Bounced back to top!
Who’s your daddy?
Men’s rights activists in the US are to argue in court that fathers do not have an obligation to pay money towards raising a child they did not want. The National Center for Men is fighting the case on a behalf of a man who says his ex-girlfriend had his child after telling him she could not get pregnant.
Activists say men should have the same rights as women in dealing with the consequences of unintended pregnancy.
[Matt] Dubay says that his former girlfriend became pregnant with his child after assuring him she had a physical condition that prevented her from conceiving. He says she went on have the baby, despite knowing that he did not want to have a child with her.
He now wants the court to free him from his obligation to pay $500 (£287) in child support every month.
No comment
um, well you see the thing is that it is the well-being of the child that is paramount. the kid should go without support payments because daddy feels “cheated”? sorry, dude – next time, wrap that rascal!
agree with doug here… well being of the child is paramount.
a more interesting question is when the man wants the child and the women doesn’t (meaning she wants to terminate the pregnancy). There men have no rights to speak of. Probably purely an intellectual question more than practical.
He made the choice to have sex, now there is a child he should be responsible for it. For your choices there things that happen, you must be mature and live up to your responsibilities.
It takes 2 to tango, and if you don’t want the child don’t have sex.
This goes for both man and woman.
I hope they roast that guy alive in the court and triple his child care payments.
Steve,
It is remotely fair because men do not have to put up with carrying the baby to term and to go through the labor process. If we men were expected to be just as pregnant for 9 months and be in labor for hours, then I’d say we should get equal say. Otherwise, how is it fair for men to tell a woman that it isn’t fair that we cannot tell them what to do with their bodies and their lives?
In regards to paying for child support…you just got to suck it up. Sometimes things happen that aren’t planned or not wanted; does that mean men should not take responsibilities for their actions? It’s like saying…“I didn’t mean to or want to hit that person with my car, but eh…since I didn’t mean to, I am not responsible for it…”
Mike – child support is not about the equities between the parents, it is about providing for the child. say mom is poor – should the kid live in poverty b/c she told daddy she could not get preggers? and adoption – the child should be deprived of her biological mother because daddy doesnt want to pay? if the vasectomy or the condom failed, well there’s always lawsuits.
in the bigger picture – reproductive freedom /= child support issues because body /= wallet.
Steve, I am not talking legally, that is a different issue, I am talking ethical, and I will go on to say, abortion is not ethical ether, but unfortunately that is legal, but maybe we still can force this “man” (I put that in quotes because the he is acting is immature, so I am not sure he is a man, but a little boy — running from responsibility) to live up to his responsibilities.
What I see happening is if this “man” wins, more woman will be forced to have abortions they don’t want because without the “mans” help (money wise) they could not care for the child (and sadly many don’t think about adoption, a very loving thing to do for a child — better then abortion)
If they’re abandoning a child obviously legality doesn’t really come into it.
I don’t think this guy should be roasted in court, & it’s not fair he was lied to, but the well being of the child is paramount. However the woman shouldn’t just be allowed to freeload.
I would make a comment but between Steve and Lou, have made it resoundingly well. The issue here is the double standard of equal protection under the law – and the man has no input into the matter.
The VERY sad part is the welfare of the child. I haven’t heard how old the child is, but hope that he/she is to young to be impacted by the severity of this preceeding. Even in divorce, the true well being of the children is often the pawn of negotiation, without regard to the affects of the pawn.
Chris Vaughn
http://chrisvaughn.org
PS: I guess I did make a comment…. oh well
“So carrying a baby for 9 months is equivalent to paying child support under threat of prison for 18 years?!”
What monetary amount can you put to the process…? It’s under threat of prison because it’s to protect the child from getting screwed over by the man that will not take responsibility for this child…
Rohan, I don’t think any one is thinking the Mother is freeloading. It is not about the mother it is about the child. Also who cares if the mother lied, even if some one has a very small chance of getting pregnant, there is still a chance, best course of action to prevent getting some one pregnant, don’t sleep with them. If you don’t have sex (or donate sperm) you can not father a child, it is just imposable at this time, the future might bring other technology that might change things but for now. . .
I do not believe a woman should legally abandon a baby…
However, with that said…that law was created for the well-being of the child. Some women may feel overwhelmed with the situation and feel desperate to get out of it, it’s better that the baby is abandoned legally with someone then it is for that baby to be “dumped” somewhere, where it’ll have no chance of surviving.
Steve, you keep talking about fair, how is any of this fair for the poor child?? The man did something that has consequences, the child did nothing, yet the child might have to suffer some consequences. You keep saying fair, please define fair?
>>He made the choice to have sex,
Ummm, so did she.
Steve, the woman does not get out as easy as you seam to believe, she will have to change the child diapers for 2 years, the potty train the child, then after that there are all the “fun” of raising the child to the teen years, then the teen years start…
I would think that the “man” is getting off easy with only $500 a month, the woman is going to have to give up 18 years of her life to raise this child (and maybe more the way things are going now)
For her this is going to be a 24/7 job, for the man how long does it take to write a $500 check, yes it cutes in to his spending money, but if you don’t want to pay that, don’t have the sex.
I believe he should also be ordered to be a part of the child’s life, poor child as it stands now will not have a father, unless the woman finds a good man to marry, to bad this “man” is not a real man.
1. Make sure there are some safeguards to ensure that child support is going 100% to the child. If the man did not want to have a child, the mother should not benefit to any detectable degress whatsoever from the support.
2. If a man is going to be forced to pay support, he better have enforceable say in how the child is raised should he choose to exercise it.
3. If a woman deceives a man like that, she should be punished in some way. She hurt his life, she needs to be hurt in return. It’s only fair. The child is innocent and should not be a victim of the situation but there is nothing wrong with punishing the mother in some way.
“You don’t think some men feel overwhelmed with having to work to pay child support for 18 years under penalty of prison?
But you did prove my point, the unbalance arises out of our desire to “protect” women and deny them any responsibility for their actions.
While a man is almost always responsible for his actions, it’s never a woman’s fault. Anyone guy who has ever been married knows that quite well. ”
Yes…being married, I know “It’s never the woman’s fault,” but I never take that crap seriously. But that is another paradox for another forum.
But I do not think you are getting the point, what I am talking about is what is right for the child. If a woman just upped and abandoned their child, she would be punished by the law. She is suppose to be just as responsible. However, there are just a lot more situations where it is not the woman being irresponsible, but the man. This is not fair, not fair for the child.
It’s never fair to some people, but life jus isn’t fair. It’s not like men usually ever get custody of the child either.
It is remotely fair because men do not have to put up with carrying the baby to term and to go through the labor process. ”
Do you suppose this comes as a surprise to a lot of women? “Holy shit, we had sex, and now ***I*** am the one who gets pregnant??!??!?””
Unfair as life may be, each sex has different responsibilities when it comes to living. And ultimately, it’s the woman’s choice whether to get pregnant or not. Just as it’s her choice whether or not to carry the baby to term and go through the labor process. Men have limited say.
While I’m sure that neither you nor I would have sex with a woman of childbearing age without taking proper precautions (unless pregnancy was the desired outcome), not everyone is as smart as us. And when push comes to shove, it’s the woman who has to live with the 9mo/ labor outcome, so it is largely her responsibility to make sure that either she does not get pregnant, or is prepared to deal with it if she does. May not be fair, but life’s a bitch.
Steve, if she did any of those, the “man” would not have to pay. But she did not, this is not a perfect world, nor is a fair place you know the saying “Life is not fair” so just deal with it. I believe the woman made the right choice in to bring the child to term. I will not talk about keeping it vs putting it up for adoption here. But the facts are, he and she had sex, there is a child now involved. This child needs to be cared for, the “man” is responsible for the child being there, therefor the “man” should be responsible for helping with the rising of the child (unless the child is put up for adoption)
No one ever said the law was going to be fair, infact there are thing that are legal that are morally wrong.
“As an example, let a women abandon the baby. But make her pay child support, just like the man would.”
I agree with you there…
However, you don’t think it’s possible for a man to legally abandon a child and not pay child support? I do not think the laws in some states are restricted to just women.
Steve – so you know, I agree with you on this. Its an imbalance in the law, and so far almost everyones comments have illustrated this imbalance.
>>Rohan, I don’t think any one is thinking the Mother is freeloading.
That’s not entirely clear. What do you suppose the woman was thinking when she told her bf that she could not get pregnant, but she really COULD? Woopsie!
I have known women who thought they could get pregnant but could not, but never one who thought she could not get pregnant and then did.
Steve, yes equal protection under the law, what about protection for the child. The state is working under the old assumption that the mother will care for the child. And with the adoption, maybe the state can go after both parents for child support if needed, but I don’t think many people that adopt really need much help with child support, but that is a different matter for a different debate.
But Steve in all your arguments you seam to contently forget that there is a innocent child involved. We need something in place to help keep this child from being harmed, yes it might seem unfair at times, but we are the adults, that “man” is legally an adult, we must watch out for the defencless, and protect the defencless in our society. Be they the children, the handicapped (I will add unborn) the aged, the incapacitated, or the mentally handy capped. (no I am not a liberal)
We have a whole class of people that can be contently ignored, but we can not ignore them and this poor child falls into this class, unfortunately. And this child is probably being used as a pawn by the mother, but that does not mean we should abandon the child, or say the father is free of his obligations to the child.
We as a society must step up to defend this child, and others, today it is just a case of a father trying to weasel his way out of child support, but we have other things that need to be done, if you feel strongly about it Steve try to introduce laws in your state (or even to the feds) that will have the mothers carry part of the responsibility of an abandoned child, or one put up for adoption.
I will admit, I rather not force the mothers into that point because more might chose to abort instead of bring to term and putting up for adoption, right now it is not perfect, it is not fair, but we must protect human life, and if it means being more lenient on the mothers then the fathers, then so be it.
Also take a look at “hate crime” laws, those show there is not equal protections under the law, if some one was to vandalize a church with the slurs of “die christians die” it would be only criminal mischief and the police would not investigate much (unless it was a “black” church), but if it was a synagogue , you better believe it would be labeled a “hate crime” and the police would not rest until some one was in jail for 10 or more years.
>>there is a innocent child involved.
Perhaps someone should have reminded the “mother” of that when she was lying to her boyfriend about not being able to get pregnant.
>>if some one was to vandalize a church with the slurs
>>of “die christians die” it would be only criminal mischief
>>and the police would not investigate much
Interesting point. Maybe it SHOULD be classified as a hate crime (also), as another weapon in the war on terror. Even “die, western infidel, die” fits the bill for me.
Mister Mustard (and Steve) you are assuming she lied, could it not be that she believed (what if she was told by a doctor that misdiagnosed that it was the case) that it was the case she could not get pregnant.
If she believed it was the case then technology she did not lie, she just gave false info, but that is not the same as lying.
Steve, what about protection for the child under the law?
>>If she believed it was the case then technology she did
>>not lie, she just gave false info, but that is not the same as lying.
Lie, gave false info, was delusional, it really makes no difference. It is **HER** responsibility what happens to her body, and the consequences of that.
If someone has anal sex with a guy who told him he was HIV negative, and it turned out he was not, he’s not responsible for the victim’s medical bills. The CATCHER is. It’s HIS body, and if he REALLY didn’t want to get AIDS, he would take the appropriate precautions to make sure that did not happen.
As I said, life’s a bitch. But sometimes you just have to accept responsibility for some things.
Actually, as I understand it, the Equal Protection clause is not applicaple to a given class (in this case men vs women) if the state proves that there is a compelling interest for the different treatment.
In this case I think the welfare of a child could be construed as a compelling interest.
Although I do agree that like many things in life, it’s not fair.
Yes she is responsible for her body, and the “man” is responsible with what he does with his body. No one was holding a gun to his head forcing him to have sex with her, I know probably some men’s fantasy there but probably did not happen here.
I can see how people are having a problem with the how it’s not fair for men. Being forced into being responsible and just being responsible are totally different things. But unfortunately, the “rotten apples” that do not take responsibility for their offspring are those that ruin it for the rest of the men.
The only way to guarantee these “rotten apples” handle their business the proper way with their child is to enforce it as a whole with all men.
Women…well, the society we live in will always buy into whatever stereotypes you have about them and their roles.