# Aborting the children of male rape victims **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 24, 2013, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755 "2013-06-24T03:10:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/41 "2013-06-24T07:08:51Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > I think this is a terrible idea. All you would do is open the door for more dead beat dads to claim their unwanted kids are rape babies. I assume you have the same objections with women. All kinds of sluts crying rape to get insurance money. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Additionally, child support is exactly what it sounds like, _support for the child_. Regardless of the circumstances of his/her birth, the child needs to be supported. I don’t get why the parent should be able to foist that responsibility to the state given that the child did nothing wrong. You are just victimizing the kid for the behavior of the mother. That’s not fair, nor is it practical. Yes, it might really suck for the dad, but sometimes life sucks. Doesn’t mean the government needs to pick up the bill for raising your kid. Then I think they should pick a random person from the phonebook and settle him (or her) with child support. At least then you won’t visit the same guy with two crimes. Even out the sucks of life a bit on the whole population. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/42 "2013-06-24T07:09:51Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > I think this is a terrible idea. All you would do is open the door for more dead beat dads to claim their unwanted kids are rape babies. Additionally, child support is exactly what it sounds like, _support for the child_. Would you support a system where random people are assigned child support bills for children without two supporting parents? That’s even more fair, after all, since all the random selectee gets hit with is a bill, unlike the victim who would be _raped_ and billed. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/43 "2013-06-24T07:10:09Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > I think this is a terrible idea. All you would do is open the door for more dead beat dads to claim their unwanted kids are rape babies. Additionally, child support is exactly what it sounds like, _support for the child_. Regardless of the circumstances of his/her birth, the child needs to be supported. I don’t get why the parent should be able to foist that responsibility to the state given that the child did nothing wrong. You are just victimizing the kid for the behavior of the mother. That’s not fair, nor is it practical. Yes, it might really suck for the dad, but sometimes life sucks. Doesn’t mean the government needs to pick up the bill for raising your kid. Then have a lottery and let some completely random person foot the bill. It’s just as arbitrary and unfair for assigning it to a victim. Unless you want to argue that the victim is somehow “responsible” for what happened to him? ETA: Haha, a threefer simulpost with the “random selection” idea. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 8:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/44 "2013-06-24T08:20:45Z")
> [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. Here we go with “punishing” again. This isn’t about punishment. Maybe not philosophically, but de facto I’m afraid it amounts to the same thing. Forcibly restraining a women for nine months until she comes to term, with all the concomitant medical risks of pregnancy ( even if minor ) comes close enough to ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ I think it is effectively a non-starter. Never gonna happen, nor should it. Sucks for your hypothetical guy, but there you go. Biology trumps the perfect world once again. ---
**Author:** ![EverwonderWhy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee59a6/32.png) [@EverwonderWhy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EverwonderWhy)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 8:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/45 "2013-06-24T08:52:12Z")
> [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. Here we go with “punishing” again. This isn’t about punishment. I used punishment and restitution together (though neither logically fits) - which you conveniently ignored. > [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. That is an opinion. I might say that personhood is conferred at conception, zygote implantation, or even the point at which life is sustainable outside of the womb. You would just continue to argue that personhood begins at birth, and then we’re getting into another enormous argument that probably wouldn’t ever go anywhere… so I’m not getting into it. It is more than an opinion. It is the current law of the land. Zygotes/embryo/fetuses do NOT have personhood/citizenship rights. Those are conferred at birth, or if you really want to split hairs, at viability. Personal philosophy may vary, but courts use the law of the land when distributing justice. > [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. “it is the woman’s body that does 100% of the work that assembles that zygote into a baby nine months later”. Doesn’t the male body create twenty-three of the chromosomes required to construct the baby? How is the woman doing 100% of the work? Whatever. Even if she is, that doesn’t really affect my argument. The 50% genetic contribution which led to the creation of a zygote, providing half the instructions for the assembly of the zygote into a baby, after nine months of her body doing 100% of the physical biological work. And yes it affects your argument. A genetic relationship does not necessarily confer any parental rights. Consider gestational surrogates, ‘custody’ of stored embryos and biological fathers’ rights in adoption proceedings (their power to contest adoption hinges on their familial ties and actions, not just genetics). > [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. “son” is a mishap. I meant to say child. A very telling mishap. > [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. “Fathers have no rights until birth and even then it can get complicated.” Isn’t that what this thread is about…? No victim _restitution_ (that I’m aware of in modern, civilized society) has ever allowed for violation of the body autonomy of the perpetrator. How is mandatory pregnancy or abortion ‘restoring’ or ‘repairing’ what was destroyed by the rape? The victim’s “psychological integrity” you argue is at stake, sounds more like a matter for civil court - e.g. suing for the cost of therapy or lost wages due to PTSD, etc. > [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. Not sovereignty. What I’m suggesting is not [sovereignty](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sovereignty). Yes, sovereignty. From you link: > [@](#): > > 1 > obsolete : supreme excellence or an example of it > 2 > a : supreme power especially over a body politic > **b : freedom from external control : autonomy > c : controlling influence > 3 > : one that is sovereign; especially : an autonomous state** Individual people have sovereign authority over their bodies, body parts and biological processes. Even convicted criminal retain these rights, outside of capital punishment and forced feeding (both ethical gray areas). Granting a victim the right to force a medically unnecessary procedure or reduce someone to an involuntary biological incubator, is granting them authority --\*\* ‘external control, controlling influence’\*\* – over the biological processes of another person. Again, what victim has ever had this right? > [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > By the way, who do you think should have custody if both parents want the child and neither of them has any prior criminal record? Are you going off on a tangent about custodial rights of non-rapist parents now? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/46 "2013-06-24T12:04:25Z")
> [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > It’s really not “as simple as that”. I haven’t made such a ludicrous claim, and I’d appreciate it if you’d do the same. Please realize that this is a complicated issue and the answer isn’t as obvious as you might think. > > Also, realize that there’s another body involved here… the body of the man’s son. And tied to that body is (possibly) the psychological integrity of the man (who, let’s not forget, was victimized by the rapist). You’re saying the man should be fucked by the justice system because the woman should be able to do whatever makes her feel comfortable. I agree with Jragon; I think she forfeited that right when she raped a guy and used his stolen sperm to create a child. It is as simple as that. You are trying to create a circumstance where a woman no longer is able to decide what happens to her body, particularly being forced to carry through a pregnancy, like a brood cow. There are no such circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/47 "2013-06-24T12:22:46Z")
> [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > 1. That is an opinion. I might say that personhood is conferred at conception, zygote implantation, or even the point at which life is sustainable outside of the womb. You would just continue to argue that personhood begins at birth, and then we’re getting into another enormous argument that probably wouldn’t ever go anywhere… so I’m not getting into it. I don’t think you can avoid getting into it; for me at least, it’s the crux of the matter. She’s not “cutting his child in half,” she’s terminating a pregnancy. There is a vast legal, medical, and ethical difference there. A child is not hers to kill, but the pregnancy is hers to terminate. Until the fetus is conferred the rights of personhood like **EverwonderWhy** says, it’s just a pregnancy, and women are allowed to terminate pregnancies with whatever caveats apply in this hypothetical state. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/48 "2013-06-24T12:50:31Z")
A more relevant issue - should those raped by space aliens be allowed to shoot down their spaceships? ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/49 "2013-06-24T12:51:11Z")
> [@Teddy\_Kennedy](#): > > I’m pretty sure the fetus is pulverized first and then vacuumed out. Regardless of your position on abortion-related matters, it doesn’t hurt to know the details. Sorry I made it a little harder for you to ignore them. :rolleyes: You have been misinformed and mislead by people you trust. No, the fetus is not pulverized at any point in the process; less than 0.2% of abortions performed include any sort of cutting of the fetal tissues, and never “pulverized” by an ethical medical doctor working according to current practice guidelines. For one quarter of abortions in the US, the uterine contents (including the fetus) are not vacuumed out at all, they fall out after the woman takes a pill or series of pills. > [@TriPolar](#): > > It is as simple as that. You are trying to create a circumstance where a woman no longer is able to decide what happens to her body, particularly being forced to carry through a pregnancy, like a brood cow. There are no such circumstances. You, on the other hand, are entirely correct. A man being raped by a woman is a horrible thing, but he doesn’t get the condolence prize of stripping her of her human rights, nor should he. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/50 "2013-06-24T13:17:13Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > I assume you have the same objections with women. All kinds of sluts crying rape to get insurance money. What are you talking about? What insurance money? > [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > Would you support a system where random people are assigned child support bills for children without two supporting parents? That’s even more fair, after all, since all the random selectee gets hit with is a bill, unlike the victim who would be _raped_ and billed. It isn’t some random guy, he’s the biological father. Now if he decides to take one of the many avenues to give up his parental rights, so be it. But this idea that he should be able to just refuse to pay child support is not practical in the real world; one where male rape victims are far outnumbered by deadbeat dads looking for an excuse not to pay. Can you imagine the flood of people claiming they were too drunk to consent, and therefore should not be required to pay child support? More importantly, courts have already ruled on many situations exactly like this, and other similar cases. Most times, a man will be held responsible for non-biological kids he had claimed at one point even if he later realizes it’s not his. Additionally, male rape victims have been made to pay child support. To quote this [post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4483414&postcount=5): > [@](#): > > In several cases the courts have ordered the father to pay child support even when he has been raped. > > Check out this quote from State ex rel. Hermesmann v. Seyer , 252 Kan. 646, 847 P.2d 1273, 1279 (1993), where a 12 year old is ordered to pay child support after being statutory raped by his 16 year old baby sitter. > Quote: > “The issue of consent to sexual activity under the criminal statutes is irrelevant in a civil action to determine paternity and for support of a minor child born of such activity.” > [http://www.nas.com/c4m/rape\_case.html](http://www.nas.com/c4m/rape_case.html) > > Then there is S.F. v. Alabama ex rel. T.M., 695 So. 2d 1186 (Ala. Civ. App. 1996). Here the man was raped and the woman bragged to friends that > Quote: > she had sex with the father while he was “passed out” and that it saved her a trip to the sperm bank. > The court concluded that the “rape” of the father could not preclude a finding of liability for support. In the first [case](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer), the court ruled: > [@](#): > > In 1993 the Kansas Supreme Court rejected an appeal by Seyer that he was not liable to pay for child support.[2] The court held that the admitted facts established that, because being under 16 he had been legally unable to consent to sex, a crime had been committed under statutory rape law. All the same Seyer had actually given consent to the acts under civil law.[1][3] The court ruled that “at no time did Shane register any complaint to his parents about the sexual liaison with Colleen”.[1]\*\* The court also ruled that a mother’s potential culpability under criminal statutes was of no relevance in determining the father’s child support liability in a civil action.[3][6]The court stated that the state’s interest in ensuring that a minor receives child support outweighed its interest in potentially deterring crimes against minors.[7]\*\* I feel this was an “unfair”, but sound ruling given the circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/51 "2013-06-24T13:34:15Z")
What’s so special about the right to one’s body? We strip other rights of criminals all the time, a criminal in solitary confinement doesn’t exactly have the right to free association, and your right to privacy ends (to a certain degree) when the state issues a search warrant. We reserve plenty of right to restrict the right to bear arms of dangerous felons, and rightly so. Obviously in this case it’s hairy because of timing windows, provability, and so on, which makes it impossible in real life. But on a philosophical level, we strip, limit, and mutate the rights of criminals all the time. Why can’t we decide (again, on a purely philosophical level) to limit the right to one’s body in cases where that right was abused (and, in fact, actively violated for the victim) by the criminal? ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/52 "2013-06-24T13:47:08Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > What’s so special about the right to one’s body? We strip other rights of criminals all the time, a criminal in solitary confinement doesn’t exactly have the right to free association, and your right to privacy ends (to a certain degree) when the state issues a search warrant. We reserve plenty of right to restrict the right to bear arms of dangerous felons, and rightly so. > > Obviously in this case it’s hairy because of timing windows, provability, and so on, which makes it impossible in real life. But on a philosophical level, we strip, limit, and mutate the rights of criminals all the time. Why can’t we decide (again, on a purely philosophical level) to limit the right to one’s body in cases where that right was abused (and, in fact, actively violated for the victim) by the criminal? The STATE may strip criminals of some of their rights. Victims may not. And medical care is a right that even the State does not strip criminals of. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/53 "2013-06-24T13:55:51Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > More importantly, courts have already ruled on many situations exactly like this, and other similar cases. Most times, a man will be held responsible for non-biological kids he had claimed at one point even if he later realizes it’s not his. Additionally, male rape victims have been made to pay child support. Which helps demonstrate the moral bankruptcy of our version of child support. Personally I’d consider it morally justified for the raped male to simply kill the woman in question, since the State has abrogated the social contract in this situation leaving him on his own. The only justice he’ll ever have is what he makes on his own, and he’ll likely be punished less for killing her than just sitting there and taking it if he kills her before she gives birth and while still underaged. The perverse incentives in this setup are huge. ---
**Author:** ![JackieLikesVariety](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackielikesvariety/32/296_2.png) [@JackieLikesVariety](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JackieLikesVariety)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/54 "2013-06-24T14:00:11Z")
> [@](#): > > This may not be the dumbest OP I’ve read on this cite, but it’s close to it. I re-read it to be sure and it is, actually, THE dumbest. wow. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/55 "2013-06-24T14:05:16Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Which helps demonstrate the moral bankruptcy of our version of child support. > > Personally I’d consider it morally justified for the raped male to simply kill the woman in question, since the State has abrogated the social contract in this situation leaving him on his own. The only justice he’ll ever have is what he makes on his own, and he’ll likely be punished less for killing her than just sitting there and taking it if he kills her before she gives birth and while still underaged. The perverse incentives in this setup are huge. Only in your twisted delusional fantasy world would this be an incentive to kill someone. The fact that you think murder is morally justifiable in this case says a lot a about you, but little that anyone with a passing acquaintance with your posting history would be surprised by. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/56 "2013-06-24T14:08:54Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > Only in your twisted delusional fantasy world would this be an incentive to kill someone. Hardly. The incentive is obvious. Less punishment by the State, and the only way to get anything resembling justice. > [@brickbacon](#): > > The fact that you think murder is morally justifiable in this case says a lot a about you, but little that anyone with a passing acquaintance with your posting history would be surprised by. And you think that it’s OK to punish underaged boys for being raped. That’s a throwback to things like forcing women to marry their rapists. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/57 "2013-06-24T14:21:18Z")
I have an image of a woman raping the underaged son of an extremely wealthy person, getting pregnant and then giving birth and demanding child support. What then? I followed the “Baby M” surrogate mother trial very closely, it happening in my back yard. Basically, Mary Beth Whitehead agreed to be artifically inseminated with the sperm of William Stern, give birth and give the child to Stern and his wife, allowing her to adopt the baby. After Whitehead gave birth, she decided to keep her daughter, put her husband’s name on the birth certificate, and said in effect to the Sterns “Go away, _I_ had a baby.” When the Sterns got a court order demanding she turn the child over to them, she fled to Florida and spent two months living with friends and in motels, eluding the law. In two phone calls, she threatened to kill the child and to falsely accuse Stern of sexually molesting her 10 year daughter. Anyway, the original contract was held up by the lower court, except for the part where Stern could force Whitehead to have an abortion The court ruled that only the pregnant woman could determine whether she would have an abortion. ---
**Author:** ![OurLordPeace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/e8c25b/32.png) [@OurLordPeace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OurLordPeace)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/58 "2013-06-24T14:23:35Z")
Fetuses are aborted, not children. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/59 "2013-06-24T14:24:38Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Hardly. The incentive is obvious. Less punishment by the State, and the only way to get anything resembling justice. Killing an innocent child for the crime of his mother solely to avoid child support is just? > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And you think that it’s OK to punish underaged boys for being raped. That’s a throwback to things like forcing women to marry their rapists. What kind of society do we live in where taking care of your child is _punishment_? Yes, it can be a financial burden, but the intent is not to punish anyone. You and others keep missing the point I (and the courts) are making- **child support is for the child**. It’s not about fairness, justice, or any other lofty ideal. It’s about how to best ensure that a child is taken care of. All of this back and forth about how “unjust” it is for the victim is beside the point. Why should you punish the child because of what his parent did? Also keep in mind that this child support probably wouldn’t even go to the rapist mom since she would likely be in jail. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755/60 "2013-06-24T14:30:48Z")
The anti-abortion crowd point out that the “child” should not be killed for what the “parent” did. Indeed, in 31 states rapists can claim paternal rights. Amusing gender equality, rapists should also have maternal rights. Image a 14 year old “father” having to take the baby to prison every week for visitation with the mother. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aborting-the-children-of-male-rape-victims/661755.md?page=4)