What About "Male" Abortion
Mickey Kaus has a quick review of the suddenly hot topic of whether men should be able to opt-out of child care just as women can via abortion. After all, a woman can decide without the father's consent to abort his child. That option is not open to a man - if he doesn't want a child, tough. Kaus discusses some of the tricky questions that would come up in trying to prove the intent of the father - did he or did he not inform the mother that he had no interest in being a father, etc.
To me, the entire pro-abortion argument is founded on the belief that a woman should have the option ("right") to undo a terrible mistake. It does seem "fair" that a man should have this right as well. But fairness aside, would a paternal opt-out provision discourage women from engaging in extra-marital sex? There is an absurd number of out-of-wedlock births in this country right now - if "optional paternity" could reasonably be expected to lower it, then I'm all for it. But my guess is that it is not - that the vast majority of unwed mothers don't end up getting child support payments and that such considerations are not on the minds of either party at the time of the 'infraction'.
To me, the entire pro-abortion argument is founded on the belief that a woman should have the option ("right") to undo a terrible mistake. It does seem "fair" that a man should have this right as well. But fairness aside, would a paternal opt-out provision discourage women from engaging in extra-marital sex? There is an absurd number of out-of-wedlock births in this country right now - if "optional paternity" could reasonably be expected to lower it, then I'm all for it. But my guess is that it is not - that the vast majority of unwed mothers don't end up getting child support payments and that such considerations are not on the minds of either party at the time of the 'infraction'.
posted by ziel | 3/17/2006 08:02:00 AM
5 Comments:
I am of the opinion that should Roe v. Wade be overturned that women should be able to legally hold the father accountable for at least 1/2 of the cost of prenatal care. That means that the clinic/hospital from day one can bill the father as well and defaulting can affect his credit as well. With our ability to do DNA testing on a fetus, it should be pretty easy to prove paternity.
The problem is that a lot of men do not want children and if abortion is made illegal, women are in danger of being murdered by the father of the child.
I am of the opinion that should Roe v. Wade be overturned that women should be able to legally hold the father accountable for at least 1/2 of the cost of prenatal care.
Very reasonable.
The problem is that a lot of men do not want children and if abortion is made illegal, women are in danger of being murdered by the father of the child.
That's true. There would need to be more protections built in for women with potentially abusive boyfriends/husbands, etc.
I don't buy the murder angle - given the draconian sentences we hand out for murder these days - deth penalty or life without parole, unlike the 13-year life sentences of old - and given the obvious guilt of the father, murder as a means of avoiding paternity responsibilities is unlikely. If the law doesn't get you, which it almost certainly will (ADA's would be fighting over such a case), you'd be going thru life looking over your shoulder for the girl's relatives to even the score one day.
But I agree you're basic idea is fair. I don't think this "male Roe v Wade" is going to go anywhere -there's just not a big enough constituency for it - it's limited to single men and people with only sons - probably not big enough to effect such a big change.
"that the vast majority of unwed mothers don't end up getting child support payments and that such considerations are not on the minds of either party at the time of the 'infraction'."
Ah, but this is because the state picks up the tab for illegitimate children. Back when welfare was only for widows, the possibility that you could be ruined if you got pregnant out of wedlock certainly was on the minds of most women.
Back when welfare was only for widows, the possibility that you could be ruined if you got pregnant out of wedlock certainly was on the minds of most women.
Absolutely. Everone took things much more seriously when the stakes (steaks?) were higher.
This goes to Sailer's shotgun weding theory as well. (That people lost the moral authority to impose a shotgun weding when abortion became legal.)
Many younger guys don't like this because obvious it become a lot hard to get laid.
Post a Comment
<< Home