Refuse abortion? Then forget Child Support baby!

Contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.

link

The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The activists involved hope to spark discussion even if they lose.

"There's such a spectrum of choice that women have — it's her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions," said Mel Feit, director of the men's center. "I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly."

Dubay says he has been ordered to pay $500 a month in child support for a girl born last year to his ex-girlfriend. He contends that the woman knew he didn't want to have a child with her and assured him repeatedly that — because of a physical condition — she could not get pregnant.

... a fatherhood opt-out wouldn't necessarily impose higher costs on society or the mother. A woman who balked at abortion but felt she couldn't afford to raise a child could put the baby up for adoption, he said.

The president of the National Organization for Women's, Kim Gandy, acknowledged that disputes over unintended pregnancies can be complex and bitter.

"None of these are easy questions," said Gandy, a former prosecutor. "But most courts say it's not about what he did or didn't do or what she did or didn't do. It's about the rights of the child."

NOW's remark is the best backfire. Since NOW supports abortion
rights, they must be talking about "born" children rights, since
abortion certainly does not give rights to children that have not exited
the womb.

Under the current woman's rights tangle of logic, men's rights will someday
bloom along the same established woman legacy. The supposed abortion right based
on "woman's privacy" will extend to yet undiscovered "men's privacy", at least
as the 2 sex's rights are defined.

I woudn't be surprised if men could insist on an abortion. Perhaps both
parties could submit to binding arbitration like baseball players or plumbers.

Of course all this would have to be decided before the child was born.
Otherwise a born child would magically get some rights as the umbilical is
cut.