Posted by: ST on March 8, 2006 at 10:48 pm
Talk about opening a can of worms! Via AP:
NEW YORK (AP) — Contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men’s rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.
The National Center for Men has prepared a lawsuit — nicknamed Roe v. Wade for Men — to be filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend’s daughter.
The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause.
The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The activists involved hope to spark discussion even if they lose.
“There’s such a spectrum of choice that women have — it’s her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions,” said Mel Feit, director of the men’s center. “I’m trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly.”
A tip o’ the hat to ‘em for trying – a nationwide debate on this *does* need to be had (it’s long overdue, in my opinion). Hopefully this lawsuit will be the spark that ignites a fruitful discussion about what rights men do have when it comes to unplanned pregnancies, because right now it doesn’t seem like they have very many.
Well if a guy is kinda duped into impregnating the girl (which has a chance of one in a million), then the guy deserves to be exonerated of any child support burden.
ST
I’m not just saying this because I’m a guy, but I’m in total support of this effort. And like you alluded to: it’s a debate that’s long overdue. Glad you wrote about this as I’ll definitely be paying attention to see what comes of it.
“A tip o’ the hat to ‘em for trying”
Do you really agree that they should succeed? They’re proposing a really bad policy.
Raj: I don’t get what you said……duped into impregnating…?
As far as the woman choosing to have the child over (beyond the health and the typical “reasons” for an abortion) the objections of the man, for reasons of his choosing, we’re going to be splitting frog hairs before the day is out.
Irresponsibility has a price. In the form of actions that created the child as well as running from the lifelong responsibility as a parent.
Freedoms have always had a price tag. No matter which freedom we speak of.
This don’t have a snow balls chance in hel…errr heck in going anywhere.
First judge hears it is going to throw it right out.
Let me give you an example:
From Behind the Badge
Do you see where men stand?
Like I said not a chance in hel…err you know what I mean.
“Well if a guy is kinda duped into impregnating the girl (which has a chance of one in a million), then the guy deserves to be exonerated of any child support burden.”
And the child gets what? The shaft?
“which has a chance of one in a million”
That should tell you that I’m alluding to the absurdity of the exoneration argument by men.
I knew that Raj
Just checkin’ 
Can ya feel the love? 
- Actually I agree with the whole spectrum in a sense, but not as too who’s responsibility it is.
- Whatever the means, the man and the woman are responsible for their offspring.
- Raj, sneak pregnancies are not all that rare. Both men and women can practice deceit. But I see that as a responsibility none the less, and heres why.
- If a man doesn’t want to run the risk of incurring responsibilities then don’t do the deed, or at the very least take precautions. Even the latter is fraught with potential liabilities. I know of one woman who intentionally poked a hole in the condum. Fortunately for her, her hubby never knew.
- But in the end you can hardly say you were “duped” if you did the act, anymore than “I was too young to know better” is a viable excuse. Mistakingly thinking you’re getting recreational sex is not really a defense, because theres a third party involved. The baby.
- In short: “If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the baby house”
- Bang
ahem. cough. clears throat.
Celibacy.
Thank you.
LSU
Big Bang, that’s just too weird. I returned early one afternoon after a concrete pour waiting for it to set up, in time to overhear my sister-in-law talking to my wife, about sabotaging the condoms, in order to retain the leash of loyalty as it were.
I’ve been saying this for years; it isn’t fair that women can abort a child the father may want or force him to pay child support for one he doesn’t…at their whim, regardless of his feelings.
“Can of worms”, yes, but one that should be opened…
AMEN LSU!
Duped into pregnancy?
How about both parties keeping their britches zipped?
It still takes two to create a child (outside of the laboratory).
If you are going to engage in risky behavior….
No it takes the man to enjoy the sex and dump some sperm while it takes the woman a whole friggin 9 months. There’s a vast physical difference here. So the man’s decision is a bit moot here.
“sneak pregnancies are not all that rare. Both men and women can practice deceit.”
Of course I’ve had a vasectomy! Can’t you see the scars?
Andrew asks, appropriately:
No, the child gets welfare — which means that if the father isn’t going to be held financially responsible, then the taxpayers (that’s us, folks!) will have to pick up the tab.
Bad policy andrew? How? If the legislation were revamped and brought into the 21st century, we might just see a decline in welfare, unwanted pregnancies and abortion. I am in no way justifing a deadbeat dad that is just trying to get out of child support..I am saying that women may start thinking twice about trying to trap a guy and a guy might think twice about not wearing a condom! If we stop rewarding bad behavior and start making people accountable for their actions, we will see a dramatic dip in the numbers.
Dana- how about we put an end to that as well! How about we make it so that we don’t offer it. You would be amazed at how quickly people would abstain from the act or take the precautions necessary to assure that a pregnancy doesn’t even occur! Prior To LBJ’s legislations on welfare and RvW: The backroom abortions were nowhere near the level we are seeing with legal abortions. The amount of “unwanted” pregnancies were nowhere near the levels we are seeing today. Families took care of families. The government was not held responsible for poor decisions. We kept people in mental institutions where they belonged. Because it was unfair to them, we released them to the streets to give them dignity..now we call them the homeless people….
Maybe if we held people accountable for their actions we would actually make progress. This is 2006..we have all of this wonderful technology before us, yet we still can’t figure out how to take the proper steps to avoid getting pregnant!
An affordable single-payer universal health care system would go a long way in reducing the number of abortions. So would an over-the-counter morning after pill. Peace
The man ought to be able to both prevent the woman from having an abortion without his permission (because it is morally unacceptable to him), AND be able to refuse to pay child support (because it was unplanned.)
That’ll show those loose woman to keep their legs closed.
The whole thing goes back to “Personal Responsibility” that is some of the problems with society now days people won’t own up to there actions and are not held accountable for their actions. With freedom comes personal responsibility but we have more and more people that point the finger whining and saying its his/her fault its my parents fault its societies fault. You just want to kick them in the gluteus maximus and say stand up on your own two feet and quit the sniveling and whining no one forced you, so accept your own actions and face the consequences. When we stop “feeling sorry” for these people and tell them this is your problem it is not the taxpayers of this countries fault or problem maybe people will think before they act. There is nothing wrong with a private person, charity or church giving a helping hand if that is what they want to do voluntarily but don’t use the Government to force the taxpayers to pay for your actions and or decisions.
Presently, Men hold reproductive responsibilities, and no rights; women hold reproductive rights and no responsibilities. A man and woman have sex. Now their are four possibilities:
First, both want to keep the child. The best of all possibilities.
Secondly, neither wants the child. Preferably, an adoption occurs, but perhaps an abortion.
Thirdly, the man wants the child, the women doesn’t. The women can decide to abort the child despite the man’s wishes.
Fourthly, the women wants the child, the man doesn’t. The women can choose to have the child, and force the man to support the child (and a lot of times the mother) for the next 18 years.
Another outrageous fact is the number of men who are forced by the courts into supporting children that everyone, including the judge and mother, know are not biologically theirs.
Funny how the drive to let men escape their parental responsibilities is coming at the same time that states are making abortion illegal and limiting access to contraception by allowing pharmacists to opt out of providing it.
Someone is going to have to take care of the resulting babies, but apparently it won’t be their irresponsible fathers. So much for the much-vaunted ethic of personal responsibility, not to mention family values.
If you play, you pay, guys (and gals). If you really don’t want a kid, keep your zippers shut or entertain yourselves in other ways. And if you use contraception, you need to do your homework, use an effective method (or methods), and be aware that it occasionally fails.
Said Steve-An affordable single-payer universal health care system would go a long way in reducing the number of abortions. So would an over-the-counter morning after pill. Peace
Steve I found this source for your source of birth control needs with the average cost of 12 condems being under $10.00, I would say it is quite affordable. Also, local health clinics give them out for free..so why do you keep bringing up cost? It isn’t the issue. Nor is universal health insurance. By giving them the insurance, they will all of a sudden become bright enough to use the contraception? Dumb steve..even for you!
Last I checked, the male can’t have sex with a woman unless she consents to it (unless we’re talking about rape, which is a different issue). The woman knows she’ll be the one who bears the physical consequences of pregnancy so she should be personally responsible as well and make sure that protection is present.
Pregnancy is not a one way street: it takes two to tango and if you want to preach about personal responsiblity, you should be preaching it to the woman as well because if she doesn’t want to worry about the slightest chance she could get pregnant, she needs to ensure that she is protected (birth control) and she also needs to verify that her partner has brought protection with him as well. If he hasn’t, she can choose to “just say no to sex” right? Isn’t that part of what freedom of choice is about?
It’s funny how the feminists in groups like NOW and NARAL love to talk about how males are “irresponsible” but don’t seem to want to address the irresponsible female who gave him permission to enter her body in the first place knowing he wasn’t protected (sorry to be crude). This one-way personal responsiblity preaching is a double standard that sends the wrong message.
Amen to “personal Responsibility” Sister T
“I am in no way justifing a deadbeat dad that is just trying to get out of child support..I am saying that women may start thinking twice about trying to trap a guy and a guy might think twice about not wearing a condom!”
I think 18 years of being a mother is enough to make someone think twice.
This is bad policy, it really just punishes the kids.
“If we stop rewarding bad behavior and start making people accountable for their actions, we will see a dramatic dip in the numbers.”
Whats the reward for bad behavior?
“That’ll show those loose woman to keep their legs closed.”
This is what being pro-life is all about.
This is a subject that I have followed for the last 8 years as I have a close personal friend that actually was “duped” into a baby making situation.
Briefly: While in college, Jason dated this gal, Erica for 6 months. On the surface she appeared extremely nice and upstanding. In fact, Jason was completely smitten by her charm. After 3 months of dating the relationship evolved to the next level…if you know what I mean. Jason, as a teenager, contracted a STD which was cured rapidly by antibiotics. He was very fortunate due to the fact that the disease went for quite a while undiagnosed as he was technically, a virgin. Anyway, needless to say, it left a major impression on him and he refused any sexual contact what-so-ever without prior placement of a condom.
After a couple of months of sexual activity, Erica began to urge Jason to obstain from using condoms and very reasonably justified this in 2 ways. First, the standandard spermicide used with condoms was very irritating to her…parts, and second due to menstral irregularities she was medically required to be on the pill…so there was no issues with pregnancy.
Even though Jason was well aware of these issues and had absolutely no reason to doubt the validitity of her claims, he refused to stop using condoms. He just switched to the “dry variety”.
Erica continued to express irritability issues relative to the condoms to the point to which Jason believed it was negatively affecting their relationship. At around 6 months he decided to stop using the condoms. He felt that he knew her well enough that the appropriate level of trust had been reached to justify the decision.
Three weeks later, he came home from school to find Erica’s stuff gone and a “Dear Jason” letter on the coffee table. She left no forwarding information, no clue as to where she would be, nothing. He was crushed.
“And now,” as Paul Harvey would say, “is the rest of the story.”
Two years later, I ran into a mutual friend of Erica and myself. Turns out Erica has moved home and was now the proud mother of a 14 month old boy that bore a striking resemblance to Jason.
Obviously, upon hearing this revelation, Jason contacted Erica and demanded an explanation.
After 8 years in court, $200,000 plus in attorney fees, multiple accounts of slander and libel, as well as multiple invasions of privacy by a PI hired by Erica, this is what we know happened.
-Erica was given 8 million dollars for her 18th birthday from her very wealthy grandfather.
-At 21 she made it known to her sister her intention of going to college to find a suitable “doner” for a child.
-Within weeks of meeting Jason, she made it known to her sister that she had infact found a “suitable doner” and was well on her way to accomplishing her goal.
-While “in college” even though she registered, paid tuition, bought books, complained about professors, tests, etc… she never attended a single class.
-She poked holes in Jason’s condoms for 3 months..to no avail and bragged about breaking his resolve to wear condoms.
It took 2 years and approximately $15,000 to get a court order for a paternity test even though there was a PILE of corroborating evidence that Jason was infact the father.
For the next 4 years, Jason was forced to pay $554 per month for child support and was ordered to pay around $6000 more for back child support and penalities for not doing so from the beginning. Additionally, due to unsubstantiated allegations of abuse and drug use he was not allowed to see his son unless he did so under the direct supervision of an officer of the court. (For which he also had to pay for.)
Finally, last year, almost 10 years after the fact, Jason was vindicated. Through court order, Jason was required to prove his innocence by meeting with a psychologist monthly for 24 months. It was only after this that the court granted “limited” unsupervised visits with his own son.
The preciding judge in the final hearing told Jason the following, “Although this court is apologetic for the unwarranted obsticles you have had to overcome, this court is bound by two primary principles. First, to protect the reproductive rights of the woman and second, to protect the health and welfare of the child.”
I’m here to say that this system is extremely flawed. Although, I agree in part, with a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body, such rights should be accompanied by a higher standard of responsibility than is currently required. If it can be proven that a woman intentionally mislead her partner relative to birth control, all claims relative to custody and subsequent child support should be immediately granted to the man.
There is no other instance in our judicial system of which a contract that has been falsely represented or has been proven fraudulent, is enforcable. It’s simply wrong and needs to be changed to protect people like Jason.
Further, (one more point and I’m done) the fact that there is a need for this entire discussion is incredible! Given the prevelance of LETHAL STD’s, there should be no question of using condoms. Sex should simply mandate it. period. It’s complete lunacy!
“That’ll show those loose woman to keep their legs closed.”
Sarah, your double standard is astounding. What about the loose men? If they’d keep their legs out from between the women’s, this problem would be avoided just as well, wouldn’t it?
“It’s funny how the feminists in groups like NOW and NARAL love to talk about how males are “irresponsible” but don’t seem to want to address the irresponsible female who gave him permission to enter her body in the first place knowing he wasn’t protected (sorry to be crude).”
As one of those crazy feminists who supports NOW and NARAL, I completely expect a woman to take responsibility for her actions. I can’t think of one of my crazy feminist friends who doesn’t. We just expect the man the accept responsibility, as well. It’s much easier for a guy to skip out on the situation, he isn’t carrying the child around inside of him for 9 months.
But, if you’re going to insist on personal responsibility, you have to teach people to act safely and responsibly. And, unfortunately (and, I admit, I don’t know your views on this subject as I haven’t read your other postings), until the GOP and Focus on the Family, et al, support comprehensive sex ed and health care systems that allow women to easily, safely, and affordably obtain birth control, many women won’t have much of a choice in the matter.
“That’ll show those loose woman to keep their legs closed.”
This is what being pro-life is all about.
1) That statement is as accurate as saying: Infanticide, that’s what being pro-choice is all about.
2) Promiscuity is an unhealthy lifestyle for whoever is endulging in it; male or female, homosexual or heterosexual. It is bad for you physically and emotionally.
3) Women have always held the power of decision making in sex. (except in cases of rape, which we know is about power, and violence, not sex)
4) The feminist movement has been good about promoting rights and choices, not so good about promoting responsibilities.
5) Our society was much healthy before it became illegitemate to make moral judgements about people’s behavior.
Nothing is 100 percent proof against pregnancy except amstinence.
I am not trying to preach abstinnence, but every time it is used, it works.
Condoms, gels, pills, ect all have a failure rate. You just LESSEN the chance of getting pregnant or getting a girl pregnant.
And not going to try sounding like a hardass, but if you have sex, there is no “entrapment”. There is a risk no matter what you use of the girl getting pregnant by you.
You don’t want to have children, fine, don’t have sex. But if you have sex, don’t sit there and act suprised if someone gets pregnant. It happens.
The only time a man and woman DON’T have a choice is in rape or incest. All other times you have a choice of having sexual intercourse or not.
Personal Responsibility.
Don’t shift blame.
If your a man, you should realize if you have sex, condom, pill or what not, you still run the risk of getting her pregnant. Step up and be a man.
If your a woman, you better damn well relaize pills, condoms ect are not fool proof and you can get pregnant.
So don’t act all suprised when and if it happens.
Here is a little known fact, the PILL doesn’t always work the way you all think it does. For my wife, it has the OPPOSITE effect, it RAISED her chances of getting pregnant. Not that I am complaining because we both wanted children.
Just saying you better damn well be thinking with the top head and not the lower one, otherwise you may end up with something you should have realized could happen in the first place.
Sorry for the spelling errors, typing at work in a very small window.
No matter how you package it, it still comes back to “Personal Responsibility” and choices and decisions that each of us make as individuals through life. No one can legally force you to do something you know is morally or ethically wrong unless you have no principals and for every action there is an equal and positive reaction. There are people that are trying to alleviate people of any personal responsibility and our courts sorry to say have gone along with some of this BS. I have to say I agree with Andrew when he said:
“If we stop rewarding bad behavior and start making people accountable for their actions, we will see a dramatic dip in the numbers.”
We are constantly rewarding bad behavior just look at welfare we reward people for dropping out of school for having kids out of wedlock for not working for a living and on and on. Do not worry no matter how bad you mess up your life the Government will take care of you (The Nanny State).
Thank you, Sister Toldjah, for bringing this subject up. It’s a complex moral issue which makes it hard to come to a decision. I’m surprised by the kneejerk reactions and automatic assumptions by your other readers.
Personally, I think the courts need to be more open to granting custody to the father and making the mother pay child support. Women may be more predisposed to be care-givers but the exceptions to the rule are vast (my former sister-in-law for one).
I find it so strange that there are so many automatic assumptions: 1) That the woman has all of the rights. 2) That the man automatically bears full responsibility. 3) That the woman is automatically the more responsible person to care for the child. 4) That the man has an unequal ability to pay for that care.
Discussions do need to be had on all of those points. I have to seriously question the motives of anybody who would dismiss them outright.
Education. Education. Education. And an affordable single-payer universal health care system. Peace
Men mostg often than not do get the shaft, so to speak.
Read the example I posted earlier:
LINK
Most times the court will side with the mother before the father.
Liz- Last time I checked, you could walk into any drugstore, supermarket or Target and get a box of condoms.
andrew asked-Whats the reward for bad behavior? let’s see, government healthcare, government checks for starters..
Pam – And, thank God for small favors. This, however, is not comprehensive health care. THAT would include women having easy, cheap access to birth control pills, the morning after pill, IUDs, etc. Not to mention condoms, while the most widely-used, are one of the less reliable methods of birth control, not least because many people don’t know how to use them correctly. If only we had, say, sex ed programs that actually taught people these sorts of things. I’m infinitely glad I got through school at a time when sex ed was actually expected to teach about, say, whadaya know, sex.
I realize my comment makes it sound like ceomprehensive health care on this topic would only cover birth control options & this is not the point I was trying to make, so my apologies on that. CHC would also help the women cover pre- & post-natal care of the child and herself, and would care for the child itself, at least until it has reached the gae of majority. And, yes, it should present women with choices available to them, be this abortion, adoption, or any other choice the woman wants to make.
Liz- I am not sure where you live, but birth control is readily available to all women over the age of 18. If you are under 18 you need parental approval. As for this statement: THAT would include women having easy, cheap access to birth control pills, the morning after pill, IUDs, etc. How about if we throw in a doctor with evey perscription. That way the doctor can be responsible and the woman needs to worry about nothing.
Isn’t it funny how a kid can figure out how to have sex, but is too stupid to buy a box of condems. And now you are telling me that those that do buy them somehow can’t read the instructions?
Pam – First, I’d like to thank you for reading my adendum before blasting away with a resonpse. It shows that your arguments are intelligent and thorough. Second, I must assume that you never had sex as a teenager. Did you ever stop to actually read the instructions before you used condoms as a horny 17 y/o? If you did, I applaud you, I think you’re one of, maybe, 5. My friends & I just laughed b/c there were pictures of neatly shorn penises and vaginas. (Thankfully, we’d had nice sex ed teachers who taught us correct usage. Those lucky bananas!)
All kids should know how to use condoms, and should read the instructions, and teenage guys should jerk off with condoms and intentionally break them so them know what it feels like and be able to recognize it & stop in that situation. But, if sex ed never mentions condoms, or how to use them, instead saying that abstinence is the only option a person should consider, do you really expect a couple kids who aren’t thinking with their top heads to do everything right?
I’m just trying to be realistic here. Teens should have the same access to birth control that adults do. They should be educated as to their options. If this happened, there would be fewer unplanned pregnancies and this whole discussion would be less of an issue to begin with.
And, just out of curiosity, have you had “the talk” with your kids? Or do you trust the schools to keep them pure?
Liz- teens do have the same access that adults do, but kids require an adults signature to get the b/c.
No I didn’t have sex in highschool. There were maybe 5 that did. It’s funny because guys always seemed to have more respect for a gal that didn’t. Has that changed? When sex was explained to us, we were taught the myths as well as the facts to pregnacy.
Get a job and pay for your birth control. I’m not sleeping with you, why should I pay for it?
As for the education..where are the parents? Somehow this became the schools responsibility to teach kids about sex and the taxpayers obligation to pay for the b/c?
Where else except school can you gather every kid for an educational excercise? Peace
Pam, you nailed it. For the life of me I don’t get this idea that personal responsibility is up to someone else. That’s why it’s called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
By definition (and check me if I’m wrong) “personal” means belonging to a particular person rather than to anyone else.
By definition “responsibility” means a moral obligation to behave correctly toward or in respect of – as in: individuals have a responsibility to control personal behavior.
Brains are not available over the counter.
Is it unfair that women seem to have all the choices about what happens in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, there are a couple of facts that are not mentioned here, the first is that (in my state) if a women decides to carry the baby she also has the responsibility of at least trying to have a healthy pregnancy ie no drinking, no drugs, and no smoking, if a women is “caught” taking illeagal drugs or drinking while pregnant I believe she can be charged with “child endangerment”and if she smokes while pregnant at least one major health plan will list her as having “mental or emotional problems” mean while her male counter-part is free to party hardy if he chooses. also if a man does not want his child put up for adoption he is free to stop the process and take the child himself (this is true even after the fact, most courts will find for the blood relatives) and can get child support from the mother. It should be noted too that fully 1/2 to 1/3 of all welfare monies paid to recipients is recouped via the child support system. In my state if a women does not cooperate with the welfare department in collecting these funds she and her child are simply cut off.
Steve- how about starting at home. How about one on one. You might get a little farther that way.
Men may want to fully understand the impact of recently introduced bill S. 1955, “The Health Insurance Marketplace Modernization and Affordability Act (HIMMAA)”, introduced by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY).
It impacts women and men and children – indeed the entire family!
This federal bill allows insurance companies to deny coverage for ordinary birth control pills. Read more about it here:
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/media/pressreleases/pr-060308-health.xml
How is this about men? When birth control is more expensive and harder to get, more unplanned pregnancies will result. In today’s society, a large majority of both parents work. However if divorce happens, the man is more often the responsible party for child support. In many instances when ‘dead beat’ dads don’t pay, they’re jailed.
There are many consequences and the bill has further provisions that may also have detrimental consequences that may have not been carefully considered – like the backlash of ordinary families.
I think that the basis of the lawsuit is being misconstrued…this lawsuit should not apply to all cases but more so on a case by case basis. If a man and woman have intercourse, they are both responsible for using protection..if they don’t, then they both should have a say in the outcome of the pregnancy….bottom line. As a child support paying father I can see both sides of this issue…I do not condone a man not taking responsibility for his actions but I do feel he should have a say in the results of those actions. I do not feel that this lawsuit was intended for deadbeat dads to have a way of getting out of paying child support for childern that were born during a planned pregnancy or an unplanned pregnancy with parenthoodparenting intentions.
Joe- Consider the source of the link. It is Planned Parenthood!
What Lynda neglected to add is that condoms are not involved in this. They are cheap and over the counter. They not only can prevent pregnancy, but also reduce the risk of STD’s!