Whoa, simul-move! That hasn’t happened in a while.
Participants may now return to their regularly scheduled snit.
Czarcasm, thank you and **TVeblen **for moving this. I apologize for the way some of my posts were worded. I should have controlled my temper better.
-
I did feel compelled to reply when my views were being entirely misconstrued (on purpose, I felt) to the point where entirely different views then the ones I have consistently expressed on this board were attributed to me. Perhaps I should have said nothing at all and trusted that the other Dopers know my stance on things, but one can never be sure. I’ve been in many a debate on this very topic where I kept my head better - I’m not sure why this one hit me so differently. I wish I could have found a way to clear things up without being aggressive, but I couldn’t. So, again, I apologize.
-
Yes, I did report the thread. Perhaps I should have done so sooner, but I still held hope that what was happening here was a misunderstanding and not deliberate misrepresentation.
-
I am, every day.
-
Sperm-bank scenerio: at the time of donation, wouldn’t the man have signed a contract? If he were a donor, the contract would absolve him from all rights and responsibilities related to conception; if he were involved in fertility treatment, the contract would protect his interests by guaranteeing that his sperm would not be used on anyone but his specified partner, right? I don’t see why this presumably unusual plot twist would invalidate the contract.
-
Seductive succubus scenerio: wait a minute, grienspace. You couldn’t find her birth control pills in the medicine cabinet? What if she kept them in the kitchen? In her nightstand? In her purse, which is at this moment locked safely in the trunk of her car? What if she took the last pill in her cycle that afternoon at the time she always takes it, took the packaging out to the alley with the rest of her garbage, and plans to pick up her new prescription first thing in the morning–it’s already called in and waiting for her at the drugstore. If any of that is true, you’ve just illegally dosed her with a “most likely safe” pill that still has the potential to kill her, and for nothing.
Scenerio 3: a young couple is about to make love using a condom. The woman has recently started a glamorous new job, and the man fears that he may lose her. But…maybe not if she becomes pregnant; they’ll have to stick together then. So he “accidentally” tears the only condom as he’s taking it out of the packaging. Then he convinces her to make love anyway. She agrees. Because she’s a dumbass.
But she knows the consequences of having unprotected sex. How is her dumbassedness any different from that displayed in the OP?
Scenerio 4: A young couple is making love, using a condom. The condom breaks during the action. The woman is unaware, but the man feels the latex split open. He’s enjoying the sex so much that he doesn’t care; he keeps his mouth shut and the party rocking on.
The woman knows the consequences of having even protected sex. How is her situation any different from the one in the OP?
Now that’s an interesting question. There are people who do not have the mental capacity to fully understand the consequences of sex. In those cases, the mentally impaired cannot be held accountable for their actions, although, sadly, women will experience some fallout because of that unfairness of biology. Now while a mentally normal kid of say 14 or 15 knows that sex=babies, I’m not sure that every 11-year-old really grasps the concept.
Scenario 3:
Her situation is no different. She can and should choose whether or not to have an abortion. His situation is no different. Both of them must support any child that results. Because they chose to have sex with no birth control, they get no sympathy for me. They are both dumbasses and morons. But that does not negate her right to make her decision, nor his obligation to honor it.
Scenario 4:
Her situation is no different. She can and should choose whether or not to have an abortion. His situation is no different. Both of them must support any child that results. Because he chose to have sex with no birth control, he gets no sympathy for me. He’s a dumbass and a moron and because he decieved his partner, I think he’s an asshole as well. But that does not negate her right to make her decision, nor his obligation to honor it.
As for Vili, I think, under the law and under most people’s estimation, he was a victim of statutory rape which involved coersion due to the power differential in the accepted teacher/student relationship. He should not be required to pay child support. If he chooses to, kudos and bully for him.
The thing I think is getting lost here is that both of them have a responsibility to support any children they have. Women as well as men. The fact that only women have the choice to abort or not is an unfortunate fact of biology, but she doesn’t get to not support any children she chooses to have. (Unless they both opt for adoption, of course. A woman cannot give her child up for adoption unless the father consents.)
Much different. That is the whole point of the OP. The legal systems and a majority of people in the western world support the woman’s right to avoid the consequences of unprotected sex as sacrosanct under any circumstances. We spend vast resources developing methods and infrastructure that give women the power to avoid the consequences.We sympathize for women young and old who end up pregnant against their will. It would be just horrible if a man deliberately got a woman pregnant against her will. The main focus of discussion would be how awful the man is.
But if a man accidentally gets a woman pregnant, or she without his consent gets herself pregnant, the main focus of discussion will be the man once again. In this case , whether accidentally or decieved, its the man who reaps the vast majority of the criticism, and society leaves him no legal options but to become partially enslaved to the woman.
And is the support of the child the issue?. No legal distinction is made if the woman is extremely wealthy and quite capable of rearing the child on her own.
I’d like some more information on this, please. Perhaps we have different systems of child support. In Illinois, child support is based on a percentage of the man’s salary (assuming the mom has custody). I think it’s about 17%, but it’s been a while since I stopped chasing WhyKid’s dad for support. If he has good reason to believe that this amount is an undue hardship on him and the mother is providing unequal support, he has every right and means to appear in front of a judge and request a reduction in support.
In other states, as mentioned in the **hauss **thread, support is based on a complex formula taking both the mother and father’s income into account.
Do non-custodial mothers have to pay child support where you’re from? They do here. If the father is the one raising the child, the mother’s salary is used to determine how much child support she owes him.
If, for any reason, the non-custodial parent feels the arrangement is unfair or that the custodial parent is spending the money on things other than the child’s maintainence or education, then once again they can appear in court and explain their situation to a judge. If the judge feels the non-custodial parent’s claim is valid, the custodial parent must produce receipts and tax records to account for their income and where the money is being spent.
It’s not a perfect system, sure. But it’s better than forced abortions.
Oh, so you do accept qualifications for the father’s responsibility based on the characterization and or actions of the woman.
I believe Vili was 12 and 14 when he proactively had intercourse. People have been convicted for crimes at that age you know. Even murder I think.
No, I accept qualification for the non-custodial parent’s responsibility based on his or her status as a rape victim.
I said several posts up that I did not think child support should be required from victims of rape. I think if a man rapes a woman and than takes custody of the child, she should not have to pay him child support. If a woman rapes a man and takes custody of the child, he should not have to pay child support. It doesn’t matter to me what gender the victim is. I think he was a victim of rape, and the law and everyone I’ve heard talk about it, agrees. Not only because of his age, but because she was his teacher, and therefore in a position of power over him. She went to jail for rape and/or child molestation, I believe.
Do you think his actions were entirely consentual?
I did ask you some questions about child support, which you haven’t addresed.
Look, I have never come across any situation where the income of the custodial parent factors in the amount of child support the other parent must pay. I would accept anecdotes from posters refuting me.
I can now understand your reactions, and please accept my regrets for having unkowingly pushed some hot buttons.
I can’t see any reason for my jursidiction being any different from yours.
I am not supporting forced abortions. I expect any man who supports the mother in a choice to go full term, must accept the responsibility. A man married to the mother implicitly accepts the responsibility.
However a single man should have a choice just like the woman. And if society is willing to spend so much resources in giving the woman the choice, then society should step in and pay the child support for the unwilling father. If on the one hand society pays for the woman to choose terminate responsibility, then society should pay for the man to terminate responsibility as well.
But according to the initial statement you went on to explain why rape allowed you to qualify responsibility.The nature of the relationship was predicated on the woman’s employment and age. If Mary Kay were 12 then it wouldn’t be rape would it ?
I haven’t found this to be true. I hear people talk plenty of trash against manipulative women. Single parenthood is becoming more acceptable in society, but unwed mothers still get their share of criticism- more than the fathers.
Isn’t the opposite also true? Don’t noncustodial mothers have to pay child support? Doesn’t a mother who abandons her children get villianized–in fact, far more than a runaway father, because for a mother to leave her children is looked upon as “unnatural.”
Of course this is after pregnancy. During pregnancy, it’s wonderful if the parents are in agreement on everything, but the mother still runs the show…because nature dictates it that way. Biology is unfair. It’s unfair that men don’t have babies, but, hey, it’s unfair that men are stronger than women too.
After pregnancy, the responsibilities are equal. This wasn’t true 30 years ago, when women were more likely to get custody; this wasn’t true 200 years ago, when men were more likely to get custody, but attitudes are changing. Laws are being interpreted and written to reflect those attitudes.
No, you pushed my hot buttons my misrepresenting nearly everything I’ve said. WhyKid’s father’s no-payment of child support is a moot issue for me.
Perhaps this would make more sense to me if society did pay for abortions, say in the case of national health care.
Even so, the cost of an abortion ($700 - $1200 around here) is in no way comparable to the tens of thousands that a non-custodial parent owes in child support over 18 - 21 years of life. So, in effect, you’re asking society to bear a much larger burden by paying for child support owed by unwilling parents then it would by fully funding abortions.
How is this equitable?
If MaryKay was 12, it wouldn’t have been rape, and Vili or his parents would be legally and ethically liable for child support. It is not contigent on her employment or age, persay, but on the fact that she raped him. I don’t know how to be any clearer on this.
If my response contributed to the Pitting of this thread, I apologize.
Perhaps I should bow out, therefore.
Regards,
Shodan
I agree. But that doesn’t contadict my point. There is far more trash talk against deadbeat dads than women who’ve had an abortion.
Absolutely, but that is irrelevant to my point. Every non- custodial mother (today in most of the western world) had the choice, the (9 month period ) a second chance to avoid the awesome burden of supporting an unwanted child) that a 16 year old boy just does not have.
Only after a short period. How many do you know that have given up a baby for adoption? But after a child achieves some degree of cognition. But not by much.
But women can work out in a gym and get stronger than most men. And don’t forget there’s alway’s someone stronger or weaker than you regardless of sex. We all have that choice. But a man has no options with regard to avoiding responsibility towards an embryo, or a fetus let alone an 18 year old child.
I hear plenty of trash talk against women who’ve had abortions, and, again, against deadbeat moms. As far as gossip about individuals, generally people are more likely to know if someone is a deadbeat dad, and not know if someone had an abortion.
As far as abortion, I think we’re never going to agree.
You raise an interesting point: what if the girl gives up the baby, but the boy blocks the adoption and wins custody. Should the girl then be forced to live up to her responsibilities and pay child support? I think she should. Would that satisfy the need for fairness?
I don’t like to classify voluntary adoption arrangements as abandonment. If the parents willingly gave up the baby for adoption, they have fulfilled their obligation to the child by finding caretakers. And under the law, the father must have consented to the adoption, and if he’s not around to consent, chances are that it’s out of choice.
Not really. There will always be individual exceptions, but I reckon that at least 8 times out of 10, a man can overpower a woman. It’s just because of different muscle masses. It’s biology. Nobody should be able to avoid responsibility toward children. Not taking care of your children is morally one of the worst things you can do.
Is your primary arguement here against abortion or for the right to refuse paternity? If the former, if abortions were outlawed, would you still advocate voluntary termination of paternity?
My argument is for a qualified right to terminate paternity.
And does the opposite hold true? Should the man be the only one to want the child, should the woman be able to terminate maternity?
Yes
Yes that is if she is wearing maternity clothes.