sex and sharing responsibility

Great Debates
21

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by andros *
**

Single fatherhood is not a national problem because they have no say in the decision whether or not to keep the baby. I think there may very well be a national problem of “denied fatherhood”… Men who wanted the child but lost it because of the woman’s decision to abort. This would be the opposite of “single motherhood”, where the man does not support the womans decision to have a baby. There are laws that make the father support that decision whether he wants to or not. BUT when the woman does not support the man’s decision to have the baby(when she aborts) there are no laws to advocate the man’s decision. And nothing can be done to reverse the woman’s decision.

There needs to be a change.

22

Er, what are you opposed to, Loki? Child support or abortion?

23

Her body, her choice, she lives with the consequences of those choices, not the man. That’t the way it should be.

24

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by LokiTheDog *
**

Child support is about making you responsible for the actions you took which led to the creation of a person. It’s not about punishing the father, or the mother winning, but about making sure that children aren’t just abandoned by their fathers.

As for the rights of men when it comes to abortions, I agree that women should talk to men about their feelings before having abortions. But I think it would be horribly wrong to legally compel women to have babies who don’t want them. Having a baby is a major physical and emotional undertaking.

If you don’t want to risk having an unwanted pregnancy of yours aborted, then talk to a woman about her thoughts on abortion before you sleep with her.

25

I’m opposed to neither. What I am opposed to is the woman being given all the power to make the choice, but the man forced to share in the responsibility of her choice.

26

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by LokiTheDog *
**

Your body, your choice (to have sex). Live with the consequences (possible child support) of that choice.

27

A woman knows she can get pregnant, even if both the man and the woman use all sorts of birth-control. By consenting to have sex, she is taking responsibility for the consequences that action might have on her body.

If she becomes pregnant, it is because of actions she freely chose. If she decides to have an abortion, then that decision is (legally) hers alone. If she decides to give birth, that decision is also (legally) hers alone to make.

That is, the woman (or, perhaps I should say “the pregnant party”) has final say in whether or not to give birth. Since the pregnant party has sole power over that decision in such a situation, which is itself a product of freely chosen actions, the pregnant party is solely responsible for the result of those decisions.

In other words, if a pregnant person decides to have a child, they are responsible for it. The non-pregnant party, having no legal say in the decision to produce offspring, should have no legal obligations to any offspring which are born as the result of another person’s decision.

The only party responsible for the child is the party that had sole discretion over its birth.

This is a non-sequiter. How does “donating” genetic material make one responsible for a child if one did not have a choice over the birth of that child?

Let’s say that I voluntarily give a blood sample for scientific research. A scientist extracts DNA from that sample and clones me. The resulting child, created from my donated genetic material, HAS to be supported by someone. Who do you think bears more responsibility to the child, me, a mere DNA donator, or the scientist whose willful actions brought the child into existence?

I contend that genetic relation is irrelevant in such a situation.

28

LokiTheDog: I think Even Sven has it pretty much right.

During gestation the mother has 100% of the rights. This is as it should be since it is her body and her burden for that nine month period. You have no rights during this period, but you also have no legal responsibilities ( assuming you are enough of a rat bastard to refuse to be supportive ). To the best of my knowledge no jurisdiction requires you to help pay for an abortion, for example. Or support an unborn child ( assuming you’re not married ).

When the child is born you assume 50% of the legal rights and responsibilities. Actually more like 45% of the rights and 50% of the responsibility as courts and society do tend to have an ingrained bias in favor of the mother. But that’s a matter of legal reform, not philosophy.

Is this completely fair? No. As you yourself has recognized, it can’t be.

Your solution to the uncomfortable ( for you ) situation of being unable to make any of the decisions during the gestation period is to put 100% of the financial responsibility for the next 21 years and beyond on the mother. And while this is certainly easier for the father, it is patently more unfair overall than the current situation. The father does have a shared genetic responsibility for the child - Insofar as it is possible to do so, the rights and responsibilities stemming from this must be equal.

Unfortunately, gestational rights are one of those that cannot be shared. Sucks - But there it is. If we were Sea Horses, this situation would be reversed. But we’re not. So stuffinb ( although I realize he is not happy with that answer himself ) is essentially correct in one of the answers he gave you. You just have to suck it up and live with this biologically imposed inequality.

  • Tamerlane
29

BlackKnight, what about women who don’t believe in abortion? Do they still bear full responsibility, since they don’t really have a choice under their moral code? (To a pro-life woman, having an abortion is no different than murdering the baby in its crib.)

30

To put it bluntly, the man is not in fact, forced to “share” in all of the responsibility of the choice.

Pre-conception - both share responsability for the choice to have sex and should agree on and be responsable for b/c if that is necessary/desired.

and, as has been pointed out, post birth, both share equally.

However, since one bares a significantly higher burden during the pregnancy, it does not follow that both should ‘share equally’ with this phase. The woman has to be cautious about substances she consumes, places and things she does during pregnancy (carnival rides, medications, smoke, alchol, various dangerous occupations), must likely miss work (certainly for doctor’s appointments etc.) not to mention physical discomfort, possability of death etc. So, frankly, I don’t find your statement ‘they should have equal choice in the matter’ persuasive.

31

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Giraffe *
**
[QUOTE
If you don’t want to risk having an unwanted pregnancy of yours aborted, then talk to a woman about her thoughts on abortion before you sleep with her.
**[/QUOTE]

That is precisely what I do. I’m not speaking of personal experience with the questions I’ve raised. I have fortunately never had to deal with these issues directly. I understand the responsibilities involved with sex, most importantly but not limited to, the creation of a new human being. But others do not. They have unprotected sex and then wind up surprised when they have to deal with these things. Some protect themselves but it fails. Anyway, just so you know, this isn’t personal for me. I’ve just noticed an imbalance and think it should be pointed out.

quote:

There needs to be a change.

Whoops, sound like some kind of damn kook there. I don’t personally give a rat’s ass. I just like calling foul when I see one.

32

What about them? If that is what they believe, then they obviously would not choose to have an abortion. That’s their choice (and I emphasize that word). Why a pregnant person chooses to give birth or not is irrelevant to their legal right to do so.

In other words, pro-life women are given the same legal right to an abortion as pro-choice women.

33

Thank you to **Black Knight ** for stating my point more eloquently than I have been able to.
wring - my statement that they should have equal choice in the matter was conditional on the fact that they are forced to share equal responsibility.

34

LokiTheDog

Someday in the not too distant future, it will likely be possible for a fetus to be removed from the mother and gestated entirely in an artificial environment.

When that becomes possible, then I can certainly see men being allowed to have a say in whether the child is brought to term or not. The woman could be relieved of the responsibility for carrying the fetus to term, yet a child would still be born.

At that point, and only at that point, can I see the men in these scenario’s having a say. Until then, it is, in my view, immoral for force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term that she does not want.

And yes, I find there to be a pretty large ethical quandry still arrises when that does become possible. But that may be for another thread.

When that becomes possible, will women be forced to pay child support for a child the father chooses to bring to term?

-Doug

35

My this is a fast-moving thread :slight_smile: .

LokiTheDog: Also, if I may, I think I’m having a slight problem with one facet of your argument.

I can understand those fathers that argue that they didn’t want a child and therefore don’t want to assume financial responsibility for one. I think they’re shit out of luck ( don’t do the crime, if you can’t do the time :wink: ), but I understand where they’re coming from.

But you’re ( if I understood you correctly ) opposed to abortion. So in effect you are saying that if a woman bears your child, that even though that is the desired outcome for you, you want to have no required financial responsibility simply due to the principle of the matter.

So the mother can’t win. If she aborts, she’s made you angry ( uncomfortable, disturbed, heartbroken, suicidal,or whatever ) because she chose differently than you would have liked. But if she chooses to have a child, even though that is what you want, she is stuck with the bills because you didn’t get a say.

Sounds kind of cold to me.

  • Tamerlane
36

And exactly how is this to be accomplished? Force the man to gain a bunch of weight all in one area of his body, take x number of hours off work, cause him to throw up every morning for 3 months, not allow him to drink, medicate himself, ride carnival rides, and, routinely execute one per whatever percentage die in pregnancy? Exactly how were you planning on increasing his risk for diabetes? and simulating a vaginal delivery?

37

** dublos** - I like that, now we’re getting somewhere.

Tamerlane - sorry for the confusion, it’s because I’m playing both sides of the fence here I guess. Neither situation applies to me, but they both could apply to other individuals.

As I said(probably while you were typing) I don’t take sex flippantly(not a prude either :slight_smile: ) I have made decisions with my partners over the years and have been happy with those decisions because they were mutual. But I had a false alarm 12 years ago when I was 18 and have since thought about the possibilities and why the laws are written the way they are.

38

** dublos** - I like that, now we’re getting somewhere.

Tamerlane - sorry for the confusion, it’s because I’m playing both sides of the fence here I guess. Neither situation applies to me, but they both could apply to other individuals. Try to consider them as two different sets of couples instead of me.

As I said(probably while you were typing) I don’t take sex flippantly(not a prude either :slight_smile: ) I have made decisions with my partners over the years and have been happy with those decisions because they were mutual. But I had a false alarm 12 years ago when I was 18 and have since thought about the possibilities and why the laws are written the way they are.

39

sorry, read the extra sentence in the second post

40

Why not give the man a set period to decide whether he wants to be the child’s father? If he wants to be the father, he pays child support but also has visitation rights. He can also choose to forgo child support, but he will lose all visitation rights.

Of course, this wouldn’t be feasible once the woman can no longer abort.

Holding the man up for something he may have been coerced or forced into doing doesn’t seem fair to me.