# Abortion for Men (redux) now "Roe v. Wade for Men" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 9, 2009, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186 "2009-06-09T04:22:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/281 "2009-06-11T00:04:04Z")
I don’t know the percentage of reversibility, but I do know that it isn’t sterilization. It doesn’t stop the production of sperm cells, it just cuts the line before it gets to the seminal fluid. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/282 "2009-06-11T00:07:15Z")
IMO arguing that men should have the same choices as women when it comes to parenthood is a denial of biological reality. They don’t and they can’t and there’s just no changing that. It’s like complaining that people who live closer to the equator get an unfair advantage when it comes to warm weather. I’ve never seen a suggestion for a solution that didn’t replace one problem with a worse one. That’s no solution at all. ---
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/283 "2009-06-11T00:11:10Z")
And of course, the only real question is what’s best for the child, not what the fathers think is “fair.” ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/284 "2009-06-11T00:25:56Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > And of course, the only real question is what’s best for the child, not what the fathers think is “fair.” That’s not the question until the child is born. This subject covers more than that. I think it has to be divided into three parts. Sex and conception. Pregnancy, and then if carried to term, the third person that needs to be considered, the infant. The only time when it’s equal is in the sex and conception portion. After that the biological differences and the third person play their role in determining what most fair and just for all concerned. It won’t be and can’t be equal. ---
**Author:** ![ManiacMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b782af/32.png) [@ManiacMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ManiacMan)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/285 "2009-06-11T01:25:24Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I’ve never heard that sterilization is reversible. Or that there couldn’t ever be medical complications that prevented it from being reversible… > > But DUDE. “Why should the woman get herself sterilized? The man would already be…besides it would be by CHOICE. If a guy doesn’t want to be a father than why the fuck is he running around with such a risk hanging over his head?” How can you not see the **massive** double standard here? You are requiring the **man** to get sterilized, or it’s all his fault - but the woman? Naah. She doesn’t have to do anything! It’s not her fault regardless - it’s the man’s! > > You are practically _defining_ double standard. A _single_ standard would be to say “If you don’t get sterilized, man or woman, you have to let the child be born and then pay to raise it if that happens.” But saying that only men should be expected to get sterilized, and claiming that’s _not_ a double standard? Good lord! I don’t think I said anywhere that it would be **required**. What I said was that if a man doesn’t want to have a kid he should get a vasectomy. Not a legal decree, but a way to just cut the shit and take matters in his own hand. I have heard it is reversible, but it is kind of a big deal. However, not as big as a deal as a woman getting her sterilization reversed. I just though it would be easier if the man stepped up to the plate. ---
**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 11, 2009, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/286 "2009-06-11T01:59:31Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > And of course, the only real question is what’s best for the child, not what the fathers think is “fair.” Wrong. Children are not of such overriding importance that they reduce men to the status of inanimate objects. They are not some sort of higher order of being, like humans compared to rats. They deserve consideration, but so do men. If the position “screw the men, the children are all that matter” is moral, then so is the position “screw the children, it’s the men that matter”. Men deserve to be regarded as more than exploitable resources. And I’d like to point out that half of those oh-so-important children will grow up to be men too, so your position isn’t really in their interest either. ---
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/287 "2009-06-11T02:37:20Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > No, you got it exactly right. And that is why, if for some strange reason our offspring began growing in incubators when we didn’t intend them to, we would have the choice to “terminate” that growth, based on exactly the factors that SCOTUS cited. And I’m still waiting for you to address the question I posed to you and **Kobal** earlier. It’s a really simple yes or no question. If men were the ones to get pregnant instead of women, do you still think the law would deny males abortion rights but grant them to women? You seem to be arguing biology has little or nothing to do with why women have rights in this arena that men do not have. But this is such a ludicrous idea that I’m reluctant to think you really believe this. When it is argued how unfair it is that women that are allowed to control whether a child is born or not but men are not, the unspoken implication is that society can actually do something about this unfairness, as if this is a wrong that should be corrected because it is based on arbitrary criteria. But this could not be further from the truth. If we accept that: 1. women get pregnant while men do not, 2. women should be permited to have an abortion should they choose, 3)) men should not coerce or force a woman to undergo painful medical procedures against her will, and 3. mothers and fathers are equally responsible in the eyes of the law for the offspring they create and ethically responsible for taking actions to prevent their gametes from causing unwanted pregnancies… … then why do we keep seeing people whine about what women can get away with as opposed to what men can’t? The persistence of this lament almost makes me think some people would prefer that abortion be illegal, just so that things are “fair” between the sexes. Of course that would be a lose lose proposition, but hey, at least those sperm-stealing hussies who put holes in condoms would no longer have an advantage over the poor men who got tricked into sleeping with them. Yay, justice for all! ---
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/288 "2009-06-11T02:42:25Z")
So is there any reason why this negotiating cannot happen _before_ sex? I have no problem with two people agreeing that they don’t want to have a child, and making something legally binding out of it. People should have the right to make a legal contract spelling out child support issues before sex. I do have a problem with the idea that you have a “right” to do whatever you want, and then “opt out” the moment things get complicated. If you want to “opt out,” you ought to do that before you start sticking your dick in her. By the time the woman is pregnant, the damage is done. Don’t even begin to tell me it’s fair for you to sign a form and walk away. It’s like setting off bottle rockets, and then arguing that should a fire break out, you should have the “right” to decline responsiblity as long as you do it withing the first ten minutes of it happening. After all, fires are easy to put out when they are small, right? ---
**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 11, 2009, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/289 "2009-06-11T03:00:42Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > … then why do we keep seeing people whine about what women can get away with as opposed to what men can’t? Because women can get away with a lot of things that men can’t, of course. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The persistence of this lament almost makes me think some people would prefer that abortion be illegal, just so that things are “fair” between the sexes. Of course that would be a lose lose proposition, but hey, at least those sperm-stealing hussies who put holes in condoms would no longer have an advantage over the poor men who got tricked into sleeping with them. Yay, justice for all! No, that would be injustice for both, also known as cutting off your nose to spite your face. The “persistence of this lament” is due to the simple fact that men don’t like being treated unfairly. Shocking, I know. > [@even\_sven](#): > > So is there any reason why this negotiating cannot happen _before_ sex? I have no problem with two people agreeing that they don’t want to have a child, and making something legally binding out of it. People should have the right to make a legal contract spelling out child support issues before sex. That sounds like a great way for a man to make sure that he doesn’t HAVE any sex. > [@even\_sven](#): > > I do have a problem with the idea that you have a “right” to do whatever you want, and then “opt out” the moment things get complicated. If you want to “opt out,” you ought to do that before you start sticking your dick in her. By the time the woman is pregnant, the damage is done. Don’t even begin to tell me it’s fair for you to sign a form and walk away. That’s known as the “The slut should have kept her legs shut” argument when applied to women. The argument that men should be coldly rational about sex doesn’t work. Both because men simply aren’t, and because if they WERE they simply wouldn’t have sex at all with women under our present laws. ---
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/290 "2009-06-11T03:54:57Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > That sounds like a great way for a man to make sure that he doesn’t HAVE any sex. Mmmhmm. You understand exactly whats happening. **Problem:** If I tell this woman that if she gets pregnant I’m not going to have anything to do with her, she won’t want to have sex with me. It turns out that women are generally not interested in the kinds of guys who would leave a pregnant lover high and dry. And it’s generally a turn off to say “Look, if you have my kid I don’t want to have anything to do with it, and I really don’t care if it suffers in poverty or not. My personal comfort is the much more important to me than my own child, much less some lady with the bad luck to get knocked up.” Hmmmm… **Solution:** AHA! If I don’t have to tell her that I’m the kind of guy who’d abandon her and my kid if trouble comes up until _after_ I’ve had sex, she won’t say no! Why, there ought to be a law! The reason why you don’t want to do these negotiations before sex is that it would hurt your chances of getting sex. You’d rather not tell your partner what kind of guy you are until after you’ve already gotten what you want. You’d like to maintain the illusion of the social contract that you act like a responsible adult when you have kid, because it serves you well. But you’d like to have the legal option not to actually have to do that. Well, boo hoo. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/291 "2009-06-11T03:57:26Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > And I’m still waiting for you to address the question I posed to you and **Kobal** earlier. It’s a really simple yes or no question. > > If men were the ones to get pregnant instead of women, do you still think the law would deny males abortion rights but grant them to women? Hypotheticals are one thing, nonsense is another. > [@](#): > > When it is argued how unfair it is that women that are allowed to control whether a child is born or not but men are not, the unspoken implication is that society can actually do something about this unfairness, Be accurate in your representations and you will get a better response. The unfairness is **not** about the control of the existence of the child. If a pregnant woman wishes to go through with her pregnancy and give birth, no one, and definitely not me, is bitching about her having the right to do that unimpeded. If she wants to parent that child after it is born, I have no quarrel with that, either. She is also absolutely entitled to not give birth to that child if she doesn’t want to. The court that declared she has that right clearly stated that it understood that she may wish to exercise that right because of a number of factors that have nothing to do with the fact that she is the one who carries it in her body. Women have a right to make these reproductive decisions for themselves, decisions based on factors both pre and POST birth, and I support all of that. My quarrel is with the fact that HER decisions can be imposed on HIM as well. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > If we accept that: > > > > 1. women get pregnant while men do not, > > Accepted. > > > [@](#): > > > > 1. women should be permited to have an abortion should they choose, > > Accepted. > > > [@](#): > > > > 3)) men should not coerce or force a woman to undergo painful medical procedures against her will, and > > Accepted > > > [@](#): > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > 1. mothers and fathers are equally responsible in the eyes of the law for the offspring they create > > > > I accept that this is a fact, and it is this fact I think is unfair and should be changed, in the way and for the reasons I have stated many times. > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > and ethically responsible for taking actions to prevent their gametes from causing unwanted pregnancies… > > > [@](#): > > > > … then why do we keep seeing people whine about what women can get away with as opposed to what men can’t? The persistence of this lament almost makes me think some people would prefer that abortion be illegal, just so that things are “fair” between the sexes. Of course that would be a lose lose proposition, but hey, at least those sperm-stealing hussies who put holes in condoms would no longer have an advantage over the poor men who got tricked into sleeping with them. Yay, justice for all! [/QUOTE] Why do you feel the need to make things up? No one has said that abortion should be illegal to make it fair. There’s many pages outlining exactly what we think would be fair: men should be given the right relinquish their parental rights and responsibilities within a short period of time after learning they have helped conceive. Period. Simple. You don’t need to invent new things to argue against. Just deal directly and honestly with the ideas that are being put forth. And in case you missed it, it seems to be more true than not that women can give their children up after birth as well, but men cannot. So women have pretty much all the choices for everyone, and I think that is horribly unjust AND leads to some women using that power to manipulate their relationships with men, leading to the conception and birth of more children than would otherwise be the case. And let’s not forget, I’m a woman. ---
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/292 "2009-06-11T04:06:29Z")
She’s not imposing any decision on him. He made his decision before she did. He agreed to be a father when he came. ---
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/293 "2009-06-11T04:36:41Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > That’s known as the “The slut should have kept her legs shut” argument when applied to women. Having an abortion _is_ taking responsibilty. And FWIW, it’s not exactly a walk in the park. Not taking responsibility would be leaving your kid for your husband to raise and then taking off. Or leaving it in a trashcan or something. In those cases, yeah, you should keep your legs shut. > [@](#): > > The argument that men should be coldly rational about sex doesn’t work. Both because men simply aren’t, and because if they WERE they simply wouldn’t have sex at all with women under our present laws. Funny. You guys manage to control yourselves when AIDS is the issue. I bet if you moved to South Africa, you’d suddenly become _very_ coldly rational about who you have sex with. And are you saying that there are no sane men who would be willing to support their children? That no sane man says “Well, if it comes to that, we’ll find a way to work it out?” and actually does that? No sane men that are in the kinds of relationships where if things go wrong they work it out together? Or just that no sane man is capable of keeping himself to partners that he trusts not to poke holes in condoms? ---
**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:** [June 11, 2009, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/294 "2009-06-11T04:55:59Z")
> [@Renee](#): > > I basically agree with the OP, but I don’t get this “forcing women to put the babies up for adoption” thing. I think if the dad wants out, he should be able to get out, but why should he be able to force the woman to give up the child? Once he’s opted out, he gets no more say in anything to do with the child, right? What am I missing? And regarding more kids in foster care, I believe, at least in the US, babies up for adoption get snapped up pretty quickly. I can see this leading to more adoptions, but very much doubt that there is suddenly going to be such a glut of newborn babies that they languish in foster care for years. This. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/295 "2009-06-11T04:59:18Z")
> [@ManiacMan](#): > > I didn’t say to stick a hot poker up his dick, did I? > > From what I understand the procedure is reversible. As someone else said, in slightly less than half of men, vasectomy can be reversed and pregancy achieved in two years. Considering that normal fertility sees 85 out of 100 couples pregnant in a year, this is a significant reduction in fertility, even for those for whom the reversal is considered successful. [cite](http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/vasectomy-reversal/MY00326). Plus, which I think no one’s mentioned yet, vasectomy on demand is still a pipe dream. Young men who request it are told to wait, often years, before they can find a doctor to consent to the procedure. The latest article I read about this phenomenon of young men seeking vasectomy, and their troubles finding a doctor willing to do it, was in the Chicago Sun-Times about a year ago, but if you google, you can find more. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > A vasectomy isn’t sterilization, and it _is_ reversible. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I don’t know the percentage of reversibility, but I do know that it isn’t sterilization. It doesn’t stop the production of sperm cells, it just cuts the line before it gets to the seminal fluid. Where did you get that definition of sterilization, **Diogenes**? > [@](#): > > [Definitions of sterilization on the Web](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=iWc&defl=en&q=define:sterilization&ei=1IswSrHkNYTAMtiD_ccH&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title) (edited by me to eliminate microbiology definitions): > > # the act of making an organism barren or infertile (unable to reproduce) > > # Sterilization (also spelled sterilisation) is a surgical technique leaving a male or female unable to reproduce. It is a method of birth control. > > A procedure to permanently prevent an organism from reproducing; an instance of a sterilization procedure > > # sterilize - make infertile; “in some countries, people with genetically transmissible disabilites are sterilized” > > wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn > > # sterilized - made infertile > > wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn > > # sterilize - To deprive a male or female the ability to procreate > > # Surgical methods of birth control that are intended to be permanent. These are: blocking of the fallopian tubes for women or the vas deferens in men). Known as tubal ligation and vasectomy > > [www.sex-ed101.org/s\_terms/s.html](http://www.sex-ed101.org/s_terms/s.html) > > # a surgery performed to make a person incapable of reproducing > [@](#): > > [Definitions of vasectomy on the Web](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&defl=en&q=define:vasectomy&ei=oYwwSv3sCZi0Nef50LYH&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title) (edited and portions bolded by me): > > # surgical procedure that removes all or part of the vas deferens (usually as a means of sterilization); is sometimes reversible > > wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn > > # Vasectomy is a surgical procedure in which the vasa deferentia of a man are cut for the purpose of **sterilization**. > > [Vasectomy - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasectomy) > > # The surgical separation of both vas deferens. A procedure used for birth control/ **sterilization**. > > www.conceptfert.com.au/glossv.htm > > # operation to make a man \*\*sterile \*\*by cutting the vas deferens, thus preventing passage of sperm from the testes to the prostate > > [Prostate Cancer Essay Examples - Only The Best to Spark Your Inspiration! | WOWESSAYS™](http://www.prostate-cancer.org/resource/gloss_vz.html) > > # An operation to prevent pregnancy in which a portion of a man’s vas deferens is cut in order to prevent sperm from leaving through the penis. Also called male **sterilisation**. > > nzdl.sadl.uleth.ca/cgi-bin/library > > # in males, the surgical removal of part of the sperm duct (vas deferens) to induce infertility > > [womenshealth.about.com/library/blmeno7.htm](http://womenshealth.about.com/library/blmeno7.htm) > > # a surgical means of birth control which interrupts the process of sperm transport at the vas deferens. > > [www.drpadron.com/glossary.html](http://www.drpadron.com/glossary.html) > > # Outpatient surgical procedure for males to induce **sterility**. > > [www.menopause.org/glossary.aspx](http://www.menopause.org/glossary.aspx) > > # (vas-EK-toe-mee) An operation to cut or tie off the two tubes that carry sperm out of the testicles. > > [www.seniormag.com/conditions/cancer/cancerglossary/v.htm](http://www.seniormag.com/conditions/cancer/cancerglossary/v.htm) > > # The operation to \*\*sterilize \*\*a man, in which the vasa deferentia are cut and tied back. It is usually performed under a local anesthetic. > > [ivf-infertility.com | Glossary | V W X Y Z](http://www.ivf-infertility.com/help/glossary/vwxyz.php) > > # An elective male \*\*sterilization \*\*procedure, it involves cutting and tying off the ends of the vas deferens to keep sperm from traveling to the ejaculatory duct. > > [www.sbivf.com/glossary.htm](http://www.sbivf.com/glossary.htm) > > # Tying, cutting, or burning of a portion of the vas deferens, thereby stopping passage of sperm movement; causes \*\*sterilization \*\*in the man. > > navalhospitaljax.med.navy.mil/expecting/terms.asp > > # a \*\*sterilization \*\*process that removes a male cat’s sperm transporting connective tubes. > > [Feline and Cat Food Glossary](http://cats.kenanderson.net/html/glossary.html) > > # A permanent method of birth control. In women, sterilization is done through a procedure called tubal ligation (tying off the fallopian tubes) and in men it is called a vasectomy (surgical resectioning of the vas deferens). … > > [www.pms-sos.com/scripts/pages/en/glossary.php](http://www.pms-sos.com/scripts/pages/en/glossary.php) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Lurker\_Above](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dc4da7/32.png) [@The\_Lurker\_Above](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Lurker_Above)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/296 "2009-06-11T05:29:59Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > And of course, the only real question is what’s best for the child, not what the fathers think is “fair.” People always _say_ this; but the idea of ‘what’s fair’ plays a very important role in the legal system. If a dirt poor man gets a woman pregnant and wants nothing to do with the child; the mother will get a rather small child support cheque. It would be far more in the child’s interest to open up tax rolls and randomly choose a man with high income, declare _him_ the father and get a much larger support cheque. We don’t this because it would be grossly unfair. The point of this absurd hypothetical is just to point out you can’t wave away all questions of justice or fairness. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/297 "2009-06-11T07:16:26Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > She’s not imposing any decision on him. He made his decision before she did. He agreed to be a father when he came. I’m starting to think that Dio has serious daddy issues. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/298 "2009-06-11T07:25:06Z")
And by the way, Dio, if your assertion were true, you would have to be advocating that abortion be made illegal for exactly the same reason: she “agrees” to be a mother when she decides to have sex. And, again, this is so because the legal basis upon which women have had their right to an abortion acknowledged is their right to privacy, which SCOTUS interpreted to mean a woman’s right to her reproductive choices, in that having a baby could be burdensome on her psychologically, emotionally, socially, financially and of course, physically. It’s a bitch when you hold two positions that pretty much cancel each other out, I understand that it leads to unfortunate things like sticking your fingers in your ears and saying lalalala I can’t hear you. My sympathies with your struggle. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 10:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/299 "2009-06-11T10:10:14Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > That’s not the question until the child is born. This subject covers more than that. > > I think it has to be divided into three parts. Sex and conception. Pregnancy, and then if carried to term, the third person that needs to be considered, the infant. > > The only time when it’s equal is in the sex and conception portion. After that the biological differences and the third person play their role in determining what most fair and just for all concerned. It won’t be and can’t be equal. On this we agree. Which is why the situation of the guy in the OP is unfair (assuming he’s not lying, obviously) : during or before the sex and conception portion, the woman told him she’d terminate an accidental pregnancy. And then she changes her mind, or was lying all along. There’s gotta be a disincentive for this scenario - it’s unfair to everyone, including the kid. No good comes of it. [QUOTE=you with the face] And I’m still waiting for you to address the question I posed to you and Kobal earlier. It’s a really simple yes or no question. If men were the ones to get pregnant instead of women, do you still think the law would deny males abortion rights but grant them to women? You seem to be arguing biology has little or nothing to do with why women have rights in this arena that men do not have. But this is such a ludicrous idea that I’m reluctant to think you really believe this. [/QUOTE] I think it’s beyond evidence that the ultimate choice goes to the one getting pregnant. I acknowledged that biology was the reason women got the ultimate, uncontestable decision. But the decision is not just about “controlling what happens inside me”, it’s also a reproductive choice, and a motherhood pick. And that is not a hand-waivable side effect, considering it’s specifically mentionned in text by SCOTUS. Had their decision been “it’s about immediate body control”, they would have said “it’s about immediate body control”. They didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2009, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186/300 "2009-06-11T12:36:47Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > men and women can use contraceptives. > > Abortion isn’t about contraception. Abortion is about a woman’s rights over her own body. That guy had his rights not to be a dad when he made the decision about using a condom. > > It takes two to tango and if you can’t own up to your 30 seconds of fun then you should be neutered. +1 Though I would like to stick up for the guys here, condoms can break or be defective. Forcing a guy to get a vasectomy is not the answer either until they come up with one that is 100% reversible. We can not force the guy to freeze his sperm on the off chance he might want to reproduce in the future. There i also a cultural bias against vasectomies in several cultures - men do not want to be seen as shooting blanks…it emasculates them. [fwiw, as i have mentioned on here, i had 2 pregnancies while exercising birth control. The pill for the first one, taken correctly and while perfectly healthy and not on any meds or herbal substances, and once with the pill and a condom, also while healthy and not on meds or herbal substances. The rubber broke.] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-for-men-redux-now-roe-v-wade-for-men/499186.md?page=16)