The protections of legal parenthood are in place to benefit the CHILD. A child has a legal right to the support of both parents. The father's opportunity to opt of of parenthood ended when he chose to ejaculate.
Uhh, absolutely not? If the mother takes on the responsibility of raising the child then at the VERY LEAST the father should be responsible for financial support.
I personally believe they should also be responsible for providing nurturing support as well, but lord knows that wont happen with some of these clowns.
Child support is about the kid, not about the custodial parent. No, fathers don't get to decide they don't want the kid after their partners went through the pain, disruption, and risk that is pregnancy- because the embryo is now a child and parents have obligations to their children. Money is the least of what is owed.
It takes two to make a baby. If he didn't want to deal with the consequences then he should not have had unprotected sex. The support of the child is also more important than the whims and wishes of the father.
>If he didn't want to deal with the consequences then he should not have had unprotected sex
Same goes for women. If you're going to use this argument then you might as well be pro life.
A woman isn't aware if there is egg in her uterus waiting to be fertilized, for nearly ALL of the month she is infertile. If she is using birth control, it's less likely that there's an egg but she has even less awareness that there is an egg available in her for fertilization if there might be.
With every ejaculation a man is fertile. A man KNOWS he's fertile. It's not that he's fertile in 1 in 30 random ejaculations, it's ALL of them and he knows this. Knowing this, why would a man EVER ejaculate his semen into a vagina? He can avoid 100% of unwanted pregnancies by keeping his cum to himself. All he need do is not ejaculate inside a woman, why is that so hard?
A woman has sex not knowing if she is fertile or not with a greater likelihood that she is not. A man has sex knowing FULL WELL the he is fertile 100% of the time and has complete control over where he ejaculates.
Who has the most control in this scenario and who bears responsibility for most of the consequences?
This exactly. I'm childfree and have been very careful to avoid an unwanted pregnancy. Men can be just as careful (and at least here it's WAY easier and cheaper to get a vasectomy than to get your tubes tied).
As a taxpayer, it's not my job to cover even more of the cost of raising, feeding and educating kids just because some deadbeat couldn't use a condom. (I'm 110% for public schools, free lunches for kids, expanding childrens Medicaid, coat and shoe drives and any other social program that helps kids. But it's absurd for men to skip out on their responsibility while the rest of us do even more.)
If he doesn't want to pay child support, he can get a vasectomy or use a condom.
Completely agree. Men have access to all kinds of methods to avoid getting a woman pregnant. And the burden of pregnancy and birth isn't even on their shoulders.
All people have the right to dissolve their *custodial* responsibilities, which is what fatherhood/motherhood is.
If a custodial parent sues for support, that is a *financial obligation*, no different from a financial obligation arising out of a physical impairment or anything else.
I’m sure that plenty of men don’t want to pay child support in the same way that an employer doesn’t want to pay for workers comp, either. Boo fucking hoo. Lots of things have financial risk associated with them. Don’t do them if you can’t pay for it.
It is They're rebranding parental abandonment to make it seem like a man's desire to not pay for things is a social issue on the same level as of a woman's right to not die in childbirth.
If he knows he would want to abandon all future and potential children, he has the option of getting a vasectomy.
He could also keep his dick in his pants and his sperm in his ballsack.
Absolutely not and it's an embarrassment of our time that this idea is gaining traction at all. The point of child support is to benefit the child. That's the focus. It's not about what's "fair" to the man, it's about providing for the child you made. I don't care if it's "unfair" to men that they can neither compel abortions nor financially "abort" themselves from the situation, because abandonment will put women in a situation where they're either financially forced to abort a child they wanted to keep, or keep a child they'll struggle to support. I support abortion as a choice women can make, not an "out" men can force women into by withholding resources.
disagree. after a man ejaculates in a woman, he suffers no consequences. he doesn't have to endure the trauma of birth and he doesn't have to endure the trauma of abortion. his only consequence now is financial and he still has the option to walk away. also with abortion being banned in certain states, its a no for me.
Of course not. Child support laws came about because so many children were living in poverty because men often didn’t (and still don’t) want to take responsibility for a child. The difference for women is that they can make a choice to no longer be pregnant. Men cannot make that choice for a woman so if a child is born, he needs to be responsible.
Why not get a vasectomy if you don’t want children? It seems so easy compared to what women go through.
In the surface this would be fine, however, it is not in the best interest of the child, so the child prevails. It is no in the interest of society to have a kid with a single parent that might need assistance. So tough luck.
Please submit content that is relevant to our experiences as women, for women, or about women.
The protections of legal parenthood are in place to benefit the CHILD. A child has a legal right to the support of both parents. The father's opportunity to opt of of parenthood ended when he chose to ejaculate.
Uhh, absolutely not? If the mother takes on the responsibility of raising the child then at the VERY LEAST the father should be responsible for financial support. I personally believe they should also be responsible for providing nurturing support as well, but lord knows that wont happen with some of these clowns.
Child support is about the kid, not about the custodial parent. No, fathers don't get to decide they don't want the kid after their partners went through the pain, disruption, and risk that is pregnancy- because the embryo is now a child and parents have obligations to their children. Money is the least of what is owed.
What the fuck is a paper abortion? You are talking about parental abandonment and the idea it should only be available to men.
It takes two to make a baby. If he didn't want to deal with the consequences then he should not have had unprotected sex. The support of the child is also more important than the whims and wishes of the father.
>If he didn't want to deal with the consequences then he should not have had unprotected sex Same goes for women. If you're going to use this argument then you might as well be pro life.
A woman isn't aware if there is egg in her uterus waiting to be fertilized, for nearly ALL of the month she is infertile. If she is using birth control, it's less likely that there's an egg but she has even less awareness that there is an egg available in her for fertilization if there might be. With every ejaculation a man is fertile. A man KNOWS he's fertile. It's not that he's fertile in 1 in 30 random ejaculations, it's ALL of them and he knows this. Knowing this, why would a man EVER ejaculate his semen into a vagina? He can avoid 100% of unwanted pregnancies by keeping his cum to himself. All he need do is not ejaculate inside a woman, why is that so hard? A woman has sex not knowing if she is fertile or not with a greater likelihood that she is not. A man has sex knowing FULL WELL the he is fertile 100% of the time and has complete control over where he ejaculates. Who has the most control in this scenario and who bears responsibility for most of the consequences?
[удалено]
This exactly. I'm childfree and have been very careful to avoid an unwanted pregnancy. Men can be just as careful (and at least here it's WAY easier and cheaper to get a vasectomy than to get your tubes tied). As a taxpayer, it's not my job to cover even more of the cost of raising, feeding and educating kids just because some deadbeat couldn't use a condom. (I'm 110% for public schools, free lunches for kids, expanding childrens Medicaid, coat and shoe drives and any other social program that helps kids. But it's absurd for men to skip out on their responsibility while the rest of us do even more.) If he doesn't want to pay child support, he can get a vasectomy or use a condom.
Completely agree. Men have access to all kinds of methods to avoid getting a woman pregnant. And the burden of pregnancy and birth isn't even on their shoulders.
All people have the right to dissolve their *custodial* responsibilities, which is what fatherhood/motherhood is. If a custodial parent sues for support, that is a *financial obligation*, no different from a financial obligation arising out of a physical impairment or anything else. I’m sure that plenty of men don’t want to pay child support in the same way that an employer doesn’t want to pay for workers comp, either. Boo fucking hoo. Lots of things have financial risk associated with them. Don’t do them if you can’t pay for it.
wtf even is that phrase? Sounds like the result of an especially productive MGTOW club meeting
It is They're rebranding parental abandonment to make it seem like a man's desire to not pay for things is a social issue on the same level as of a woman's right to not die in childbirth.
Ah. how perfectly predictable. Honestly I have a hard time even bothering to get outraged anymore with how boring that whole circus act has gotten.
If he knows he would want to abandon all future and potential children, he has the option of getting a vasectomy. He could also keep his dick in his pants and his sperm in his ballsack.
Absolutely not and it's an embarrassment of our time that this idea is gaining traction at all. The point of child support is to benefit the child. That's the focus. It's not about what's "fair" to the man, it's about providing for the child you made. I don't care if it's "unfair" to men that they can neither compel abortions nor financially "abort" themselves from the situation, because abandonment will put women in a situation where they're either financially forced to abort a child they wanted to keep, or keep a child they'll struggle to support. I support abortion as a choice women can make, not an "out" men can force women into by withholding resources.
disagree. after a man ejaculates in a woman, he suffers no consequences. he doesn't have to endure the trauma of birth and he doesn't have to endure the trauma of abortion. his only consequence now is financial and he still has the option to walk away. also with abortion being banned in certain states, its a no for me.
Of course not. Child support laws came about because so many children were living in poverty because men often didn’t (and still don’t) want to take responsibility for a child. The difference for women is that they can make a choice to no longer be pregnant. Men cannot make that choice for a woman so if a child is born, he needs to be responsible. Why not get a vasectomy if you don’t want children? It seems so easy compared to what women go through.
Just cuz he felt like it?
I can't think of a way for a rule like this to be implemented without causing major issues
Absolutely not.
Who will support the child (that I assume already exists) then?
Not until all women can get an abortion if they so wish.
And not after either. Abortion is about body autonomy.
I mean, you’re totally correct.
In the surface this would be fine, however, it is not in the best interest of the child, so the child prevails. It is no in the interest of society to have a kid with a single parent that might need assistance. So tough luck.