I never said he shouldn’t be told, only that he doesn’t necessarily have a legal right to be told. There are circumstances, as I mentioned before, under which it would be dangerous to the woman to notify the father.
I also think it’s his own responsibility to be aware of the results of his own orgasms. It is HIS responsibility to find out if he’s gotten a woman pregnant.
yosemite-
Why should men have to make heroic efforts to keep track of their mates if they don’t want to miss out on their child?
I don’t want to require a heroic effort I just want a reasonable one. I bet if she gives a name and an address our government would be able to track him down.
Fine. Do you have a cite that informing the father that he has a child would violate the mothers patient/doctor privilege?
Ok. That makes much more sense. I was afraid that you were saying a man who has sex and then doesn’t keep in contact with a woman didn’t have the right to know he had become a father. But, as long as long as he hasn’t moved, his phone number hasn’t changed and no contact info at all has changed then the woman should feel obligated to contact the man and inform him.
I agree that if some guy is more or less “running” and there is no way to contact him to let him know, then he can’t bitch when he does find out. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Maybe you’re just slow on the uptake, so I’ll explain this to you again. Baby Safe Haven has something to do with the fact that women have a myriad of after-the-fact options in order to avoid actual motherhood or even just financial motherhood that are not available to men.
While it may be technically legal for a father to drop the kid off there in order to not be a father, it’s certainly far less practically possible, especially without the knowledge of the mother. Which makes it, in reality, an option that the mother has and the father does not.
Therefore, it is an example of options other than parenthood after a pregnancy occurs that are available, large scale, to women that are not available to men
Do you understand now?
wring, I think the earlier reference was to the very similiar Baby Richard case.
No, you can’t “extend” threads in a vacuum, and no, I am not saying that you set out to “extend” threads. But your style and manner are such that threads just get extended. A lot.
Drop it with Safe Haven already. It’s a fucking red herring and a distraction from the real issues. It’s bullshit.
All of them? I hardly think so.
But, in the interest of not further extending this thread by arguing with you, as you have set yourself to starting an argument with me that is not relating to the general discourse of the thread, any further accusations from you will not merit a response.
In reality, the only reason it’s less practically possible for the father to do this than the mother is the unavoidable sexism of the fact that the baby grows in the woman. In reality, neither person has any interest in doing this in 99.99999% of all cases. So it’s not fucking relevant. Try, for a change, talking about situations that actually occur in real life instead of your fucked-up fantasy world where all women are comic-book villains interested only in screwing over men.
Apparently you don’t dispute the fact that women have after-the-fact options and men don’t.
The only thing you do dispute is my opinion that men should have them. Since I am not going to change my mind, you may continue to call me ‘fucked up’ and say that I live in a ‘fantasy world’ in my absence. Congratulations, you win. I’m out of this thread.
No its a legal way for the mother of a child to circumvent the rights of the father.
And here comes if the if the father wants the child he can go to court. Continuing to completely ignore the reality of the situation.
You’re stupid.
I win!!
Men DO have options. Any man who wants custody only has to say so.
Don’t let the doorknob hit you in the ass.
Giraffe - yep, had I known who treis was, and that they’d be participating, I certainly would have upped my prediction.
catsix - I don’t consider all of my opponents “loony assed” (though I don’t recall using that term to describe you - not denying it mind you, but it wouldn’t have been my first choice of adjectives), so a simple disagreement doesn’t elicit the sort of observations I’ve made about you. Why I didn’t include tries is 'cause I don’t recall encountering them before.
why I didn’t include Dio - well, in this thread, certainly, he’s not attempting to force only one side of the sexual encounter to have consequences. You are. And you continue to ignore it. no matter what happens, the woman has consequences. She either endures a pregnancy or an abortion, with all of the potential physical dangers involved in either, if she opts to continue the pregnancy, she endures childbirth w/all the potential physical consequences, then the rest of the consequences of either adoption or raising the child. In your scenario, the sperm donor can opt out of any responsability or consequences of where his sperm landed.
and that would mean that the male has zero incentive to exercise any degree of responsible behavior before hand.
I’ve not seen you address that. ever. The woman always has consequences. the man, in your scenario, can choose to have zero.
In the best of all worlds, no male/female couple would have penis-vaginal intercourse w/o first establishing what each person was willing to do should a pregnancy occur, neither party would engage unless there was an agreement and no one would ever, ever change their minds.
That just isn’t going to happen. BIrth control methods sometimes fail, people sometimes aren’t always able to accurately predict what they would do in the future, and male female couples about to engage in vaginal intercourse often don’t exchange much more than “your place or mine” before hand.
Given all of that, and given that society is better off w/children being supported by their parents (adoptive or natural), a system by which one parent (and only one- if it’s both than there’s an adoption possability) can choose to opt out of all responsability towards the child regardless of the child’s or society’s best interests does not serve the child or society at all, and only serves the selfish interest of the one individual. An inherently untenable situation for a society to allow.
So, the solution is simple for all, males and females:
there is no option 3 where you get to have heterosexual penis vagina intercourse w/o potential for consequences for yourself. for either party.
DING DING DING DING!!!
Page eight, wring!!! We’re here!
No, it’s contrived fucking bullshit because you can’t win the argument. Any father who wants the kid only has to say so. If he doesn’t know he’s a father it’s his own fucking fault and fuck him. He’s not a fucking victim just a pig that can’t be bothered to keep track of his own sperm.
I am psychic.
I am still waiting on your cite by the way. Somehow I doubt it will be forthcoming though.
Maybe they do. But it’s not because of some sinsister plot against men. It’s just biology.
What options would you give men that won’t harm the interests of the child? If men opt out of their parental rights and responsibilities, the child suffers (and possibly the tax payers as well). If you eliminate all safe harbor programs, you eliminate options for desparate women who may harm that child.
*Johnny, tell Giraffe what they’ve won!
well, Giraffe, for pointing out the clusterfuck, has won this plasma Big screen TV! and this case of Orville Reddenbocker gourmet microwave popcorn, the popcorn of discriminating popcorn lovers!
and for catsix, for once again being an instrumental participant in a giant clusterfuck has these wonderful parting gifts - a rock we found in the street and this candy wrapper.
for tries, who has come from behind to totally hijack this clusterfuck, we have this canister of medical waste and our grateful thanks.
and, for Dio, we have a state of the art monkey butler to type for him lest his fingers get sore.*
Beautiful post.