Well, it’s probably a bad idea for me to pop my posting cherry by starting a thread like this, but here goes.
I would like to open up for debate the issue of the double standard in regards to personal responsibility for sex.
Hypothetical: A man and a woman have consentual sex. She conceives. For the sake of this argument say that both parties were responsible enough to use contraception, she was on the pill and he wore a condom, but a pregnancy resulted anyway.
Both parties contributed to her pregnancy equally, correct? How can we hold the man responsible for child support without also giving him a say in whether the child is born?
Damn this is difficult to pose this question the way I want to. The law says that a woman has the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, because it is her body. She has 100% say so in the matter, the man has 0%.
Yet the man can be held financially responsible for her decision if she decides to have the baby. On the flip side of that, what if she decides to have an abortion, but the man wanted to keep the baby? How can we hold both parties responsible if we don’t give both parties equal decision making power?
Doesn’t giving the woman the sole right to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy(because it is her body), also put the responsibility of that decision solely on her? If she has all the rights then she should have all the responsibilities.
For the record, I am personally opposed to abortion, but not the right to have one. What I mean by that is I would not want my child to be aborted, but I would not want to take away others rights to make that decision for themselves. I guess that’s where it gets tricky, because what do you do if one partner wants the baby but the other does not? If we leave the ultimate decision up to the female
, then how can the male be held responsible. It’s sort of like taxation without representation. If the woman can get child support for deciding to have the baby, can’t the male get some compensation if she decides not to have it? He has, after all, lost something very dear to him in that instance.
Well, I’m confused and unsure how I performed my first time, but at least I’m not all sticky.
This one seems pretty cold considering there are probably lots of men out there dealing with
the fact that their mate chose to end their unborn child’s life. Get over it? Some might have
trouble getting over it. It’s not just about child support payments, the question works both ways.
What if the man wants the baby to be born? If it’s 50% his child then he is receiving a forced
abortion, no?
Is the usual response to that, “If baby comes out of sex, the woman must carry it to full term whether she wants to or not?” That isn’t what the law says.
Neither of these apply to the case of the man wanting to keep the baby.
Hey Loki Im not picking on you. FWIW, I posted a very similar post to your own, and was beaten over the head with responses similar to the ones I gave you (albeit paraphrased… slightly). In any event I share your disatisfaction with those answers, just thought I’d warn you.
I’m not a SDMB virgin, I’ve just never posted. I’ve been observing for close to two years but just never registered. So I have a little experience interpreting intent and don’t automatically assume that anyone who posts opposition to my op is trying to fry me. As a matter of fact I play devil’s advocate quite a bit in order to test both sides of something before I take a firmer stance, so I’m generally appreciative of any comments that are knowledgeable. I hope I didn’t come across to cocky, I had the feeling those arguments were a little too easy to swat down, maybe they won’t be if they’re coming from someone who strongly believes them. Anybody?
I figure that unless men do 50% of the work of a pregnacy, lug around 50% of the weight, cope with 50% of the fallen arches and back pain, suffer 50% of the pain of labor and delivery, and handle 50% of the breastfeeding, the child is not 50% theirs.
Half the genes does not mean half the posession of the fetus.
There is an amazeingly easy answer to this that Andros alluded to.
A fetus belongs solely to the woman. She has to feed it, lug it around, and live with it. Therefor if she chooses to relieve herself of it, that is her choice. No one else can choose that for her or prevent her from that, because it is not their body that the fetus is feeding off of.
Once born, however, a fetus is not soley dependent on the mother. It can be supported by many. Indeed, it HAS to be supported by someone. So it makes sense to spread the responsibiliy equally among those who donated genetic material.
So mom is responsible for the fetus. Mom and dad are responsible for the kid.
There is an amazeingly easy answer to this that Andros alluded to.
A fetus belongs solely to the woman. She has to feed it, lug it around, and live with it. Therefor if she chooses to relieve herself of it, that is her choice. No one else can choose that for her or prevent her from that, because it is not their body that the fetus is feeding off of.
Once born, however, a fetus is not soley dependent on the mother. It can be supported by many. Indeed, it HAS to be supported by someone. So it makes sense to spread the responsibiliy equally among those who donated genetic material.
So mom is responsible for the fetus. Mom and dad are responsible for the kid.
Yes, correct, as opposed to a voluntary abortion. You can’t(legally) force a woman to have an abortion but you can force a man. If a woman has an abortion it is voluntary. That doesn’t mean that “she got herself into that mess”. It doesn’t imply that she is the only one responsible for the pregnancy, but she is certainly the one who must decide to undergo the procedure. That makes it voluntary.
So you oppose child support, or at least you believe the woman should provide more than 50% of the responsibility since she has more than 50% “possession”? Whoops, putting words in your mouth, but that sounds like a logical conclusion to your statement.
So neither the biological mother or father “possess” the child born through a surrogate mother? The woman who did all that back breaking carrying, she’s the real mother?
So if a surrogate mother “chooses to relieve herself” that is her choice? It is her body that the fetus is feeding off of, not the body of those who contributed the DNA.
Well, ummmm, yes. If a surrogate mother did that, it would make her a bit of a jerk, as she volenteered for the position and all. But thats her choice.
If I used my space alian nano-technology to implant a fetus with genetic information from Richard Nixon and myself, you’d want the option to abort that, wouldn’t you?
The op stated that the sex was consentual, what you alluded to amounts to rape. By the way, sorry you’re insemination tool is so small. (no offense, just couldn’t resist)
even sven, I thought your answer to the OP was well-stated.
LokiTheDog, there’s no possible way to make this situation 100% fair for both genders, because it’s not symmetric. Only one gender can have babies. Having babies is a major undertaking, both physically and emotionally. I think the current situation is about as fair as an inherently unfair situation can be.
May I ask what you think the most fair situation would be?
:shrug: I do think that the policies we have in place in the US for child support need work. But that’s neither here nor there. The fact is simply that by and large women do have more than 50% of the responsibility. Or has “single fatherhood” suddenly become a national problem?
I said nothing about a “real mother,” or the possession of a child. Possession of a fetus, yes–child, no. But yes, in absence of a contract, the surrogate can do as she pleases. Of course, almost no surrogate is without a contract, and therefore almost no surrogate has a right to abort her pregnancy.
Let’s rephrase this - I believe what he’s saying is ‘A woman’s child cannot be aborted without her consent, but a man’s child can be aborted without his consent.’ Does that make more sense?
Giraffe, I agree with your post, there is not one answer that is cut and dry that solves the problem. If you try to use the 50/50 responsibility idea you wind up in a draw and need a judge to make the decision. I’m not for that, though obviously it is necessary when a surrogate is involved. To say that the surrogate gets to make all decisions involving the baby as long as she is carrying it is ridiculous. It doesn’t work that way. There is a contract. Is there an unwritten contract involved when a man and woman conceive using natural methods? There seems to be. By both partners agreeing to use contraception they both imply that they don’t want a child, though for the man in this case that is an inference - he could simply be concerned about protecting against the transmission of disease, contraception would be a side effect. When the woman becomes pregnant anyway, she has to make the decision whether to carry to term or abort. I would certainly hope she would consult the man’s wishes and they would work out something they would both be happy with. But she doesn’t have to. She is given the choice. Because she is given the choice, and noone can force her to do anything other than what she chooses, she is solely responsible for that choice.
You see you can't have it both ways. Either it's the woman's decision or it's both of their decisions. The law says it's the womans, so why does it make the man pay for a decision that he did not make(this applies whether you're talking about paying child support when the woman chooses to have the baby and the man does not, or paying an emotional price when she chooses to abort and he does not)
If the law makes it her choice then it’s her responsibility.
Unless you go back to the 50/50 + judge scenario, the man has no invovlement. I’m not saying the 50/50 + judge idea is best, but it is the most fair. The 100/0 idea is only fair if the man is removed from the consequences of the woman’s decision. The law could be written so that this is done in the case when he doesn’t want the baby, but not when he wants it, so it still fails.
What is most fair? 50/50 +judge
What do we have? 100/0 in the decision making, 50/50(ideally) in the responsibility. That’s not fair.
How do we reconcile? 100/0 in the decision making, 100/0 in the responsibility.
Loki, I’m not sure I’m fully understanding you. You’re saying that the fair thing to do would let a judge decide whether or not the woman has an abortion, if she and the man disagree over whether she should have one? Barring that, the second-best thing is for men to have no responsibility whatsoever if they impregnate women?
If I’ve stated your position fairly, then I disagree with you.
When a couple decides to have sex, they are both acknowledging that there is a risk of pregnancy. I think both people should take responsibility for the outcome (children), if a pregnancy occurs. Whether or not you have any say in the option to abort is irrelevant. You only get to make choices about your own body, not someone else’s. If you’re a guy, and don’t want to risk child support, get a vasectomy. Or don’t have sex. Woman have more choices, because the baby grows in her body. Her body, her choice. That’s the way it is.
You don’t have a God-given right to have sex, consequence-free. By having sex, you are taking the risk that you might make a baby. You can’t just pretend that baby doesn’t exist – you are the father, and responsible for it.
