I was reading this blog article in HuffyPost from about 2 years ago. The author brings up a point where she says:
"While pro-choice legislation makes the rights of the mother clear, at what point is a father able to say,'I do not want this child'? Whether pro-life or pro-choice, we should all be able to agree that the quality of life is just as important as life itself, and when faced with the pivotal decision of whether or not to continue a pregnancy, both parents must be included in the dialogue. If not, ultimately, it is the child who suffers."
She goes on and provides data of situations of children growing in fatherless homes
• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
• 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes
• 80% of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes
• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes
• 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes
• 70% of youths in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes.
• 85% of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes.
So undoubtedly the right for a woman to choose is obviously non negotiable. If a woman decides based on her situation that she does not want a child because of her reasoning, she has the right to abort her pregnancy without the approval of anyone other than herself. But the does the same rules apply for no one being able to endure a man to be financially responsible for a child that he did not want?
Another question to look at is if a man and woman have sex, they both know the consequences of a possible pregnancy. To which a woman can abort out of. But if a man and woman have sex, does the man have the right to have the woman to carry his child to term even the woman does not want to? (Talking about consensual sex, not rape or any of that stuff). Keep in mind that she knows the consequence of a possible pregnancy as well.
Keep in mind this is about a specific situation such as consensual sex not rape. Obviously matters of rape would nullify the discussion which I am aware of.
taxpayers have a right to not have to pay for irresponsibly conceived children.
There's a difference between irresponsibly and accidentally...
@Rocky Is there another Rocky, or are you talking to yourself?
Anyway, I don't think anyone is asking to give the man control over the woman's body. The issue is that once she makes a decision independent of him, doesn't that make the birth and the consequences of the birth her responsibility as well rather than a joint responsibility.
See my example of the couple who enter a contest to try to win a trip to Ibiza but end up with a puppy instead. He doesn't want it, she does. How much responsibility should he have for the puppy if she gets her way and keeps it?
So, here's the analogy. The one couple wants to have sex (wants a trip to Ibiza) but get something different and not anticipated, a conception (a puppy). He doesn't want the baby (puppy), but she decides she does.
You are arguing then that since winning a puppy and not a trip was a possible outcome, he then should be equally responsible for the woman's puppy even though he doesn't want a puppy?
The puppy is linked to both by both having entered a contest to win a luxury trip. As long as abortion is a possibility and the choice whether to have it or not is 100% the female's, I think she assumes 100% of the responsibility at that point. I don't see that the sex linkage adds much to the equation. Not without some premises you haven't stated. Some women want to have their cake and eat it, too.
Besides, you have a major problem in convincing me. I believe all morality is subjective and not factual. You can't make it a fact that a father should support a child he doesn't want. You can legislate it and enforce it, but morality doesn't come into it at all.
If you like, though, llet's talk about the morality of bringing a child into the world without a father. Forcing the father to provide financial support doesn't thereby make him a "dad.' In fact, some women may want the money but may decide that the biological father isn't what they want as a father for the child. Once again, the male often has no choice in the matter. What about the morality of that situation?
I assumed we were discussing whether a man should have the legal right to abort/not care for a child that is his.
Not exactly. The question in the original post isn't about giving men the right to force a woman to abort, but whether she, through deciding to carrythe unexpected pregnancy to term, should be able to effectively create an obligation for him to support the child. Right now, typically, in the United States, she can.
Or, should a male be able to say, "We didn't go into this intending to create a child, so I want no part of it. If you want it, fine, but that is your decision and it is you, then, taking on the responsibility.
Creation, by its nature, is necessarily an intentional act. If God (you know, the imaginary one) had created the universe as a kind of "Oops!" nobody would be calling him the creator.
"both parents must be included in the dialogue. If not, ultimately, it is the child who suffers."
Not really - children don't need fathers - fathers are over rated. it only takes one good parent to raise a child or two. A good mother is better than the best father. The thing that will cause a child to suffer is if the mother is too young, not supported, living in poverty, uneducated etc.
"at what point is a father able to say,'I do not want this child'?"
. He doesn't have to want the child or see it. Thats his choice and he can piss off because a child with a good mother can do without its father. But the father still needs to pay to provide for its upbringing.
But if a man and woman have sex, does the man have the right to have the woman to carry his child to term even the woman does not want to?
No - can you imagine the horror of that reality. This is why its ultimately her decision. Its her body. How could a female possibly be forced to carry out a pregnancy to full term against her wishes? The living person is more important than the unborn non-person.
and with consensual sex - well how can we define consensual sex?
What if they were both drunk or one coerced the other or what if they were too young etc. Its not always rape. Sometimes its just a mistake and not convenient for her to be pregnant at that time.
Do men have the same problem?
Anyway Adam, what would you do If your condom broke and she became pregnant. Would you support the child even though you didn't want a relationship with it.
I'm not sure where you get your idea that the absence of dad is no big deal. From The Annals of Psychotherapy & Integrative Health.
A single parent, normally the mother, raises many of these children. Fatherless homes have a negative effect on children. According to the Center for Disease Control, 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Center for Children’s Justice [CCJ], n.d.). The Bureau of the Census reports that 90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes (CCJ). Seventy-one percent of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (CCJ). Seventy-five percent of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (CCJ). Sixty-three percent of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (CCJ). Eighty percent of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Knight & Prentky, 1987). Eighty-five percent of all youths sitting in prison grew up in a fatherless home (CCJ). Criminal behavior experts and social scientists are finding intriguing evidence that the epidemic of youth violence and gangs is related to the breakdown of the two-parent family (CCJ). Additional statistics that emphasize the trauma of growing up in a fatherless home include the following:
5 times more likely to commit suicide
32 times more likely to run away
14 times more likely to commit rape
20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
20 times more likely to end up in prison (Center for Children’s Justice)
"I'm not sure where you get your idea that the absence of dad is no big deal."
I'll always maintain that its the absence of community/culture thats caused the breakdown not the absence of bio-dad. I have no doubt that children need to grow up observing good role models in both sexes. Males can include elders, uncles etc not just dad.
and you know - about those statistics you've provided - those are caused by bad parenting and awful environments - not by the absence of dad.
You seem so sure that the mothers of all those at risk children don't have alternative male role models.
Where do you get that idea. Are mothers that dumb?
"Are mothers that dumb?"
The mainstream of them - yes
I have absolutely no sympathy for men who are irresponsible with their sperm. They need to deal with the consequences of that.
But where I do feel sorry for men is when they believe that the child or children they have been supporting for years, are not biologically theirs.
Thats a shocker.