might be far fewer single mothers living in poverty.

And what about the scenario where a man wants the baby and a woman doesn’t? Should he be able to force her to carry it to term? Isn’t that the same as forcing him to support a child he doesn’t want?

“that is his cue, that is where his *choice* comes in whether to have a child.”

That is where his choice comes in to show whether he is willing to have a child. Again, you can’t take a free-ride and then cry entrapment.

Yeah, also wanted to touch on this…

“If it’s simply biology, then aren’t men better equipped for the business world? Less mood swings? No PMS?? No hot flashes in the boardroom??”

I know the point of saying this was but for the record? Men report having as many “mood swings” as women do – as well as food-cravings – throughout the year. Women do, too, it’s just that it is only noticed when they near their period. Plus it isn’t even true of all women . Also they have found nothing during the PMS time that causes moods swings or anything of the type.

I have said my piece. I am finished. I have already discussed every one of your points. Just because you don’t like my answers, that doesn’t mean that I’m going to change them. I’m done.

Go bother someone else now.

You promote contradictions? This case has nothing to do with men not having uteri. It is about individual rights, which apply equally to both genders, not specifically one. No one can decide what another person can do with their body. That’s the standard. Period.

“If a man does not want to pay child support for a child he does not want, then he needs to make sure he does not create that child in the first place.”

This is a non sequitur. The conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premise. I just demolished your premise and demonstrated that this isn’t a necessary consequence in my comment above, but either you refuse to see it, can’t rebut it, or you didn’t read it at all.

What evidence do you have to support your claim? That the only alternative for a man is to “use a condom”? So that means that once he creates the child, he must be coerced by the government to provide for it even though its life is no longer dependent on him if adoptive parents can and will ensure its survival? If there were no adoptive parents willing to support the child, then the father would have to support it, but that’s not the case since adoptive parents exists and are willing to. That’s a fact.
“But can a woman simply abandon her child and walk away? No. She will be thrown in jail.”

This is a strawman. I’m not arguing for this, nor do I know who else is. My argument rests on the alternative for adoption, which exists, and you’ve set this strawman up in attempt to undermine my argument, although you haven’t touched it.

“A man wants legal sanction to abandon a child that he fathered because he thought his girlfriend couldn’t get pregnant.”

Another strawman.

“Think about it: It’s not just abandomnment he wants. He wants the courts to legally allow him to abandon his child. A legal walk-away clause. The concept is so detestable that I can’t believe anyone is arguing for it, and yet, they are.”

Let’s make this clear. Is he abandoning the child? Yes. But is he leaving it to rot? No. He’s leaving it in the care of adoptive parents. You may not like it, but the child’s life will be protected since it is provided for by them.

“Equal rights? They have nothing to do with this. This is about legally-allowed lack of responsibility.”

What kind of argument is this? The government cannot enforce responsibility. It cannot enforce what it thinks or feels or wants people to be responsible for. That would be completely arbitrary. It can only protect rights and can do so by force. And nowhere in your argument have you shown that the child’s life is being endangered, except by knocking down a strawman.

You can throw all the strawmans you want. If you want to prove your point, try to prove that the father must support the child despite the alternatives that exists. Prove that it is a necessary consequence, and therefore, the only. But the fact is you can’t. Whenever you try, you just end up bypassing the facts, and we all know that facts can’t be ignored.

My last comment on this issue is to point out that the ramifications of this are not solely borne by men. Many times where a man is paying child support to a former partner, but currently married to a new wife, the new wife and possible new children are also victimized by a former partner who wants increased support based upon the man’s increased earnings. Many women (obviously the new wife)I know are the most vocal critics of this practice.

The woman bears the responsibility of the child before, during, and after the birth. Yes, women can put their child up for adoption. Yes, women can abort. But can a woman simply abandon her child and walk away? No. She will be thrown in jail.

And yet, that is exactly what this case is about: A man wants legal sanction to abandon a child that he fathered because he thought his girlfriend couldn’t get pregnant.

Think about it: It’s not just abandomnment he wants. He wants the courts to legally allow him to abandon his child. A legal walk-away clause. The concept is so detestable that I can’t believe anyone is arguing for it, and yet, they are.

Equal rights? They have nothing to do with this. This is about legally-allowed lack of responsibility.

I say again: The solution to this problem: Make sure you don’t get your girlfriend pregnant. Because after you do, it’s your child, too. Deal with it.