Financial abortion

[Tsuyu]

I crave intelligent conversation but lord knows I aint getting it in real life. Please engage me!

I recently hearded about the concept of financial abortion the other day. What it means is that the father should have the right to "abort" just like the mother by abolishing all economical duties (and stuff like visiting rights!) if the mother decides to keep the kid. Sounds stupid at first, but as a man it sorta makes sense; a woman can take the morning after pill. She can have an abortion. The man has only one choice; the condom (or similar). After that his right to choose is stripped from him and it all rests with the woman. Once he comes inside of her his rights are stripped from him, frankly.

If we as a society allows women to decide, shouldn't we be default allow the man to do so as well? That, dear feminists around the globe, is equality.

 

[MissAlbion89]

Okay, so just explain this to me, cause i'm not sure I have it right. You're saying that the child's father has the right to "abort" the child by basically not doing anything for it if the mother wants to keep it and he doesn't?

 

[Tyloric]

Okay, so just explain this to me, cause i'm not sure I have it right. You're saying that the child's father has the right to "abort" the child by basically not doing anything for it if the mother wants to keep it and he doesn't?

I think what he means is that the father has rights to not want the child as much as the mother may or may not. If the mother decides to keep the baby the father should have the right to not have to pay child support, be apart of their lives, ect.

Oh which I'm not certain I agree. I've always been morally against abortion (but I would never judge a woman for having one). I've always personally believed that if a child was conceived, unless it is medically unsafe for the woman to continue with the pregnancy that they should go through with it. You don't even need to keep the child; there are plenty of couples out there who want a child but can't conceive.

That is my $.02 on the matter.

 

[Necromancer]

Well, a man already has the right to do that. It's just not socially acceptable. If you're saying that it shouldn't be so socially taboo, I'd have to disagree, at least in certain cases. I mean, really, it depends a lot on the situation. If a man is being vigilant about using protection while the woman is apathetic about it, or if the man is lied to about the woman being on birth control (which actually happened to a friend of mine), then yes, the man should have the right to opt out, though there are many men, myself and my aforementioned friend included, who could not in good conscience cut all ties to a child that is biologically theirs. However, if the man is the one who is careless about using protection, and that causes the woman to get pregnant, I don't think he should be able to "financially abort" the baby. Now, if neither or both sexual partners are at fault, and the woman refuses to get an abortion, a grey area emerges. I'd really have to take a look at the totality of the circumstances to figure out what's morally right in a case like that.

 

[Tsuyu]

Exactly. Not socially acceptable. Deadbeat dad stereotype. Once the sperm leaves his body and enters hers, it takes all his rights with it.

A woman's body, a woman's right. That's what pro-choice people say, isn't it?

Once the deed is done, there is no such thing as a man's right on the matter.

 

[Necromancer]

Exactly. Not socially acceptable. Deadbeat dad stereotype. Once the sperm leaves his body and enters hers, it takes all his rights with it.

A woman's body, a woman's right. That's what pro-choice people say, isn't it?

Once the deed is done, there is no such thing as a man's right on the matter.

Unfortunately, yes, that's how it is much of the time. If a man took the correct precautions and/or was lied to about the woman's own precautions, he should have much more of a say about whether or not the woman gets an abortion, and he should have the right to walk away if an abortion is off the table. Although, I do think walking away would be the immoral thing to do in certain situations, even ones like these, but logically, it's a right that the man should have since he was not at fault. The woman may also do this by getting an abortion or giving the child up for adoption, so for those of you who were going to say that the man is being given a right that the woman does not have here, that would be false. However, if the man is to blame for the unwanted pregnancy, his input on the subject of abortion should be considered, but the woman should have most of the power there. And if he were to leave her and their unborn child after causing the pregnancy, I'm going to say that at the very least, that should definitely remain a social taboo.

Assigning blame can be a very juvenile thing to do, but it is critical in a situation like this so that the person who was doing the right thing during the sexual encounter(s) can have more power to decide what happens. Let the person who screwed up suffer the consequences.

 

[Wonderfoole WINO]

Let me see if I've got this right. So a child is unintentionally concieved, the mother wants to keep it but the father does not? Should the father have the right to revoke all responsablility, rights, and obligations to her and the child? Given sertain conditions, yes. These things always depend on the individual situation of course, but I think it should be an option. It seems like a really deadbeat thing to do, and no doubt would be used that way, but that is real equality.

For example, one thing I've seen and heard about is a sort of "social leech" behavior. A woman will intentionally "accidentally" get pregnant, and proceed to take the man for all he is worth, while at the same time collecting wellfair, food stamps, and any other goodies she can squeeze out of the state due to "dissabilities". Even more if she can prove the kids have something wrong with them, ADD/ADHD is always a winner. She just dumps the kids in the cheapest daycare she can find and every few years pops out another kid from some poor sucker to keep the money flowing. To me it seems like a hard way to earn a free ride, but it happens. Quite frequently in fact. And the really sad part is the kids usually end up being useless riff-raff deadbeats just like her!

Like you said, once the egg has been fertalized the woman has pretty much got the guy by the goods. Things shouldn't be that way if we are going to be truly equal.

 

[Tsuyu]

Okay, so just explain this to me, cause i'm not sure I have it right. You're saying that the child's father has the right to "abort" the child by basically not doing anything for it if the mother wants to keep it and he doesn't?

I'm sorry I didn't respond to your post eariler. I must've missed it looking at the thread via my iHipsterphone.

Anyhow, yes that's the gist of it. The woman has several options to opt out of a pregnancy, but a man hasn't really any acceptable ways of getting out of it should the woman decide to keep the baby. Financial abortion would mean that the father comes to an agreement with the mother than abolishes all fatherly obligations - as well as rights (this is equally important), By giving up his rights as a father he can't come back five or ten years later and demand visitation rights and stuff. If he wants that privilege he should help her out by paying child support.

If their viewpoints were opposite, the mother could abort the baby because it is her body and the father couldn't do much about it. The idea of financial abortion gives him the same option, without the stigma of being a deadbeat father.

 

[Quistrix]

There's always a chance that a man could agree to have a baby with his partner, knock her up, change his mind and then opt for a financial abortion. In a legal sense there would be no way for the woman to prove they had agreed to anything.

There's also a chance that a woman may opt out of an abortion because it's againsts her morals or beliefs, whatever. Then she's left alone with this kid, and a biological father who's like "Nah."

There's a simple solution here, as Jeremy Kyle would say: Put something on the end of it.

 

[Angel]

I think we need less options to avoid responsibility. Life comes with consequences - if you're not ready for them, then you need to prepare yourself for the possibility of them BEFORE you do something that may or may not affect the rest of your life - not to mention someone else's.

Although I am personally against abortion, I am also for men having a say because it's their baby too (or clump of cells if you want to be all House about it) - I've seen plenty of guys completely broken because the missus has decided to get rid without taking their opinion into account. That said, if a guy wants to keep the baby and then wants to opt out - tough. She's got to live with it and so does he.

But hey - a man can always just impregnate some bird from England; the way that the CSA seems to be incapable of getting men to live up to their financial and moral responsibilities means it'll be years before they even catch you, let alone prove it in court that you've got to cough up for the kid in question. And then you can plead poverty by signing on welfare so they can't touch you. Ensure you never declare your cash-in-hand earnings so that you don't have to pay - ever - and you're golden.

Cynical? Me? Never...

 

[Tsuyu]

If we look aside the morality and ethics of abortion here for a second:

If it is okay for the woman, it should be okay for the man, no?

That's sorta the point I'm trying to make; not whether or not abortion should be allowed. Since we are allowing it for women, we should for men too.

 

[Tsuyu]

If we look aside the morality and ethics of abortion here for a second:

If it is okay for the woman, it should be okay for the man, no?

That's sorta the point I'm trying to make; not whether or not abortion should be allowed. Since we are allowing it for women, we should for men too.

 

[Angel]

I just don't feel the two are comparable. In the one scenario, the woman deals with the responsibility of decision - regardless of what it is. In the other, the man gets absolved of the responsibility completely.

Unless I'm not quite getting it?

 

[Tsuyu]

They are not comparable in the sense that one is a surgical procedure and the other is not.

But in other aspects, I'd say they are comparable.

 

[Quistrix]

I was brought up by a single mother, and I never went without, in fact maybe I was even a little spoilt. Just a little. My mother and father were married for a couple years, my mum got pregnant with me and during her pregnancy my daddio rocked the cazbah with some other chick and they split. I was born, and my dad didn't want to know. He's never been here and has never paid a penny for me. Your classic deadbeat-dad.

I'll never be a guy, or my father, so I gotta take it from my own perspective only. But I know my Dad well enough to know that if he had some legal choice to not give a f*ck, and make that "ok" he'd take it in a heartbeat.

Too personal a post?? Nah, I don't do the whole abandonment-issues thang, I'd just like to point out that such a power can be abused.

 

[Tsuyu]

And a pregnant woman doesn't hold any power whatsoever over the man who knocked her up? If you allow the same responsibilities to be put on the man, you should give him equal rights to choose.

 

[Angel]

They are not comparable in the sense that one is a surgical procedure and the other is not.

But in other aspects, I'd say they are comparable.

I still don't think I agree. I'm not sure that you can keep all the moral/ethical/blah aspects of this out of the equation when discussing the subject. Not having to pay for or even acknowledge a child, to me, is not comparable to a physical abortion and there are many factors which contribute to the decision of physical abortion which I believe ought to be taken into account when debating the "fairness" of this sort of "equality".

 

[Tsuyu]

So in essence you agree with the the man losing his right to choose the moment he ejaculates? That is, to choose without becoming a shunned deadbeat dad?

 

[Quistrix]

And a pregnant woman doesn't hold any power whatsoever over the man who knocked her up? If you allow the same responsibilities to be put on the man, you should give him equal rights to choose.

I'm sure at some point my father did want me, but after he found another lady he decided he didn't want that life anymore. He made the choice to not be my father. Giving him that legal power would have just made it ok. For him.

My mother never forced him to do anything, honestly I think she was just too heartbroken to care.

 

[Tsuyu]

Didn't mean to say she did.