# Abortion and child support **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 13, 2010, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985 "2010-12-13T15:24:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2010, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/361 "2010-12-18T16:20:04Z")
I think your views on men and women may not be as universal as you think they are. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2010, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/362 "2010-12-18T20:37:59Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Not nearly as unfair as what you propose but you won’t face that in this thread. Really, you think it’s fair to reward women for being too lazy to search for a man that actually wants to be a father before getting pregnant. The world has too many unwanted kids. We need to start concentrating on reducing this number. Every child born should be a wanted child with a family committed to its willing being, not unwilling draftees. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2010, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/363 "2010-12-18T20:39:25Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Where I come from, sex is a fun shared activity that everyone enjoys, not some adversarial gender battle field. And sex should remain that fun shared activity that everyone enjoys, not financial extortion. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/364 "2010-12-19T00:29:04Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Really, you think it’s fair to reward women for being too lazy to search for a man that actually wants to be a father before getting pregnant. The world has too many unwanted kids. You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. How are women being rewarded by having _unwanted_ children? In a thread in which men are complaining about the women they sleep with, one would think the obvious solution to their woes is for _them_ to be less lazy and practice more selectivity. Sign some pre-sex contracts, do something, anything. Instead, we get excuses to why anything other than orphaning kids is infeasible or unrealistic or too difficult (because apparently all women are snakes in the grass, right). Last I heard, indiscriminate promiscuity belonged to the province of men moreso than women. So instead of demanding women further tighten their chastity belts, how about we finally get around to calling men out for acting like stupid sluts? Sluts who are too stupid figure out how to stop impregnanting women with children that they don’t want. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/365 "2010-12-19T02:42:46Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. How are women being rewarded by having _unwanted_ children? > > In a thread in which men are complaining about the women they sleep with, one would think the obvious solution to their woes is for _them_ to be less lazy and practice more selectivity. Sign some pre-sex contracts, do something, anything. Instead, we get excuses to why anything other than orphaning kids is infeasible or unrealistic or too difficult (because apparently all women are snakes in the grass, right). > > Last I heard, indiscriminate promiscuity belonged to the province of men moreso than women. So instead of demanding women further tighten their chastity belts, how about we finally get around to calling men out for acting like stupid sluts? Sluts who are too stupid figure out how to stop impregnanting women with children that they don’t want. Forcing a man to pay for a child he never wanted that exists because of birth control failure (or deliberate sabotage) is rewarding a woman for having an unwanted child. The way child support laws are in the United States no pre-sex contact would be effective. Actually, I think it can be argued that unwilling, single fathers were being rather smart. They were not marrying these women. They were making a rather prominent statement that the relationship (if there even was one) meant nothing more than sex. Unfortunately, their partners refused to listen to the obvious, or more likely never intended the relationship to be casual and when they couldn’t get more permanent committment settled for getting money. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/366 "2010-12-19T02:56:54Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Actually, I think it can be argued that unwilling, single fathers were being rather smart. Great, so we can consider their child support obligation like a big ole National Merit Scholar pin. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/367 "2010-12-19T15:26:27Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Forcing a man to pay for a child he never wanted that exists because of birth control failure (or deliberate sabotage) is rewarding a woman for having an unwanted child. The way child support laws are in the United States no pre-sex contact would be effective. Actually, I think it can be argued that unwilling, single fathers were being rather smart. If siring unwanted children that they will be forced to support for 18 years, with women that they don’t want to marry and probably don’t even like all that much, counts as _smart_ in your book, then no wonder we’re in disagreement. Your definition of smart borders on my definition of slaw-jawed stupid. I find it cute when you say “birth control failure (or deliberate sabotage)” as if anywhere close to most unwanted pregnancies occur from mistakes or maliciousness. I’m fairly certain that most occur because the man opted not to protect himself. If he chooses to leave contraception all to the woman, he’s more than free to do that, but then, too, he can also cross the street without looking both ways based on the belief that all drivers should be paying attention. When unwanted consequences occur as a result of these choices, there is no argument in the book that could convince me that the man should not be held at least partially responsible. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/368 "2010-12-19T17:05:45Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Really, you think it’s fair to reward women for being too lazy to search for a man that actually wants to be a father before getting pregnant. The world has too many unwanted kids. We need to start concentrating on reducing this number. Every child born should be a wanted child with a family committed to its willing being, not unwilling draftees. Your bias is plainly revealed by the false inference that supporting a child you sired is somehow a “reward” for “lazy” women. It’s a ludicrous statement. I’ll say it one more time. We make our choices and our laws based on the realities of biology. It cannot be “fair” for everybody because of the unavoidable inequity of biology. What noble defenders of men like yourself suggest is merely a shift in the inequity to favor men, while being very unfair to women and more importantly, the only person who didn’t choose anything and is completely innocent, a newborn. As far as unwanted children go, you don’t propose any practical solutions for that. If you’re suggesting making women solely responsible will be an effective solution you’re ignoring the fact that it was already that way. Are you suggesting compelling women to have abortions or surrender the baby for adoption? Are you suggesting a legal limit on children being born? So, every child born should be a wanted child with a family dedicated to their well being huh? What a nice ideal. Do you suppose it’s been thought of before? Stating the obvious does nothing to deal with real life issues. You have no solutions and nothing equitable to offer. You’ve got an opinion based on bias and that’s all. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/369 "2010-12-19T21:47:33Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > What noble defenders of men like yourself suggest is merely a shift in the inequity to favor men, while being very unfair to women and more importantly, the only person who didn’t choose anything and is completely innocent, a newborn. First, off, I am a woman. And our society’s willlingness to shaft adults in order to pamper babies just sickens me. No wonder there are so many spoiled uncontrollable brats in the world. And it is not unfair to expect the person responsible for the child being in this world to pay for it. Having consentual sex should not be an excuse to leach money for 18 years. If a woman wants to be paid for sex, she can move where prostitution is legal. There is no excuse for adding to the population problem. > [@cosmosdan](#): > > As far as unwanted children go, you don’t propose any practical solutions for that. If you’re suggesting making women solely responsible will be an effective solution you’re ignoring the fact that it was already that way. Are you suggesting compelling women to have abortions or surrender the baby for adoption? Are you suggesting a legal limit on children being born? > > So, every child born should be a wanted child with a family dedicated to their well being huh? What a nice ideal. Do you suppose it’s been thought of before? Stating the obvious does nothing to deal with real life issues. You have no solutions and nothing equitable to offer. You’ve got an opinion based on bias and that’s all. Actually, what I propose would have the practical solution of reducing the unwanted children problem within in a few years as more women face the cold, hard reality that having a child without the consent of both parties means possibly relying on the old welfare safety net (which really isn’t a safety net at all) instead of drafting someone else to pay for their little resource sucker. I think a legal limit on children being born might be good idea actually. Compelling abortions wouldn’t bother me in the least though I think it could be easier done with a little subliminal pressure. Ideally what we should do is make having an unwanted, child that you can’t support such a disgraceful, socially stigimitized act that compulsion would not be needed. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/370 "2010-12-19T22:45:40Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Actually, what I propose would have the practical solution of reducing the unwanted children problem within in a few years as more women face the cold, hard reality that having a child without the consent of both parties means possibly relying on the old welfare safety net (which really isn’t a safety net at all) instead of drafting someone else to pay for their little resource sucker. If you want to see what your proposal looks like in practice, I invite you look at countries where parents either aren’t required to support their offspring or the laws are too weak to enforce. Go on, do some research. There’s no need to treat this like a theoretical. Your plan has a track record of epic failure that goes back thousands and thousands of years. The cold, hard reality is no closer than a slum in a 3rd world country, where there is neither welfare nor child support, and yet plenty of neglected, half-abandoned children litter the streets. It’s not a coincidence that countries that enjoy the lowest population growth, higher qualities of life, and not to mention, lower HIV prevalence are also the countries that hold men accountable for the offspring they create. Unlike societies where this is not the case, we’ve moved past blaming women for men’s behavior. We hold men accountable as parents, just as we do women. Take away that accountability and we’ll be living in hell, not a utopia like you naively suggest. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/371 "2010-12-19T23:19:24Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Compelling abortions wouldn’t bother me in the least though I think it could be easier done with a little subliminal pressure. Offering to shake a woman’s hand = something akin to rape for which men should be fired Forcing women to have abortions = good and righteous I don’t get it. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2010, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/372 "2010-12-19T23:31:31Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Offering to shake a woman’s hand = something akin to rape for which men should be fired > > Forcing women to have abortions = good and righteous > > I don’t get it. I just read that thread–the Orthodox Judaism/handshaking one. Wow… ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/373 "2010-12-20T00:57:31Z")
> [@villa](#): > > This again? > > Child support is the right of the child. If the mother chooses to abort, there is no child. If she does not, then the extant child has a right to be supported, both by the mother and the sperm donor. > > It really isn’t complicated, and it isn’t a big nasty conspiracy to screw men over. Well you’re not biased at all. “Mother” and “sperm donor” does not at all colour the argument does it? Why do we NEVER see the phrases “womb” and “father” in these threads? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/374 "2010-12-20T01:15:08Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > Well you’re not biased at all. > > “Mother” and “sperm donor” does not at all colour the argument does it? > > Why do we NEVER see the phrases “womb” and “father” in these threads? Since we’re kinda talking about people who don’t want the role of “father,” wouldn’t that be weird? They are saying they didn’t choose to be fathers, so they aren’t fathers and shouldn’t owe child support, so it makes a lot more sense for them to be “sperm donors” than for the women who are choosing to carry a child to term to be “wombs.” ETA: Though I would tend to prefer just using “father” and “mother.” ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/375 "2010-12-20T03:06:20Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Since we’re kinda talking about people who don’t want the role of “father,” wouldn’t that be weird? They are saying they didn’t choose to be fathers, so they aren’t fathers and shouldn’t owe child support, so it makes a lot more sense for them to be “sperm donors” than for the women who are choosing to carry a child to term to be “wombs.” > ETA: Though I would tend to prefer just using “father” and “mother.” Not that I disagree with you, but it does tend to colour the discussion just a little, and no matter what, if we see a woman with 4 children from 4 different fathers she doesn’t tend to come in for the same treatment. And I do agree with you, as “father” and “mother” . Just because a the father doesn’t want to be a daddy, doesn’t make him a “sperm donor” only. There could be a multitude of reasons why he doesn’t want the baby, which could arise out of his own sense of responsibility (as in, his life situation is not appropriate to be raising a baby). And I do agree that those that don’t want kids should just “keep it zipped”, but coming back to the OP, it doesn’t seem very fair that the woman gets the extra time to make the decision. Haivng sex is a joint decision, birth control is a shared responsibility, yet when it reaches the stage of a “bun in the oven” it becomes her right only. The thing is, I don’t have an just or equitable solution, other than to recognise that the decision to abort or not, in a perfect world would not be her decision only. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/376 "2010-12-20T03:20:11Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Since we’re kinda talking about people who don’t want the role of “father,” wouldn’t that be weird? They are saying they didn’t choose to be fathers, so they aren’t fathers and shouldn’t owe child support, so it makes a lot more sense for them to be “sperm donors” than for the women who are choosing to carry a child to term to be “wombs.” > ETA: Though I would tend to prefer just using “father” and “mother.” I didn’t use father because I don’t think men who attempt to avoid responsibility for their children deserve the word father. Father and mother imply a relationship and responsibility, as far as I am concerned. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/377 "2010-12-20T03:23:39Z")
> [@HRoark43](#): > > It’s obvious your motivations are based on your inability to feel sympathy for any man who is cheated simply because he is male. > > I will not bother to chase this headless goose that is your argument any further. What an absolute pathetic cop out. I have said nothing whatsoever that could lead you to think this - I haven’t commented on how a man who has been cheated on should feel about the person who cheated on him. All I have said is that the child didn’t cheat, and if the man’s relationship with his child is such that the moment he finds he doesn’t share DNA, he abandons any responsibility, that shows a lot about his character. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/378 "2010-12-20T04:56:06Z")
> [@villa](#): > > I didn’t use father because I don’t think men who attempt to avoid responsibility for their children deserve the word father. Father and mother imply a relationship and responsibility, as far as I am concerned. We seem to be talking at cross purposes. Trying not to bring a child into the world, when you know you are not is a position to take proper care of it. I don’t see that as “trying to avoid responsbililty”. Quite the reverse in fact. If the “sperm donor” had WANTED as child, then once it came decided “too hard” I would have little sympathy. however this is not the case we are (neccesarily) talking about. If the woman made the decision to have the baby, a positive decision against the wishes of the father, then shouldn’t she bear more responsibility than him? Let’s put it another way, a couple go looking at cars, boyfriend says “don’t want”, the girl says want. She signs up for a loan.\* Because he was there with her he “witesses” the loan. Later he becomes responsible for the payments - would that be fair? - Yeah, I know this can never happen in the real world, but please go with the hypothetical. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/379 "2010-12-20T05:33:06Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > Let’s put it another way, a couple go looking at cars, boyfriend says “don’t want”, the girl says want. She signs up for a loan.\* Because he was there with her he “witesses” the loan. Later he becomes responsible for the payments - would that be fair? > > - Yeah, I know this can never happen in the real world, but please go with the hypothetical. The only way that the situations could be analogous were if the man were to sign the loan and then decide later on that he wanted to walk away. In that case, he be just as liable as the woman. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/380 "2010-12-20T06:52:47Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > It pretty much does. The fact that an abortion (or birth) has long term effects on both parties is not the point of abortion rights. The point is that a person has the right to do what they want with their body. Since the woman is the only one who has the fetus inside her, she gets to choose what happens to it. And in the process she can make a pretty momentous decision about the father’s life. Letting fathers off the hook might result in more abortions or in more adoptions or even more single moms on welfare but that would still be her choice wouldn’t it? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985.md?page=20)