It’s easily resolved. Just rephrase as “the person who is pregnant can choose to abort” and leave “men” and “women” out of it.
There, perfectly fair.
Men should have the right to ‘abort’ responsibility for an unborn child, Swedish political group say
In a word, VASECTOMY. You don’t want to engender a kid, be on the hook to support it? Snip it. Otherwise, suck it the fuck up, Buttercup. You don’t need to have sex to be healthy, many people have gone decades or entire lives without having sex, or you want release you can masturbate but if you want a more interactive experience, get the damned snip.
Thats like saying you support the right for gay people to have a heterosexual marriage. Its a stupid and silly argument.
You can rephrase it any way you like it doesn’t affect the argument. Women have control over a fetus that men do not.
I thought I made it clear that men in this hypothetical world would have paternal responsibility for children born in wedlock. Why can’t the assumption be that a child born out of wedlock is not the responsibility of the father unless the father decides he want to assume paternal responsibility?
Now, I realize that this is impractical because men and women are going to have sex outside of marriage and when the woman gets pregnant, they are faced with a dire choice and it is in the best interests of society if we tell her that we are going to compel the biological father to assist her (at least financially). But there does seem to be a lopsided set of rights when a woman can choose to abort (or keep) the child without any input from the father and the father has to live with the consequences of that decision.
I suppose we could look at the woman’s right to abort as the final element of chance that a man is subjected to in the saga of an accidental pregnancy.
Marriage and procreation are not unrelated. There are all sorts of legal rights and presumptions wrt children born inside and outside of wedlock.
The lopsidedness is only in the biology. A woman can choose to terminate a pregnancy, at which point there is no “child”, legally speaking. A man could do the same if he could get pregnant.
Once a child exists (and this is true whether the woman voluntarily chose not to terminate the pregnancy or was somehow prevented from terminating it), the legal responsibilities of the father and mother toward that child are the same.
There are plenty of women out there paying child support for a child they don’t want, because the child’s father chose not to relinquish the child for adoption and the mother has to live with the consequences of that decision.
Because the fetus is in the woman’s body. Only she is entitled to control that situation.
If the fetus becomes a child, the control and rights that the mother has over the child are no different from those the father has.
This holds true even if the mother would have preferred to terminate her pregnancy before the fetus became a child but was not able to.
Pregnancy and parenthood are not the same thing. Only women are responsible for deciding how to deal with pregnancy, because only women can get pregnant (so far). But men and women are equally responsible for deciding how to deal with parenthood.
If for whatever reason they cannot agree on how to deal with it, then it may happen that one of them ends up paying child support for a child they don’t want. There’s nothing intrinsically unfair about that as far as gender is concerned.
Those who say oh she can have an abortion need to consider that having an abortion can have a serious psychological effect on a woman over a long period of time and in some cases leave the woman sterile and unable to have future babies
And since only she has control of the fetus the right to refuse financial responsibility should be extended to men.
That’s completely untrue. Abortions are incredibly safe, simple procedures and most women report feeling nothing but relief.
It’s also off-topic.
Men do not have any financial responsibility for fetuses. That’s kinda unfair isn’t it? Maybe we should require men pay 50% of healthcare and nutritionall requirements while a woman is carrying his child. Maybe men should be required to pay an amount equal to half the cost of an abortion? Should a man have to pay the woman for any long term physical or mental issues as a result of an abortion if he says he will not support the expected child?
I’m fine with holding both men and women equally responsible for children they did not want.
Yes, it is stupid and silly, and entirely unlike the argument I was making. The argument I was making is more akin to “any two persons can form a legal marriage”, as opposed to “only a man and a woman can form a legal marriage.”
If, for some reason, the subset of “persons” known as “men” were unwilling or unable to form legal marriages, that should in no way affect the complementary subset (“women”) from doing so.
As boytyperanma noted, the right to refuse financial responsibility for a pregnancy, which is what the woman has exclusive control over, is extended to men.
No law requires that men pay for the costs of pregnancy or even childbirth. That’s exclusively a woman’s responsibility.
If a child is born, though, neither parent has the right to refuse financial responsibility without the other parent’s consent.
See? Simple, consistent and fair. (Except, of course, for the innate unfairness of biology that makes pregnancy exclusively a woman’s responsibility, but it’s not the law’s job to try to redress that.)
Yes but control of the fetus means control of future responsibilities.
But you know that and are just ignoring the point the op made.
Nope. Control of the fetus simply means control over whether or not the fetus becomes a child.
Once the fetus does become a child, responsibilities are divided between the mother, the father, and whomever they consent to delegate all or part of the responsibility to (as well the state’s responsibility for promoting the child’s well-being).
The rights and responsibilities go like this:
-
Both men and women have control over whether their individual sperm/ova have a chance of becoming a fetus.
-
A pregnant woman exclusively controls whether an embryo/fetus becomes a child, because the pregnancy takes place exclusively within her body, and also bears all the responsibilities of the pregnancy.
-
When children are born, both men and women have equal responsibilities for them.
Simple, consistent, and (modulo biology) fair.
which has a financial liability and is in the exclusive control of the woman.
You’re going to imply I’m the one being disingenuous here?
Do you care to address any of the questions posed to you?
The biology is inherently unfair. You ignoring the unfairness women are forced to accept and advocating we create more ‘fairness’ for men.
I have not avoided proclaiming my beliefs on the matter. I’mvery much in line with Kimstu. If you are unclear on where I stand feel free to ask and I’ll answer, a favor you are failing to return.
Yup, but that’s not an unfair appropriation of control. The woman rightly controls that situation because it’s about her body, and only hers.
Sometimes, individuals due to their individual bodily autonomy exercise exclusive control over situations that may have financial consequences for other people. That’s just the way life is.
Your spouse cannot legally prohibit you from smoking, for example; you can smoke if you want to. And your spouse cannot therefore withhold your joint property from paying medical costs subsequently incurred to treat whatever smoking-related cancers you may develop.
You alone had the choice to smoke or not to smoke, but the responsibility of paying resulting medical bills if you choose to smoke rests with the joint owners of the marital property.
Likewise, a pregnant woman alone has the choice to terminate or not to terminate her pregnancy, but the responsibility of supporting the child if she chooses not to terminate rests with the joint progenitors of the child.
If you want to bring it about that nobody’s ever legally responsible for the consequences of any situation that at some point they had no legal control over, you’ll have your work cut out for you.
If you want to ensure that outcome only for men who accidentally impregnate women but don’t want to be fathers, you don’t really have a leg to stand on, logically or ethically (or legally) speaking.
yes, when one person doesn’t want the child and the other does and only one has control then it’s an unfair appropriation of control.