# If a man requests, but woman won't have abortion, should he be freed of obligation? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 10, 2003, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209 "2003-02-10T21:39:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2003, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/381 "2003-02-17T21:56:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by catsix \* > _ **snip some really insightful arguing** _ **Catsix** , I want you to not bear my children. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2003, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/382 "2003-02-17T22:04:03Z")
> [@](#): > > A planned abortion is not a natural act. Neither is child support. What’s your point? ---
**Author:** ![In\_Conceivable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/4bbf92/32.png) [@In\_Conceivable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/In_Conceivable)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2003, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/383 "2003-02-17T22:06:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lightnin’ \* > \*\*If the decision to have an abortion prevents a pregnancy from resulting in the birth of a child, **In Conceivable** , then the decision to NOT have an abortion results in the pregnancy coming to term (barring complications, of course). > > To say anything else is merely semantics. \*\* I don’t feel that it is semantics. **robert** says that the state of pregnancy doesn’t lead to the state of child birth. I think that it is silly to say that. Of course it does. The decision to have an abortion requires actions. A women can’t decide to have an abortion and have the fetus magically remove itself from her womb. She can decide to have an abortion, not follow through, and still have a child. The decision to not have an abortion is a really just a decision to allow nature to run it’s course. It is not a decision to allow a baby to be born only a decision to not do anything further to stop it. I think there is a real difference there. ---
**Author:** ![In\_Conceivable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/4bbf92/32.png) [@In\_Conceivable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/In_Conceivable)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2003, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/384 "2003-02-17T22:19:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by robertliguori \* > \*\*Neither is child support. What’s your point? \*\* My point, as I have said before… You say : state of pregnancy does not equal the state of child birth. I say : The state of pregnancy does equal the state of child birth unless a women specifically makes actions to stop it. (Not a decision, actual actions) Naturally, (and baring complications) the state of pregnancy does equal the state of child birth. ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2003, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/385 "2003-02-17T23:51:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by yosemitebabe \* > **A doctor usually has input into her health decisions, yes. You know who _doesn’t_ have input into her health decisions? Yeah, that’s right—_you_.** Fantastic. Like I’ve said, time and time again, I don’t care whether she has an abortion or not. She can feel free to do whatever she wants with the money - decorate the baby room, fly to Alaska, or buy some bitchin’ mag wheels. The doctor’s opinion is only relevant to my plan in cases where abortion would be hazardous, and then only to determine the amount the potential father has to pay. > [@](#): > > **Because you and your pocketbook don’t have to have a medical procedure.** That’s right… the money is removed with a pen, not a scalpel, so obviously it can’t be anything more than an “inconvenience”. > [@](#): > > **Well, obviously she wants to help support the child, which is why she’s actually carrying it to term and is planning to raise it. She just happens to think that since she didn’t get pregnant by _herself_, she shouldn’t support it alone.** Guess she has the wrong idea, then. She made the decision to bear a child by herself, didn’t she? Or are you suggesting we change the law to allow the father input on that decision? > [@](#): > > **Oh yeah, we see it. Pick a girl up at a bar. … Stop mid-stream, and whip out the legal documents. Oh yeah. We all see this happening. _Really sexy._ Sets the mood.** The same has been said about condoms, but that doesn’t seem to stop people from using them. > [@](#): > > **Why not beat these chicks who want to reproduce like rabbits at their own game? Why are you wasting time posting your opinions on a message board? Why aren’t you making the doctor’s appointment for the vasectomy _right now?_ Time’s a wastin’!** You know, you always end up confusing my personal life with my opinion in threads like this one. Maybe you ought to stick to threads where you can keep a cooler head. > [@](#): > > **Ejaculating into her and fertilizing her egg creates the thing that will be a baby, or not. No sperm, no zygote, no baby. She’d have nothing to abort (or carry to term) if not for his sperm.** Oh boy, I love Six Degrees of Baby! It’s so much more fun than pinning responsibility on the one person who makes the final decision. Let me try one… she chose to carry a zygote to term, which was created with his sperm, when they had sex in a hotel, after driving there in a Chevrolet, which they inherited from an old man, who originally bought it because Pat Boone sang about it on TV. Get your checkbook ready, Pat Boone! > [@](#): > > **So what’s stopping you from trying to make some agreement now? I mean, seriously?** She already knows what I think about having kids, which is just as meaningful as a contract, given the current state of the law. I don’t want to create tension for no possible benefit. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by In Conceivable_ > **The decision to not have an abortion is a really just a decision to allow nature to run it’s course. It is not a decision to allow a baby to be born only a decision to not do anything further to stop it.** It’s a meaningless distinction - inaction is a free choice, just like action. If you are told to show up in court on a certain date (a proactive action), and you fail to appear (inaction), somehow I don’t think they’ll accept the excuse “But I was just letting nature take its course!” ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2003, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/386 "2003-02-18T02:24:37Z")
> [@](#): > > **Lightnin’** said: > Catsix, I want you to not bear my children. No problem, since I won’t be having any children, ever. Hypothetically though, if I were to have a kid I knew was only wanted by me, it falls to reason in my mind that the kid would be provided for by only me. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2003, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/387 "2003-02-18T06:16:16Z")
> [@](#): > > _catsix wrote:_ > Who said anything about killing? That’s why safe harbor policies exist. Didn’t you know that? They don’t want flakey young parents trashing their kids in dumpsters. _That is the reason these policies were started._ > [@](#): > > Nope, kid gets no say. Kids don’t sue for child support, checks aren’t made out to kids, they certainly don’t cash them and they don’t spend them. I have never heard a single mother that I’ve spoken to (and where I work, I encounter a lot of them) refer to child support as anything other than money the man has to pay to her. That may be their _attitude_, but the money is for the kid. I think minty (a lawyer, I believe) clarified this quite a while ago. Some of these mothers you refer to are probably talking about money _getting paid back to them_ for the support of the child. They support the child 100% out of their own pocket, dad (supposedly) pays her back a portion of that. The kid also may want to go to college some day, or may have some other reasonable need. You don’t think that as they get older, they’ll realize that it would be nice if they could afford better schooling? If dad would only fulfill his obligation? You don’t think that _no_ kid, _ever_, has known that they have a “right” to some support from their dad and has made moves to make it happen (legally)? > [@](#): > > _robertligouri wrote:_ > > Because, as I have said umpty-bajillion times, the state of pregnancy does not equate to a state of child, and the woman is the one who gets the pregnancy to that state. We go around very nicely in circles. The men who will _wait in line_ to screw these women are every bit as responsible for the pregnant state of the women. Don’t start with the concept of “the child only starts when the woman decides to not have an abortion” bullshit. Because that’s what it is—bullshit. The child started (maybe it was just a few deciding cells, but it was _started_) when sperm met egg. And many men will _wait in line_ to contribute their sperm. And, you haven’t answered my question—why aren’t _you_ waiting in line to get a vasectomy? Why? Beat these scheming “breeding like rabbits” women at their own game! “The child cannot start if he doesn’t give it any sperm to contribute to starting them.” Why can’t the _man’s_ decision to have a vasectomy be the deciding factor here? _Especially_ since he is the one who is so vehemently unwilling to be a father. I should think that the ball should be in his court—let _him_ be proactive and do something to protect himself if he is so horrified at the concept of child support. Why do nothing, have sex anyway, and hope that the woman won’t get pregnant and then want to carry the child to term? Why leave it all up to _her_ when he _does_ have more than a few choices that will protect him and his sacred wallet? > [@](#): > > _Mr2001 wrote:_ > > The doctor’s opinion is only relevant to my plan in cases where abortion would be hazardous, and then only to determine the amount the potential father has to pay. “Your plan” is all about the sanctity of your wallet and nothing else, we got it. So her body, her psyche, the “big picture” for her—what is best in the long run for _her_ is of no significance. We got it, really we do. > [@](#): > > That’s right… the money is removed with a pen, not a scalpel, so obviously it can’t be anything more than an “inconvenience”. I’m sure to someone like you, it is extremely painful—because, after all, nothing, no, _nothing_ is more sacred than your wallet. You’ve made this abundantly clear. Hey, why won’t you get that vasectomy? All your worries would be over. And your sacred wallet would be safe. It sounds like an _excellent_ deal. So why aren’t you doing it? Seriously? > [@](#): > > Guess she has the wrong idea, then. She made the decision to bear a child by herself, didn’t she? Or are you suggesting we change the law to allow the father input on that decision? Oh, he had his “input”. It’s called _sperm_. And he gave it _quite_ willingly, knowing what it was capable of doing. He was chomping at the bit to contribute his sperm. And he did it without any vasectomy, (something he quite easily could get, if supporting unwanted children was a major concern for him). > [@](#): > > The same has been said about condoms, but that doesn’t seem to stop people from using them. Oh, you don’t believe that for a _minute_. Condoms are nowhere near similar to stopping everything, whipping out a long legal document and taking time to peruse it. > [@](#): > > Oh boy, I love Six Degrees of Baby! It’s so much more fun than pinning responsibility on the one person who makes the final decision. Only the “final decision” matters? What about _his_ “final decision”? About whether or not to get a vasectomy? It’s a decision he can make, he has complete control over, and yet he won’t do it. But he’ll piss and moan when he willingly has sex with her, and she gets pregnant and then has the audacity to not want to have an abortion! Cry me a river. > [@](#): > > She already knows what I think about having kids, which is just as meaningful as a contract, given the current state of the law. I don’t want to create tension for no possible benefit. “Tension”?!? _TENSION?!?!?!_ So you admit that the whole concept would generate _tension?_ Why, pray tell? And, is your girlfriend a Doper? Would she like to contribute to this thread? I’m sure we’d all _love_ to get some insight of her opinions on this matter. > [@](#): > > It’s a meaningless distinction - inaction is a free choice, just like action. Not getting a vasectomy is inaction as well. So live with your inaction, then. Be fertile, risk impregnanting women, and risk being an unwilling father. Risk your sacred wallet. Your choice, obviously. ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2003, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/388 "2003-02-18T08:09:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by yosemitebabe \* > **I’m sure to someone like you, it is extremely painful—because, after all, nothing, no, _nothing_ is more sacred than your wallet. You’ve made this abundantly clear.** Sigh. And to you, nothing is more sacred than the ability to churn out babies at someone else’s expense. Aren’t generalizations fun? > [@](#): > > **Hey, why won’t you get that vasectomy? All your worries would be over. And your sacred wallet would be safe. It sounds like an _excellent_ deal. So why aren’t you doing it?** Perhaps because I’m posting about principles, not my personal life. Maybe I’m not in a position where I’ll potentially become a parent, or maybe I’m willing to help raise any kids that do result. Also, even supposing that I’m absolutely opposed to having kids now, I may want them in the future. According to the [alt.support.vasectomy FAQ](http://www.vasectomy-information.com/faq/faq.htm): > [@](#): > > Vasectomy should not be considered contraception - it is sterilization, and should be regarded as permanent. … Reversal with restoration of fertility is possible, but becomes less likely as the years go on. In any case, the operation to reverse a vasectomy is expensive, reversal with restoration of fertility is uncertain, and becomes even less certain the longer after your vasectomy it is done. Sperm freezing is also an option, but this is expensive to store and use (by IVF), and deteriorates over time in any case. > [@](#): > > **Oh, he had his “input”. It’s called _sperm_.** _rimshot_ She’ll be here all week, folks. > [@](#): > > **Oh, you don’t believe that for a _minute_. Condoms are nowhere near similar to stopping everything, whipping out a long legal document and taking time to peruse it.** Hold it… who said this has to happen _during_ the sex act? Isn’t there plenty of time before that point to make sure they’re both on the same page (no pun intended) as far as children are concerned? I assume people aren’t tearing each other’s clothes off the instant they meet. Maybe I’m just going to the wrong clubs. 😉 > [@](#): > > **Only the “final decision” matters? What about _his_ “final decision”? About whether or not to get a vasectomy?** That is, quite obviously, not the final decision in the process of delivering a baby. It’s not even the last decision the man makes, unless he somehow gets a vasectomy during the sex act. > [@](#): > > **"Tension"?!? _TENSION?!?!?!_ So you admit that the whole concept would generate _tension?_ Why, pray tell?** The same reason it would cause tension if the woman said, “You know, if we have sex, I might make a decision that costs you tens of thousands of dollars over the next 20 years of your life. Please sign this contract stating that you’re aware of the huge risk you’re taking.” The man doesn’t want to be confronted with that financial risk, but at least under our current laws, he knows he’s taking that risk whether she confronts him or not. The woman would want even less to be put on the spot, forced to weigh her relationship with this guy against the possibility of having to choose between an abortion and single motherhood - but at least no one else would be making the decision for her. > [@](#): > > **And, is your girlfriend a Doper? Would she like to contribute to this thread?** No, she isn’t. Based on the hostility I’ve seen around this topic, I don’t know if I’d want you talking to her anyway. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2003, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/389 "2003-02-18T08:37:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr2001 \* > ]Sigh. And to you, nothing is more sacred than the ability to churn out babies at someone else’s expense. Aren’t generalizations fun? Oh, sure! :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > Also, even supposing that I’m absolutely opposed to having kids now, I may want them in the future. According to the [alt.support.vasectomy FAQ](http://www.vasectomy-information.com/faq/faq.htm): ::shrug:: So vasectomy isn’t perfect, it probably can’t be reversed, and it’s expensive. But the preserving of sperm _is_ an option, even though it’s not perfect either. But I’ll hazard a guess and assume that a vasectomy is cheaper than 18 years of child support. Since you are so cavalier about a woman getting an abortion (whether or not she wants it or feels it is best for her body or mind) then why shouldn’t we be cavalier about men getting a vasectomy? Men get vasectomies, all the time. And if they have their sperm preserved, they can always father kids later. And they’ll _never_ have to worry about supporting a child that “never should have been born”. And I’ll hasten to add, no one is killing the doctors because they perform vasectomies. Vasectomies never used to be illegal. No one wants to make vasectomites illegal today. It’s a rare person who would consider a vasectomy something like “murder”. So, once again, ::shrug:: > [@](#): > > _rimshot_ > She’ll be here all week, folks. 😃 Nice to have a little sarcastic humor once in a while, eh? > [@](#): > > Hold it… who said this has to happen _during_ the sex act? Isn’t there plenty of time before that point to make sure they’re both on the same page (no pun intended) as far as children are concerned? Oh sure, that happens _some_ of the time. But surely you know that many people are quite spontanious about sex. And yeah, women get pregnant, even when the act isn’t planned out way ahead of time. > [@](#): > > That is, quite obviously, not the final decision in the process of delivering a baby. It’s not even the last decision the man makes, unless he somehow gets a vasectomy during the sex act. But it’s a definitive decision and act that _he_ can make, all by his lonesome. He won’t be dependent on her decisions. He won’t be a “victim” to anything she does or does not do, which, as you have been lamenting, leaves him in a very vulnerable position after the fact. He’ll be more in control of his own fate if he decides to take a _proactive_ stance rather than hoping that she’ll do what _he_ wants. > [@](#): > > The same reason it would cause tension if the woman said, “You know, if we have sex, I might make a decision that costs you tens of thousands of dollars over the next 20 years of your life. Please sign this contract stating that you’re aware of the huge risk you’re taking.” Uh, wouldn’t that be more accurately stated as, “You know, if we have sex, _your_ sperm might get _me_ pregnant and then I’ll have to decide what is best for my body and health. (Pregnancy or abortion.) And depending on the decsions that only I am entitled to make (since I’m the one that you knocked up) we both may end up supporting the child that _we both_ helped get started.” Yeah, that would be a real mood-killer. But then again, if people are going to be open and discuss these things, instead of just ripping each others’ clothes off… > [@](#): > > No, she isn’t. Based on the hostility I’ve seen around this topic, I don’t know if I’d want you talking to her anyway. Oh, and I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that she might see things just a _smidgen_ differently than you… 😉 ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2003, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209/390 "2003-02-18T12:46:55Z")
> [@](#): > > The men who will wait in line to screw these women are every bit as responsible for the pregnant state of the women. Very true. But, as has also been stated umpty-bajillion times, the fact that we share responsibility for the pregnancy does not mean that we share responsibility for the actual gestation/birthing. Re: Vasectomy: You might have missed it, but I am not lobbying for you to have to lose control of your reproductive system because pregnancy occurrs. This is because that would be wrong. Are you arguing that loss of control of your property as the result of a pregnancy that you contributed to is right? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-man-requests-but-woman-wont-have-abortion-should-he-be-freed-of-obligation/154209.md?page=19)