This is the question some men in the U.S. are asking family court judges, when slapped with court-ordered child support.

If a man accidentally conceives a child with a woman, and does not want to raise the child with her, what are his choices? Surprisingly, he has few options in the United States. He can urge her to seek an abortion, but ultimately that decision is hers to make. Should she decide to continue the pregnancy and raise the child, and should she or our government attempt to establish him as the legal father, he can be stuck with years of child support payments.

Some men resent this. They feel they shouldn't be forced to financially support children they never wanted. They say they were trapped by women who claimed to be on birth control when they are not, promised to have an abortion if they get pregnant, but then changed their minds, poked holes in their diaphragms/condoms or claimed to be infertile when they are not. But some women, counter that they are also trapped into single motherhood for 18 years with, often, next to no recourse. They claim men, in different ways, lied, deceived, broke their promises, or pulled a 180, when faced with an unplanned pregnancy. They agreed to marry but didn't, or refused to pay child support and became deadbeat dads, once the child was born.

Some men even attempted to expand the concept of reproductive rights by replacing the pro-choice motto, "My body, my choice," with "my wallet, my choice."

But a U.S. District Court in Michigan ruled otherwise. In June 2006, the National Center for Men filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Michigan, on behalf of a 25-year old computer technician who didn't want to pay child support for the daughter he conceived with his 20-year-old ex-girlfriend. During their three-month relationship, he allegedly told his ex-girlfriend he wasn't ready to have children, and she replied that she was infertile but using birth control anyway. After they had unprotected s-x, she got pregnant and chose to raise the child. He promptly received a court order to pay $500 a month in child support.

The lawsuit contended that if a woman has the legal right to abort, give up for adoption, or raise a child from an unintended pregnancy, a man should be able to choose to decline the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The case, nicknamed “Roe v. Wade for men,” equated a woman’s decision about her body to a man’s right to decide whether he wants children. But U.S. District Court Judge David M. Lawson dismissed the lawsuit, in March 2007, on the grounds that the computer engineer had no choice but to accept the financial consequences of his conduct. That ruling managed to provoke a national conversation about “reproductive rights for men.

From the beginning, the case was a longshot. The courts have never sided with men like the computer technician, believing that a child’s interest in receiving financial support from two parents outweighs a father’s claim of being duped into financial responsibilities for which he was unprepared. The case sparked debate over whether men can claim the right to terminate all parental responsibility, based essentially on the verbal equivalent of an informal prenuptial agreement.

Glenn Sacks, a commentator on father’s issues who supported the computer technician, wrote, “When it comes to reproduction, in America today women have rights and men merely have responsibilities.”

Dr. Laurie Shrage, in the article "Is Forced Fatherhood Fair?" says that "punishing men for accidental pregnancies also punish those children who must manage a lifelong relationship with an absent but legal father. These “fathers” are not “dead-beat dads” failing to live up to responsibilities they once took on — they are men who never voluntarily took on the responsibilities of fatherhood with respect to a particular child.”

Sources:
alternet.org /Excerpted from the article: "The Difference Between a Womb and a Wallet" By Kai MaÂ
nationalcenterformen.org
newyorktimes.com / Article: "Is Forced Fatherhood Fair?" by Dr. Laurie Shrage
_________________________________

Your thoughts?

Here is my thot

its like throwing a thousand stone at a glass window and hoping that it doesn't break.

if it doesn't break good for u, but if it breaks u will have to pay for it

my point is if u dnt want to pay keep it zipped.
Chances are those 3million sp-erm u throw each time u Bleep dat babe. One day one is going to break
a window and u will have to pay for it.

bebe2:
Here is my thot

its like throwing a thousand stone at a glass window and hoping that it doesn't break.

if it does break good for u, but if it breaks u will have to pay for it

my point is if u dnt want to pay keep it zipped.
Chances are those 3m sp-erm u throw each time u Bleep dat babe. One day one is going to break a window and u will have to pay for it.

I disagree with your analogy which somehow appears deficient. Let me help out here.

The owner of a house invites her friend to a game of stone throwing on glass claiming the glass is triplex(on the pill, inserted coils etc) and would not break. They both enjoyed the game but broke a piece of glass in the process. Now that broken glass may have a product.....injuries to the house owner since she lives there. Thankfully they have a choice to clean up their mess (abortion) but the house owner rejects this and walks on it causing injuries.

Is it fair for her to make any claims on her friend considering the following;

1. She told the friend that the glass was unbreakable when she knew it was not.
2. She had an opportunity to "clean" it up but still went ahead to step on the broken glass.

My thoughts.

If before the pregnancy, he told her about not wanting a child and she agreed to still have unprotected $ex, then by all means the lady is responsible for whatever comes next.

Then again, it will always be, he said, she said, so the best thing is, woman if you know your partner can't afford a child and doesn't want one, please take all necessary measure(s) to protect yourself.

Men, if you don't want children, the only way you can ensure that, is, use protection and if the condom breaks, make sure she takes the after morning pill.

Sign over parental rights!
Simple!

If you don't want a child then don't have sex. Before you have sex think about the fact that this decision you're about to make can create a child. It is her right to decide not to put her body through an abortion or to live with the knowledge that she chose to remove her unborn child. In the US a rapist has a right to visit the child they conceived through rape. If he can establish that he is rehabilitated he might be able to come and go as he pleases into his childs life. The woman who was victimized would have to deal with it somehow. People have rights. Even rapists.

Kanwulia:
Sign over parental rights!
Simple!

He could but that won't necessarily stop the child support payments

Because it's your child. It is that simple.

My thot.

If you can't wed her,don't bed her.

soulglo:


He could but that won't necessarily stop the child support payments

Then the man/men should do what is necessary!
No man should be chained to a woman because of ANY child.

Move out of THAT country!
I know MANY Nigerian men who did just that!
I would!

Yes, he should have used some form of birth-control.
He NEVER wanted the child from day one.
Love is not by force!
Na woman dey carry belle. Make SHE deal with am!
Next time make dem babes CHOOSE men wey want pikin OR CLOSE DEM TOTOS!
Period!

That's all . If you cannot stand the heat of child support, stay out of the kitchen of v@gynas

next

bebe2:
Here is my thot

its like throwing a thousand stone at a glass window and hoping that it doesn't break.

if it does break good for u, but if it breaks u will have to pay for it

my point is if u dnt want to pay keep it zipped.
Chances are those 3m sp-erm u throw each time u Bleep dat babe. One day one is going to break a window and u will have to pay for it.

My question to this advocate of don't force me to have a child with you is that


1.if she is not a"wife material, ankara, voile or whatever" according to your standard, why then should it be convenient for you to have sex with her
let me put it in another way


if she's not a take home to mama, dady, grandma etc why should she be a take to bed



why should you sleep with someone who you know at the back of your mind you are not going to marry
shebi yorubas say the thing you cannot buy don't taste. It's like going to a restaurant when you know that you don't have money you eat their food, when it's time to pay,you say you don't have money. No be trouble you dey find so?

If you are molested, embarrassed and forced to pay, why should you cry foul that it's not fair

Condoms.. condoms, condoms.. never leave home without it

I'll take a different view on this topic.

One of my best friends has a baby for her ex-fiance (both Nigerians), but this guy rejected the baby since birth because she was born fully disabled - God bless her.

Now the issue is, he doesn't want to be seen with the baby, doesn't acknowledge her and refuses to support his now baby mama financially. Why?? This is America where competent doctors tell you straight up that your child is disabled before birth. The man wanted her out, but my friend ran to the Church for prayers. I won't judge anyone's decision, but anyways. .. After 6 years, she filed for child support so the dad went to the court with excellent attorneys and told the judge the initial situation and how he suggested an abortion, but she insisted. Just because he never waived paternal rights on the baby and his name is on the birth certificate, he ended up with the responsibility of paying less than $200/month. Chicken change for a disabled child that need 24/7 care.

As women, we get too emotional and sometimes, don't use our head. If we close our legs, we'll be just fine.

To the ones saying, 'don't have $ex if you don't want babies/don't sleep with her if you can't wed her'.

I ask, so it's a must that you wed who you bed? So $ex is now only for procreation?

I say, so long as you are honest about your intentions, I don't see why there should be a problem.

1stCitizen:


I disagree with your analogy which somehow appears deficient. Let me help out here.

[/b]The owner of a house invites her friend to a game of stone throwing on glass claiming the glass is triplex[b](on the pill, inserted coils etc) and would not break. They both enjoyed the game but broke a piece of glass in the process. Now that broken glass may have a product.....injuries to the house owner since she lives there. Thankfully they have a choice to clean up their mess (abortion) but the house owner rejects this and walks on it causing injuries.

Is it fair for her to make any claims on her friend considering the following;

1. She told the friend that the glass was unbreakable when she knew it was not.
2. She had an opportunity to "clean" it up but still went ahead to step on the broken glass.

your analogy isnt any bette,r

u knw triplex window can be broken, it gets broken everyday. it broke dats probably how u came to life.
u are an adult so u have to take responsibilty for ur action.

yes u both enjoyed the game and she is going to bear the consequences too.
who is going to be pregnant? puke for months, stretch marks, labour pains, sore nipples, sleepness nights etc

and u expect to go free to go break another triplex glass, abi??

as for cleaning it up, who's life is at risk during and possibly after the procedure?? and u go about town breaking........

next time person say come and play the game of stone throwing, just say NO.

EyeKandy:
I'll take a different view on this topic.

One of my best friends has a baby for her ex-fiance (both Nigerians), but this guy rejected the baby since birth because she was born fully disabled - God bless her.

Now the issue is, he doesn't want to be seen with the baby, doesn't acknowledge her and refuses to support his now baby mama financially. Why?? This is America where competent doctors tell you straight up that your child is disabled before birth. The man wanted her out, but my friend ran to the Church for prayers. I won't judge anyone's decision, but anyways. .. After 6 years, my friend filed for child support so the dad went to the court with excellent attorneys and straight up told the judge the initial situation and how he suggested an abortion, but the lady insisted. Just because he never waived paternal rights on the baby and his name is on the birth certificate, he ended up with the responsibility of paying less than $200/month. Chicken change for a disabled child that need 24/7 care.

As women, we get too emotional and sometimes, don't use our head. If we close our legs, we'll be just fine.

First of all, you can close your legs as much as you want.
Secondly, if another lady does not and she gets pregnant then the child is STILL innocent and deserves that mother AND father take care of it.
Thirdly, who says that it is compulsory to abort disabled children? They have no right to life? Are you the one to decide it?

carefreewannabe:

First of all, you can close your legs as much as you want.

Excuse you!! Means??

carefreewannabe:
Secondly, if another lady does not and she gets pregnant then the child is STILL innocent and deserves that mother AND father take care of it.

Who says otherwise? Is this a joke?

carefreewannabe:
Thirdly, who says that it is compulsory to abort disabled children? They have no right to life? Are you the one to decide it?

I question your understanding and comprehension skills.
I coherently described two positions and stated that "I wont judge anyone's decision". Neither the father nor the mother. I explained why my friend struggled at court and now, the guy pays peanuts. Her only saving grace is the birth certificate with his name on it. I am not the law.

You asked stup!d questions that has nothing to do with my post. I don't discuss with low reasoning people. This is my last response to you. I suggest you read: Brighter grammar 1, 2 & 3.

EyeKandy:


Excuse you!! Means??



Who says otherwise? Is this a joke?



I question your understanding and comprehension skills.
I coherently described two positions and stated that "I wont judge anyone's decision". Neither the father nor the mother. I explained why my friend struggled at court and now, the guy pays peanuts. I am not the law.

You asked stup!d questions that has nothing to do with my post. I don't discuss with low reasoning people. This is my last response to you. I suggest you read: Brighter grammar 1, 2 & 3.

Why do you ask me questions if you don't intend to respond to my comments?

See superior reasoning.

carefreewannabe:


First of all, you can close your legs as much as you want.
Secondly, if another lady does not and she gets pregnant then the child is STILL innocent and deserves that mother AND father take care of it.
Thirdly, who says that it is compulsory to abort disabled children? They have no right to life? Are you the one to decide it?

If a lady doesn't close her leg and gets pregnant then that's her problem, I mean you should know who you are sleeping with, before you have unprotected $ex with someone, you should have weighed your options, and if a mistake happens, measures can be taken to prevent pregnancy.

If one is going to be taking care of a disabled child, then he or she has a say in whether they are upto it or not, this actually applies to all pregnancies.

Bottomline is, what have you discussed with your partner before opening your legs.

When it comes to pregnancy, the man should NEVER be allowed to get off scott free. Let him sweat it out making Child Support Payments, even if it kills him. Then and only then would he take the necessary precautions to prevent another pregnancy happening.

I've always said it - man are the instigators. Women can't impregnate themselves. The men do it. If a man is happy to let his akamu flow into the nest, he should be darn happy when his akamu hatches an egg or two from the nest.

A man who doesn't want to have kids won't and he will either abstain from sex or have a vasectomy. Anything else outside of these are just feeble excuses to shirk responsibilities for their insatiable lust.

It ain't rocket science!

freecocoa:
If a lady doesn't close her leg and gets pregnant then that's her problem, I mean you should know who you are sleeping with, before you have unprotected $ex with someone, you should have weighed your options, and if a mistake happens, measures can be taken to prevent pregnancy.

I don't care about the lady really, I care about the child. And the child has a right to be taken care of by a father and a mother.

The day after pill can be taken if an accident occurs but you cannot force everyone to approve of abortion. Something that must be discussed too before the deed is done.

If one is going to be taking care of a disabled child, then he or she has a say in whether they are upto it or not, this actually applies to all pregnancies.

No, you have to take care of your child whether it is disabled or not. It is a human being.

Bottomline is, what have you discussed with your partner before opening your legs.

Whatever is discussed before, the child did not have a part in it.

carefreewannabe:


I don't care about the lady really, I care about the child. And the child has a right to be taken care of by a father and a mother.

The day after pill can be taken if an accident occurs but you cannot force everyone to approve of abortion. Something that must be discussed too before the deed is done.




No, you have to take care of your child whether it is disabled or not. It is a human being.



Whatever is discussed before, the child did not have a part in it.

I like that we agree that these things should be discussed before the deed, just like you can't force anyone to approve of abortion, so should you not force a child on someone who doesn't want it, especially after telling you before doing the deed.

That child only gets the right, if he is wanted, if you didn't want him but went ahead to have him, then you must take care of him.

It is a human being whom you are going to be responsible for, therefore it's your right to decide if you want to be responsible for him or not, if every pregnancy was supposed to be, then there won't be anything like abortion or miscarriage.

freecocoa:
I like that we agree that these things should be discussed before the deed, just like you can't force anyone to approve of abortion, so should you not force a child on someone who doesn't want it, especially after telling you before doing the deed.

That child only gets the right, if he is wanted, if you didn't want him but went ahead to have him, then you must take care of him.

It is a human being whom you are going to be responsible for, therefore it's your right to decide if you want to be responsible for him or not, if every pregnancy was supposed to be, then there won't be anything like abortion or miscarriage.

What do you mean by force a child on someone?

And are you saying that parents should be free to abandon or to reject their children when they choose to?
A child has a right to have both parents as long as they are in the mood to take care of the child?

carefreewannabe:


What do you mean by force a child on someone?

And are you saying that parents should be free to abandon or to reject their children when they choose to?
A child has a right to have both parents as long as they are in the mood to take care of the child?

Forcing a child on someone as in, insisting on keeping a pregnancy even when he says he isn't ready for it(assuming they discussed this before doing the deed).

No, I'm saying, a parent can choose to abort or keep a pregnancy, the issue of abandoning a child comes up after the child has been born and if a man tells a woman he doesn't want a child and she let's herself get pregnant and insists on keeping it, then she should carry her cross.

if there's one thing I hate most in this world, it is "deceit". I detest it with the whole of myself and I really dislike deceitful people and I will never associate my self with them and even if I'm associated with one, I disassociate myself from them instantly. Women tricking/deceiving men into bringing children to this world should be made to face the consequences of their action by the law. But how can this be proven in a law court? everyman will claim the woman tricked them in order not to pay child support. Mind you, I'm very against abortion. If you have ever aborted a baby one way or the other or you were instrumental in aborting a baby, you are a killer.

freecocoa:
Forcing a child on someone as in, insisting on keeping a pregnancy even when he says he isn't ready for it(assuming they discussed this before doing the deed).

No, I'm saying, a parent can choose to abort or keep a pregnancy, the issue of abandoning a child comes up after the child has been born and if a man tells a woman he doesn't want a child and she let's herself get pregnant and insists on keeping it, then she should carry her cross.

So when an accident happens and a woman gets pregnant despite contraceptives and notices it when being in the second months, she has to abort the child despite her firm belief that abortion is murder and despite any possible health risks that come along with abortion?

And it is wrong to abandon your child after it was born but it is right to kill it before it is born?

carefreewannabe:


So when an accident happens and a woman gets pregnant despite contraceptives and notices it when being in the second months, she has to abort the child despite her firm belief that abortion is murder and despite any possible health risks that come along with abortion?

And it is wrong to abandon your child after it was born but it is right to kill it before it is born?

One in million cases, exception to the rule.

After the child has been born in example no 1, there's no point abandoning.

You have the right to decide if he or she should be born, that's why there's provision for abortion, I already said that.

freecocoa:
One in million cases, exception to the rule.

After the child has been born in example no 1, there's no point abandoning.

You have the right to decide if he or she should be born, that's why there's provision for abortion, I already said that.

Last time I checked, abortion is NOT legal everywhere.

carefreewannabe:


Last time I checked, abortion is NOT legal everywhere.

Lol, abortion is one of the easiest thing everywhere, legal or not.

freecocoa:
Lol, abortion is one of the easiest thing everywhere, legal or not.

ileobatojo:

Duh! Hold your eyes o, make them no fall comot.