The things you can do and learn online for General Paper (and Project Work).

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/08/fatherhood.suit.ap/index.html

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.

Advertisements

Comments on: "‘Male activists want say in unplanned pregnancy’" (4)

  1. hong sze min said:

    I feel that this is a rather private matter, between the man and the woman. It isn’t fair to blame the male all the time especially as females are equally capable of deceit. The issue of wanting the child is really concerned by only the parties involved, the law’s part in things is only if rights as stipulated in the constitution has been violated. Why bother the courts with a petty (admittedly not to those involved) argument about shifting responsibility from one to the other each claiming a truth to their side of the story?
    Circumstances dictate everything, if the woman wanted the baby and the man didn’t, then I think he has the right to refuse to “pay up” so to speak. If both parties didn’t want the child, but engaged in lies, false claims of physical incapabilities and not willing to engage in safe sex, then both are at fault, too bad, too sad.
    If I were in charge, I’ll just tell them to go solve their problems on their own. If they’re grown up enough to engage in sexual activity, then they ought to be mature enough as well to handle the consequences. As for the education of those people, well… nothing to do with me.
    Just my rambling.
    ~asm

  2. Some Guy said:

    In a perfect world everything you said would be true. However immature and irresponsible adults and children all over the country are sexually active and that is why we have unplanned pregnancies in the first place. If people were responsible enough to handle problems maturely on their own we wouldn’t need a judicial system in the first place. The fact is people can be cruel, especially when it comes to sexual relationships so it is the responsibility of the government to protect its citizens from themselves. I think this debate is long over-due. I am pro-choice because I don’t think anyone should have to right to tell a woman what to do to her body. However if she chooses to take a child to term against the wishes of the father then she should forfeit all paternal financial support. I think this a pretty cut and dry issue.

  3. I feel that the father should not be allowed to dodge his paternal payments, should the girl decide to carry the baby to term.

    Firstly, it is easy for a male to call for abortion if they don’t want any responsibility or burden. Unfortunately, it is not as clear cut for the female. The girl has to deal with the biopyschosocial aspects of the trauma. And that itself is already a huge stress factor on the girl. It’s not just a simple matter of financial arrangements. I don’t think it’s fair if the guy can get away so easily. After all, it takes 2 for the deed to happen.

    If fathers are allowed to skirt their payments, it would just send out a wrong message to all guys that it’s ok to sleep around, since their future would not be jeopardize by an unwanted pregnancy. After all, they can afford to be indifferent. As of now, even with the fear of unwanted pregnancies, there is still rampany PM sex occurring. What will happen then when fatherhood responsibilities can be easily relieved?

    Girls also tend to want to keep their unborn child. If the fathers can choose not to help out, it is just going to create a vicious cycle of financial unstability for the girl as she struggles to bring up the kid. Who knows, suicide rates may rise in the process.

    Of course, the woman could be the despicable one too. Claiming paternal payments for her own use. But truthfully, i think that would be one dumb woman. After all how much of the paternal payments can she use to splurge on herself without spending a significant portion on the kid? Bringing up a kid is not cheap.

    And not allowing the law to step into the matter because this is a private issue between a couple, is not a wise choice. Either party could abuse the other, and a lot more social problems could crop up.

  4. firestorm said:

    For the father of the child to refuse financial support to the child on the basis of his needing a choice in the mattter is completely ungrounded.

    He did have a choice as to whether or not to have sex with the woman in question. The fact is that as an adult in consenting to having sex with this woman he consented to the responsibility of raising the child that could have possibly been conceived. For him to decline the responsibilty of taking financial care of this child is immature and shows a lack of ability to take responsibility for his own actions.

    The judicial system is often noted for saying ‘if you did the crime then you’ve got to do the time’. Let this saying work now with the father.

    The mothers’ choices are based on the ability to take care of the child, these choices should not be taken without consideration of the father of the child. If the views of the parents do differ, and the woman decides to raise the child against the wishes of the father, the father may then forfeit financial responsiblility of the child and thus any parental responsibility of the child.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: