# 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:** 3
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/41 "2010-12-14T16:28:48Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > He made the choice to be a parent when he came. > > The money goes to his child that he decided to make and who he is responsible for. The fact that the money is administered by the child’s legal guardian or custodial parent is irrelevant, and none of the guy’s business. He does not get to shirk his repsonsibility to his children because he doesn’t like their mother. too bad. He shouldn’t have chosen to have a child with her then. I frankly cannot understand at all how so many men can show such utterly callous disregard for their own children. It’s sociopathic. Then why such a disparate number of mother as custodial parent? The only one bringing up shirking responsibility is you, you need to get past that. If she has a choice, so should he. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/42 "2010-12-14T16:30:42Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Then why such a disparate number of mother as custodial parent? What’s disparate about it? > [@](#): > > The only one bringing up shirking responsibility is you, you need to get past that. > If she has a choice, so should he. He does have a choice. His choice is made when he comes. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/43 "2010-12-14T16:32:32Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What’s disparate about it? > > He does have a choice. His choice is made when he comes. And hers isn’t? The disparate number of Father’s who want to be custodial parent but get by-passed daily in favor of the Mother. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/44 "2010-12-14T16:36:35Z")
The custody question is separate from the support one. Custody law needs to be reformed. The solution to its faults is not to permit non custodial parents to shirk on their financial responsibilities. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/45 "2010-12-14T16:40:17Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > And hers isn’t? No. She can terminate a pregnancy. That doesn’t involve his body. Yiou can say that’s not fair, but the biology isn’t fair. Once his sperm is in another person’s body, he loses any ownership of it. He is perfectly free not to come in a fertile woman’s vagina, but when he makes the choice to do that, he is making the choice to be a father and to assume the necssary responsibilities. > [@](#): > > The disparate number of Father’s who want to be custodial parent but get by-passed daily in favor of the Mother. Fathers can get shared custody, but this has nothing to do with their responsibilities anyway. They don’t get to abandon responsibility to their children just because a judge won’t award them sole custody. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/46 "2010-12-14T16:40:42Z")
> [@villa](#): > > The custody question is separate from the support one. Custody law needs to be reformed. The solution to its faults is not to permit non custodial parents to shirk on their financial responsibilities. Again, I am not talking about shirking responsibility but it goes hand in hand with the choice being given solely to the Mother. If the choice were made more fair, the custody thing wouldn’t be such a big deal. No one is advocating (at least not me as a Father of three) that Dad has no financial obligation to his kids. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/47 "2010-12-14T16:44:52Z")
The choice is not given solely to the mother. Men have just as much choice about becoming parents as women do, and it is trivially easy for them to avoid becoming fathers. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/48 "2010-12-14T16:46:19Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Then why isn’t her choice made at the same time the father’s choice is made? Because it’s better this way. Seriously, we lived with this alternate model, and it sucks. Back alley abortions, unwanted children, etc. We’ve considered the idea of letting a man off the hook for support (virtual abortion) and that sucks too. Kids would routinely be left without enough financial support, and women would be pressured to abort by finances alone. The model that sucks the least is what we’ve got. Women have freedom of choice, up to a point. Men have freedom of choice, just not as late as the ladies. Men and women, are both responsible to support living children, even if the women are usually the custodial parent. Yes, there are inequalities, but that’s life. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/49 "2010-12-14T17:01:48Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The choice is not given solely to the mother. Men have just as much choice about becoming parents as women do, and it is trivially easy for them to avoid becoming fathers. Haha, if it were ‘trivially easy’ there wouldn’t be near the number of unwed pregnancies in the US that there are. ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/50 "2010-12-14T17:14:18Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Because it’s better this way. > > We’ve considered the idea of letting a man off the hook for support (virtual abortion) and that sucks too. Kids would routinely be left without enough financial support, _and women would be pressured to abort by finances alone._ Snip, Italics mine. What, exactly, is wrong with that? If they cannot support a child then they should be taking measures as well to prevent pregnancy. Even accidental pregnancies should be terminated early if you are unable to bear the financial burden of a child. To so otherwise is just as abusive of the child’s right to support as a father’s money being absent. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/51 "2010-12-14T17:19:40Z")
So only mothers should be financially responsible for their children? ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/52 "2010-12-14T17:33:59Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > That hasn’t been my experience. IME, many men ONLY pay support because they have been ordered to, and think that if they’re no longer with the mother, then their kids are not entitled to any of their money. I have known or worked with probably a dozen men with sometimes sizable child support payments. I never once saw anything even approaching the archetypal dad paying child support because he had to but otherwise having no contact with the kids. Realistically, I think both the mom who has a kid only to collect child support and the total deadbeat absentee dad are both very rare in real life, fortunately, and couching the argument in those terms is distracting. In real life, the situation is more commonly two people who are in a difficult situation and trying to do the right thing, but who’s decision making process is heavily clouded by biology, tradition, society and maybe religion. The current system makes making a rational decision even harder. I recognize that the child support system is one solution to the problem, but I disagree that it is the only or the best solution. The notion that the alternative is supporting the family on government assistance is a false dichotomy-- ad-hoc quasi-families created by court order are not significantly better off than single parents. There are _plenty_ of families I know who are ostensibly supposed to be receiving child support but have to get government assistance nonetheless, even when dad is paying up. Like I said earlier, the man with means to support his children who does not do so voluntarily is by far the exception, not the rule. I’m all for having legal channels to apply for child support in certain circumstances (including when the child was planned and clearly wanted by both parties), but I don’t think it should be the default. I think the real reason why the compulsory child support system has persisted as our solution to indigent parenting is simply that it has the side-effect of enforcing traditionalist values (namely that sex is only for reproduction) which, IMHO, are incompatible with the values of a modern society. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/53 "2010-12-14T17:39:40Z")
> [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > What, exactly, is wrong with that? If they cannot support a child then they should be taking measures as well to prevent pregnancy. Even accidental pregnancies should be terminated early if you are unable to bear the financial burden of a child. Poor wording on my part, I’m sure financial issues are a common reason folks have for getting an abortion, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. The problem I have with virtual abortion is that the man’s choice to keep his wallet shut can have profound impact on the woman’s decision. While I think the man has a justified place in discussing how an abortion or birth will affect both their lives, a virtual abortion is a one sided hit. It’s just too much influence on what I think has to be the woman’s decision. ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/54 "2010-12-14T17:41:11Z")
> [@villa](#): > > Yes. > > Up for debate, but fundamentally irrelevant to the question posed in the OP, unless one is arguing a man has no obligation to provide support to his child. In which case I would argue that the term “man” is no longer appropriate. Well, look. “Child support” is a social construct. How it can be a right is beyond me, and is certainly not the absolute you’re making it out to be. I could maybe agree that a child has a right to “nurture and care conducive to a healthy life” or somesuch, but that does not necessarily equate with “financial support from non-custodial parent.” And, it is most definitely relevant to the OP, because despite what you seem to want to pretend, there is more than one perspective on this. If you assume that a man must provide support to his genetic offspring in all circumstances then yes, that fact answers the OP. If, though, one thinks there are situations in which that might not be true, then one needs to come up with a different set of criteria for deciding these things other than, “because you put your dick in her.” > [@villa](#): > > If my son was being raised to hate me, that would be disgusting. And I would be resentful of that. But I would deal with that in a separate way to starving my child, because, oddly enough, my child wouldn’t be the one at blame there. Get real. Is anyone talking about starvation? Unless your assertation is that if all the non-custodial parents out there dropped dead their children would starve, then over-the-top statements like that sound like angry fear-mongering. No one is suggesting we starve children. FTR, in the case of the OP, my answer is, “he has to pay because simply not wanting a kid is no excuse. If it were, all children born out of wedlock would be able to be abandoned by their fathers at the drop of a hat; ‘oh, I asked her to get an abortion and she wouldn’t, so, um, I shouldn’t have to help raise the kid.’ Not a reasonable way to form policy, IMHO.” ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/55 "2010-12-14T17:42:26Z")
I agree, but I also think the present system grants the mother too much influence. ETA: I agree with **Cheesesteak** , that is. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/56 "2010-12-14T17:50:27Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > While I think the man has a justified place in discussing how an abortion or birth will affect both their lives, a virtual abortion is a one sided hit. It’s just too much influence on what I think has to be the woman’s decision. Why should a woman have an unconditional unilateral veto, but not the man? I agree that the man shouldn’t be able to make decisions about what happens in the woman’s body so he shouldn’t be able to force an abortion, but once the kid is out there’s no inherent reason why the woman should have 100% of the power to decide whether both are going to be financially, emotionally and legally responsible for the kid for the next 18+ years when a perfectly workable solution exists in adoption. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/57 "2010-12-14T17:56:38Z")
> [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > Snip, Italics mine. > > What, exactly, is wrong with that? If they cannot support a child then they should be taking measures as well to prevent pregnancy. Even accidental pregnancies should be terminated early if you are unable to bear the financial burden of a child. To so otherwise is just as abusive of the child’s right to support as a father’s money being absent. Of course. If it’s “a parasite” “bloodclot” and a “clump of cells” why should there be any problems with it? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/58 "2010-12-14T18:03:00Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > Why should a woman have an unconditional unilateral veto, but not the man? The man does have that veto. He can exercise it by not coming in a woman’s vagina. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/59 "2010-12-14T18:06:13Z")
Yes, but a woman has _two_. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2010, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985/60 "2010-12-14T18:09:45Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The man does have that veto. He can exercise it by not coming in a woman’s vagina. I didn’t realize withdrawl was a 100% effective contraceptive method. I reiterate: > [@](#): > > I think the real reason why the compulsory child support system has persisted as our solution to indigent parenting is simply that it has the side-effect of enforcing traditionalist values (namely that sex is only for reproduction) which, IMHO, are incompatible with the values of a modern society. If you’re saying that sex should only be for reproduction and paying 18 years of child support is a man’s punishment for fornication, just come out and say it. Otherwise you have to admit that sex without intent to start a family does occur and that no contraception method is 100% reliable. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-and-child-support/563985.md?page=4)