Financial/paper abortion - legitimate arguments against?

poppy_blu · 2022-09-25T23:30:51+00:00

The biggest one is the child knowing their father didn’t want anything to do with them and decided parting with their money was worse than parting with their child. Though the reality is that millions and millions of men have and are already doing this, it just isn’t recognized by the courts.

Beyond that, there’s the implications on society at large. The two people who made the kid should be responsible for supporting it, not me. I do support safety net programs, but because I don’t want children to suffer because of the bad decisions of their parents. I also recognize that there are some dads out there who are legit struggling financially and can’t make their child support payments, and I don’t think putting them in jail and virtually guaranteeing they’ll never be able to support their kids in the future isn’t their answer. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to support the kids of the some day trader making 800k a year because he was too lazy to wear a condom.

scwizard · 2022-09-25T22:44:13+00:00

Parents have a moral responsibility to their children.

anonymous-platypus1 · 2022-09-25T17:24:31+00:00

I think part the issue is, some men will no doubt use this to be an absent father during the hard years, then come back when this kid is an adult and be a father for a lot less work/after years of not helping.

Novadina · 2022-09-25T18:33:23+00:00

But when abortion is a legal and accessible option for women, and a man does not want a child, shouldn’t it be an option for the man to have a window of time to say he will not be a part of the kid’s life OR, alternatively, that he IS willing to contribute (financially or otherwise)? Then the woman can use that information to help in her decision about whether to terminate the pregnancy.

Abortion being legal is not the only consideration for if a woman can get an abortion.

What if it’s a against her religion? What if she honestly believes doing it will send her to hell where she will be painfully torutured for eternity? What if she just doesn’t believe in abortion and thinks it’s murder? Then she is 100% responsible for a kid that took two people to create? Expecting a woman to kill a fetus just because he wanted to cum in her doesn’t seem right, one is a lot less morally ambiguous, not to mention easier to do (and it’s free to not cum in a woman too).

A lot of people don’t believe in doing drugs or alcohol, or sex before marriage, or adultery, and most people would find it abhorant if we forced them to do it anyway just because it was legal.

Biologically, the woman happens to have a bit more time to prevent birth than the man does, making men not pay their share wouldn’t change this. If a kid is born, then it exists and needs care, and it took two people to create it. Biologically, the man can only control his sperm and the woman can only control her eggs - and in fact it’s much easier to control where the sperm goes than it is to control where the egg goes - only invasive medical interventions can control that. If both people don’t control any of it then there is a kid that needs financial support - a man signing a paper doesn’t prevent its existence or make the kid eat less or not require shelter…

bunnakay · 2022-09-25T17:16:53+00:00

I support it abstractly, moreso if they stop referring to it as abortion. But given how many men have told me they don't even bother asking a woman what'd she'd do with an unwanted pregnancy prior to having sex with her, they don't have my sympathy.

Freevoulous · 2022-09-25T22:16:18+00:00

the ONLY solution to this whole problem is if all men got reversible vasectomies at 18 and only had them reversed after they and a woman sing a Parenting Contract PRIOR to the child even being conceived.

Every other solution is just band-aid.

januaryphilosopher · 2022-09-25T17:23:37+00:00

Someone is going to have to pay for those children, and I'd rather it were their parents than the taxpayer. It would also disincentivise men to care about whether their actions lead to pregnancy at all, as it won't have an impact on their bodies or finances, and with the amount of reproductive coercion that happens currently that's rather unsettling.

_revelationary · 2022-09-25T22:42:31+00:00

First of all, I think a more apt term is giving up parental rights. An abortion is a medical procedure/pill/surgery. When people give up parental rights, you are wiping yourself clean from your child, they are not only not yours in a social sense, but in a legal/financial sense. You are considered no longer their parent. I have no idea on how hard this is to achieve though, and varies a lot by state.

One argument against "financial abortion," is that the law favours the child welfare above all. For example, say a single teen mom doesn't want/can't have an abortion, but doesn't/is unable to raise their child. She can't just get a "financial abortion," without going through the process of a legal adoption, or up to 30 days in all states activate the Safe Haven law. However, the mother still needs to follow the rules of her individual Safe Haven law or she is liable to prosecution (child abandonment). So both the mother and father can sign away their parental rights, but it is a stringent process.

In the matter of fairness, if the father is the primary custodian, the court can and will absolutely order child support from the mother, it is just more uncommon as it is more common for the woman to be the primary custodian. It is more common to be a single mom than a single mom, statistics-wise.

https://www.clevergirlfinance.com/blog/do-women-pay-child-support/#:~:text=The%20short%20answer%20is%20yes,is%20an%20entirely%20different%20question.

Naturally, despite being about parental rights, when the term "financial abortion," comes up, the crux of argument is: it is unfair that women can get an abortion and a man can't. As Dave Chappelle said in Sticks and Stones: "Gentlemen, that is fair, and ladies, to be fair to us, I also believe if you decide to have the baby, a man should not have to pay. That’s fair. If you can kill this motherfucker, I can at least abandon him. It’s my money, my choice."

And to that I would say, that is a good point. It is unfair. But I would also say biology, and specifically reproduction is inherently unfair. It's unfair that men are naturally much stronger and taller than women. It is unfair that women suffer all the complications of pregnancy to their body, suffer for 9 months, not to mention other medical risks ranging from normal to deadly.

I do agree with Dave Chappelle when he said: "And if I’m wrong, then perhaps we’re wrong. Think that shit out for yourselves." Personally I thought about this as an adult, with changing and evolving opinions.

I always landed with when it comes to pregnancy and reproduction, women bear more responsibility (to not get pregnant, birth control choices, to make sacrifices for a healthy pregnancy, pain), but also have more choice, (when it comes to whether to have the child).

Lastly, I think even if giving up parental rights would become much easier, it might not still be an easy thing. For example, let's say you were raised by a single Mom. The father never taught you to throw a ball, how to tie a tie, girlfriend advice, never was involved, never helped pay for your schooling, or anything.

Then he comes back when you are 25 and says "Hey, I financially aborted you, so that is why I was never there." Would you see it as "oh, well since hypothetically my mother had the opportunity to abort me, that is fair." Or better yet, how would kids react when they are older knowing that their father financially aborted them. Would there be a support group for financially aborted people?

(Honestly, that is why we should just stick to calling it waiving parental rights, because financial abortion sounds even worse). Just stick to the terms we already have.

In the end of the day, the stigma of the "dead beat dad," will probably remain. For the most part, I think fathers choose not to waive parental rights because it is a very hard thing to do emotionally. Once you have the kid, it changes everything. That is why we see so many more teen moms who raise their kids. If they don't abort, once the kid is born, they find it too hard to give up financial responsibility because that would mean giving up being a Mom to your kids. Even if the "smart," thing to do is give up the kid, emotional bonds overtake everything else.

A lot of men probably feel similarly. There is all the talk of saving finances, and abortion, and blah blah, but once that kid is born, when you see the baby born. Hell, just knowing you have a son out there, a daughter; at that point it is probably too late. Whether you want to be a father is irrelevant; you have a son. You have a daughter...."Hey why aren't they carrying my name." Better talk to the girlfriend... (ie, taking on more responsibility)" And that changes someone forever.

Hate to break it to you fellows, but you do have paternal instincts, meaning you are just as irrational when it comes to babies as your mother and father, and their parents were. A lot of men think about carrying on their legacy, making sure their baby has their last name at the very least, then "financial abortion, (again, a weird way to talk about a person)" when they have a child.

Probably how some women when they first find out they have an unexpected pregnancy might imagine abortion, but have the baby and can now never imagine it any other way, and will now die for their child. I imagine some men might have a flash of "oh shit, should I l run?," Then their girlfriend doesn't have the baby, and they meet their baby and boom, their paternal instincts start firing.

Naturally, we feel more affinity/responsibility to a 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20 year old son, than a couple months old unknown gender aborted fetus.

darkvalleys · 2022-09-25T18:52:33+00:00

Maybe if you consider countries where child support is mandated vs not, you might see a pattern

Just a thought!

BikePersonDotCom · 2022-09-25T20:03:13+00:00

Taxpayers being on the hook vs personal responsibility. Don’t want to pay for the sperm of losers, simple as

cowfishAreReal · 2022-09-25T17:47:13+00:00

A fetus never being born doesn't affect society negatively. A child being born into poverty because their father refuses to support them does. The reason I don't think that should be allowed is simple, if BOTH parents aren't paying for the child then all taxpayers probably are. And asking the whole country to pay for your mistake is simply not reasonable.

NakedStreets · 2022-09-25T18:03:07+00:00

shouldn’t it be an option for the man to have a window of time to say he will not be a part of the kid’s life OR, alternatively, that he IS willing to contribute (financially or otherwise)?

Possibly, but this window of time should be BEFORE SEX, not after the predictable consequences of sex the man participated in.

risdeveau · 2022-09-25T18:26:02+00:00

That was called life before child support, and we do not do that anymore

I assume there are good reasons for almost all modern Western societies to have done this, but that’s just me.

RealNiceLady · 2022-09-25T22:30:38+00:00

Financial/paper abortion - legitimate arguments against?

1) unfair to women 2)unfair to children 3)bad for society 4)promotes gendered sexual double standards 5)causes fathers to be undervalued in society

Obviously this can only be an option in places where abortion is easily accessible,

Even when abortion is readily available this bullshit should not stand.

But when abortion is a legal and accessible option for women, and a man does not want a child, shouldn’t it be an option for the man to have a window of time to say he will not be a part of the kid’s life OR, alternatively, that he IS willing to contribute (financially or otherwise)?

If a man impregnates a woman, he must take responsibility for it, period.

Then the woman can use that information to help in her decision about whether to terminate the pregnancy

A woman's decision whether or not to terminate should never be based on the man's willingness, or lack thereof, to take responsibility for his own child.

Should men and women just be thinking more about and discussing the very real repercussions of sex BEFORE they hook up (unlikely)?

Um, yeah.

Edited to add - even though this wasn’t framed as a CMV, a lot of the discussion here has made me change my mind in that now I don’t think this is clearly as fair a solution as I thought before. And it could definitely have far more negative consequences.

Thank you.

sublimemongrel · 2022-09-26T00:38:19+00:00

I did a post on this that I thought was fairest but most men were against it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5b7gi6/cmv_contractual_waivers_before_sex_is_the_fairest/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Edit: since you’re talking about “BEFORE hooking up” maybe this will appeal to you

CanYouTieThemInABow · 2022-09-25T17:47:20+00:00

There does not exist a way to give men and women equal power in this situation. A man will never suffer the consequences of pregnancy and childbirth, and men mostly seem ignorant of the hardships of pregnancy, particularly the men on this subreddit.

So those who argue that this is a matter of equality are mistaken. Equality is impossible: a woman deciding whether or not to have a baby is not the same as a man making that decision. And the impact of the decision is also different, because there is a baby or there isn't.

The simple truth is that hookups are a bad idea. We shouldn't further incentivize men to follow their dicks. And we shouldn't ignore the well-being of children when discussing adult relationships.

mcove97 · 2022-09-25T19:58:25+00:00

An undeveloped fetus and a fully developed baby are two different things.

That fully developed baby needs money to keep it alive and well. If the dad isn't paying towards the baby, then it becomes the tax payers burden.

If neither the tax payer or the father pay towards the child, it will grow up suffering and will be much more likely to turn to crime as an adult - which is a net negative for all involved.

We already have an issue of getting men to use protection. If we take away the fear of paying towards a child - the amount of kids born to single parents will increase by a significant amount.

It's not a perfect system, but I think it's the best we can do.

NockerJoe · 2022-09-25T18:50:11+00:00

Lmao dudes will bitch endlessly about how fatherless women carry on right up until its time to act like a father.

Demasii · 2022-09-25T19:58:53+00:00

Are the arguments against financial abortion primarily logistical?

Yup. There is really no way around it.

Men accepting the risks and using condoms (and throwing it away from the woman) is the most cost effective and simpliest plan to execute without massive detrimental effects to society.

GlamSunCrybabyMoon · 2022-09-25T20:02:53+00:00

Men will opt out of child support and parental responsibility and then try to reappear in their adult child’s life if they are sick and need a caregiver (especially if they have a daughter). If they’re terrible enough they will come back and ask their children for help.

Nothing stops their children from hunting them down either if they don’t want to be involved. That’s why an abortion will never be equal to a financial abortion. The situation definitively ends with an abortion. With a financial abortion you will have to look over your shoulder for the rest of your life wondering if your kid you didn’t want will show up at your door and hate your guts.

It also means men could just abandon multiple children under the guise of “well I told her I don’t want it” and not have a single repercussions. I don’t care about my taxes paying for these children, that’s fine to me. I care about the quality of the childrens lives.

KekeSmall · 2022-09-25T18:16:56+00:00

The burden of sex,pregnancy, and child rearing mostly fall on women anyways. Regardless of what a man chooses to do. Seeing as how a lot of men already skip out on child support (both financially and physically) makes it hard for me to sympathize. The average CS payment is only around $400 a month anyway. Most women aren’t making off like thieves in the night. Raising a mans child completely by yourself ends up being a liability more than anything. It takes more than just money to effectively raise a child. Throwing a few dollars every month but still being able to have your life to yourself seems like a fair trade off to me.

social_mule · 2022-09-26T01:12:53+00:00

The idea of financial abortion is the single stupidest argument made by the RP community. The folks who advocate it are even more annoying than the 80/20 bots. What's the premise behind it? You fuck a woman raw, bust a nut inside her and impregnate her. Then you declare financial abortion like Michael Scott declared bankruptcy because you never wanted to be a father?

On what fucking planet does this even come close to making sense?

Valuable-Marzipan761 · 2022-09-25T18:12:57+00:00

What are the arguments against men being able to opt out of child support and being a part of the kid’s life early on in pregnancy?

That there is either a child growing up in poverty, or taxpayers having to pay for them. Both options are less moral than the father paying for the situation he created.

Neptune-Jr · 2022-09-25T18:04:34+00:00

I don't understand why people are even entertaining this as a good idea. Men should NOT have the ability to abandon a child they made just because they feel like it. What kind of degeneracy are we trying to advocate for here? People KNOW that sex can lead to children. Men Financial Abortion would be easily used for men to hump carelessly and leave a heartlessly leave a bunch of fatherless kids with no support around.

subgamer90 · 2022-09-25T17:49:00+00:00

Simple - if a child comes into the world, both parents are responsible for its upbringing.

dbz19_kai · 2022-09-26T03:13:28+00:00

When you create a human being, you’re responsible for him or her. Being a parent comes with certain responsibilities and obligations. Don’t want to pay for a child? Don’t have sex

I’d say the same thing to women who want abortions

WilliamWyattD · 2022-09-26T15:45:26+00:00

Assuming we are in a cognitive space where actual abortion is acceptable, then I think it follows that the case against paper-abortions IS ultimately a pragmatic issue. It is about limited resources. The state doesn't have the resources, or structures, to raise or even support the raising of all children.

And even if the state had enough to adequately support single mothers at a given rate, if you allowed paper-abortions it would incentivize people to be careless about pregnancy and the rate of paper-abortions and single motherhood would climb beyond what the state could afford.

JumboJetz · 2022-09-27T01:16:10+00:00

The argument against men doing a financial abortion is if he doesnt support the mother, ME the tax payer will have to.

And ME the tax payer didn’t even get to enjoy the sex.

Gruntyth · 2022-10-09T02:10:55+00:00

legitimate arguments against?

There aren't, all the arguments trying to justify men not having the right to paper abortion when abortion is legal, are either fallacies or double standards

Valuable-Marzipan761 · 2022-09-25T18:35:10+00:00

If you have 100% of the decision making power, you have 100% of the responsibility for your choice.

Idgaf about the “well being of the child”. Not my problem. You wanted to have the bastard, your responsibility to figure out how to support it.

But, responsibility is kryptonite to women. They want all the choices with none of the responsibility that goes with those choices.

DisasterPeace7 · 2022-09-25T18:22:56+00:00

A 2-month hard cap for both parents to decide what they want to do, as far as it being unfair to ask the taxpayers to pay for the kid, I thought it was pretty unfair to have some of my tax money go towards student debt that people chose to take out I want my damn refund lol

womandatory · 2022-09-25T22:13:11+00:00

If you don’t want to be a father, don’t have sex. It’s a well-known, common side effect of hetero sex. Guys on this sub love you hate on single mothers, but so many are quick to want to absolve men of all responsibility for creating them.

Opening_Pattern_301 · 2022-09-25T17:41:29+00:00

simple argument is that there is a huge possibility of abuse by bad actors the same way it happens with some women

vogel777 · 2022-09-26T11:01:15+00:00

Pregnancy and childrearing are much harder on women physically (even potentially life threatening), emotionally and financially for far longer than it is or men. Women must always have the final decision on what happens with her body.

If men don't want kids they need to take responsibility for themselves and either wrap it up or abstain. Even if the woman is on birth control or uses a coil wear a condom if you definitely don't want kids with that woman as no birth control is 100% so 2 types of birth control are better than one especially for sex outside of a committed relationship. Always carry your own condoms, gett extra strong ones, make sure they are well fitting, put them on carefully, avoid intoxicated sex. Sex is a reproductive activity, pregnancy is its aim so there is always a risk everytime. You know in advance about that and about child support so no excuses.

It may sound harsh but ultimately if the woman does become pregnant with your child and she keeps it and you have to pay child support you can still walk away and all that is required of you is some money, not your time, not your energy or your emotional investment. In this scenario you are getting off relatively lightly.

You might say you had no say or choice but you did have a choice the minute you chose to put your dick inside her vagina.

Teflon08191 · 2022-09-25T17:46:57+00:00

The only argument against it (as someone who fully supports it) is that society would likely suffer if men were absolved from taking responsibility for women's poor decisions. The way so many women try to insist that ~10 minutes of shared irresponsibility is equivalent to 9+ months of unilateral irresponsibility suggests that they aren't particularly interested in being accountable for their own decisions, and children would ultimately be the ones to suffer if women were left to their own devices.

I'm more in favor of individual "fairness" than I am in favor of what would be best for society in general which is why I support financial abortions (as well as actual ones). But if I were to propose a solution that would benefit society rather than the individual, I would recommend banning abortion entirely, and removing the bias in family courts when it comes to which parent is granted the role of primary caregiver. But I acknowledge the "pie in the sky" nature of that solution, which again, is why I would sooner support financial abortions.

SmilesLikeMardiGras · 2022-09-25T19:16:11+00:00

if it was up to me there would only be marital paternity, no rights and no responsibilities for an unwed father, out of wedlock children would belong to the woman 100%. there would also be no welfare for deliberate unwed mothers and abortion an dbirth control would be very legal and encouraged.
however, the US government decided it didnt want to pay for tyrone and juggalos crotchspawn 100% anymore and that they wanted the men to chip in for their OOW babies, so here we are. there is never going to be a time where the government is like "lol we'll pay for it, go ahead dude, skeedaddle"

dukesaces · 2022-09-25T17:28:10+00:00

The only logical argument I've seen, against paper abortions, relates to the welfare of the child and the money needed to raise it. However, given that the welfare of said child doesn't seem to matter when it comes to women getting their way whether that be abortions or the family court favouring mothers, even when they're clearly unfit parents, I don't see how it's fair to dump it on the man either.

Child support should be mandatory If the child was given birth to within the confines of a long term relationship or marriage. If, however, the woman wasn't in a long term relationship then the onus of raising the child should be on her. Don't have kids with shitty absentee fathers and if you choose to do so anyway, support it yourself. These women shouldn't even be given welfare support.

14ers4days · 2022-09-25T22:15:11+00:00

Condoms or pulling out is the male equivalent to abortion. Once the child exists it is too late. It needs support from someone, and while there are justifications for a father not being able to do that, "I don't want to" isn't one of them.

ElectricBugs · 2022-09-26T03:09:55+00:00

As with all arguments like this it boils down to this: Men chose to take on the risk of pregnancy by having sex. As does the woman. Once a woman is pregnant she is the one whose body is affected and needs to make that decision. Men know that. therefore, a man's choice rests with his decision of having sex. Just the reality. Don't have sex, or get a vasectomy and use as much Birth Control as possible. But if you are having sex, as a man, there is always a risk of pregnancy and the only way to prevent pregnancy 100% is to abstain.

SwimmingTheme3736 · 2022-09-26T05:20:27+00:00

Once a child is here it shouldn’t be punished for their father not wanting them.

I really really wish people would start taking more responsibility before having children.

belachewhm · 2022-09-25T18:22:08+00:00

It should be capped at 50% of the child’s expenses

Also it should go into a child spending account that way purchases can be audited/accounted for from both parents

2022-09-26T01:09:10+00:00

Sounds like a great way to hugely exasperate childhood poverty so more assholes can be deadbeats. Neither financial nor physical abortion should be legal.

tired_hillbilly · 2022-09-25T19:05:51+00:00

Ideal world: Both paper and medical abortion banned; you don't get to kill/abandon your kids in a just world

Bad world: Both paper and medical abortion are legal; millions of kids will be killed/abandoned, but at least men and women have equal rights

Worst world (and what we have now): Paper abortion banned, medical abortion legal. Millions of kids still die, and women are the only ones with reproductive rights.

SoIlikeMangos · 2022-09-25T17:22:40+00:00

Is abortion available for all women now

Pilling_it · 2022-09-25T18:57:04+00:00

You pretty much said it. I don't really give it any thought because I don't see an universe in which people at the top would go that much against the current to get rid of an easy way to get money. You know, women spending more and yada yada.

If there's any changes, I think I would rather see those happening in the direction of getting incentives for people to have kids and force them to get together (maybe carrot, but mostly the stick).

ViolentTakeByForce · 2022-09-25T22:58:02+00:00

I am pro RP and against abortion.

That said, I think that the idea men should be able to opt out of child support if they don’t want the woman to go through with having a child makes sense. Especially because females get the ultimate decision as to whether the child gets to be born or murdered(abortion).

I also think child support should be closely monitored and not just a blank check, as well as make sense financially as to what the child needs, with caps. If a man makes 200k, that does not mean child support should raise to match his income vs someone with $40,000 annual salary. Same at $1mm. There is no reason on God’s green earth a child should cost $10,000+/mo just because the father makes more.

All that does is put the father, especially at lower incomes, less ability to breathe financially and put himself in a better spot, which actually allows him to provide better for his child in the long run.

Most mother’s aren’t using the money after what the child really needs and investing into their child. It gets turned into the total income the mother believes she can spend before getting to 0.

If men are punished for not having stayed with the mother and sleeping with bad, incompatible partners, women should feel punished as well. The benefit of this hurting both the mother and father, is that people will become more careful with who they sleep with. And because women are actually birthing the children and feeling the physical impacts(literally) of child bearing and rearing, they should be WAY WAY pickier. I’ve seen women caught at the wrong moment sleeping with dudes who are nearing 30 no job, beat up car(if they have one)and living with their parents. Like how stupid can you be.

And for the record, I was raised by my mother and my siblings were from different fathers. She never asked for a penny from them and worked various jobs, mostly property management then a job related to aviation much later. So all these “independent strong women” getting checks from their baby daddy’s, while my mother could have made better choices in men, that’s what an independent woman looks like. Not the bs you all tell yourselves while taking a check from ONS and complaining about how terrible they are lol. I could never talk shit about how terrible someone is and then be taking money from them, but funny how women do it all the fucking time. No backbone.

Podlubnyi · 2022-09-27T16:36:26+00:00

This debate is exactly why I couldn't care less about the abortion debate. If you would deny me my right to opt out of parenthood, then why should I care about yours?

It's also funny how the so-called pro-choice crowd are vehemently against the man having any choice. They even use the same arguments as the pro-lifers.

AcanthocephalaNew947 · 2022-09-25T19:41:23+00:00

Yes.It’s called a condom.

ruboyuri · 2022-09-25T19:50:00+00:00

Oh, all of human history. And pretty much every developed nation

Ylduts · 2022-09-25T21:33:32+00:00

Women are strong and Independent now so financial abortion should exist. Both parents should have a choice.

RubyWooToo · 2022-09-26T16:56:52+00:00

I’m against abortion of all kinds. Children are entitled to be born and they are entitled to be provided for and nurtured by both parents.

No one should have sex with anyone whose children they are unwilling to carry or support.

AutoModerator · 2022-09-25T17:12:38+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

carritotaquito · 2022-09-25T20:07:05+00:00

I SOMEWHAT agree with it, but with some caveats. Hear me out:

It must occur during the same timeline a jurisdiction gives a woman to have an actual abortion.

Say, if a jurisdiction gives up to 15 weeks in normal circumstances, said man SHALL HAVE those same 15 weeks to come to said decision.

Upon making their decision (yay/nay), it must be in writing to the future mother.

The reason? So said future mother could plan ahead if she/they intends to keep the pregnancy sans financial support from the presumptive father.

howdoiw0rkthisthing · 2022-09-26T02:02:00+00:00

I’m actually in favor of this but the specifics start to get messy.

Women typically bear ultimate responsibility for babies (hence the rates of single motherhood vs. single fatherhood) so I understand wanting ultimate authority. But in cases where the mother and father disagree (like if the mother wants to keep it and the father doesn’t or vice versa) things get complicated.

LeeroyX · 2022-09-26T04:45:32+00:00

I know you mentioned putting logistics aside, however I still think they are worth considering otherwise the point is mute.

I’m assuming that we are talking about each unplanned (and outside marriage) pregnancy when considering this.

If so, I would like to kind of take a bit of a walk through in terms of time frames:

• ⁠Every women would therefore need to inform each potential bio father so that he could provide the yes/no response to the possibility of a financial abortion (that alone is a bit of a reach). If the bio father was not informed (for whatever reason) the law would need to default. The default would then become either a financial abortion - this would result in the bio father auto losing his rights without his input; or default to the bio father undertaking financial responsibility making the purpose of the law a bit elusive. Realistically both options are obviously also open to be weaponised.

• ⁠should the women inform the relevant individual’s within the time frame for his decision, to ensure that the law was targeting the correct individual (and therefore valid) each potential bio father would need to be DNA tested to ensure that the right person is opting out (or opting in). That’s significant under the time frame we are talking about and I’m sure we would also be concerned about privacy issues in enforcing a legal requirement for DNA testing. Legal representation through this process would be wise I imagine and should one of the relevant individuals wish to legally challenge the DNA testing requirement, we are once again against a time restriction.

• ⁠should the bio father be identified, he would then have a very short time frame to make a fundamental decision and one that would cost him all rights to the child. Should he wish to opt in but clarify the custody arrangements prior to signing on the dotted line (very wise) it would be hard to consult a lawyer and negotiate an outcome once again with the time restrictions. In regards to legal rights I also feel that it’s worth noting that the financial lure of opting out for young men at say 18 years of age could feel very different at say 29 years with (probably) minimal legal recourse.

• ⁠while a lot of these decisions are not new, the point of decision and preparation time is removed. I wonder if it would also become a bit of a “pay to play” model with access to suitable legal council being out of reach for many.

icefire54 · 2022-09-26T06:08:47+00:00

There is no legit argument against it. Just people who want to oppress men dressing up their anti-male beliefs with nonsensical arguments.

Stop_Maximum · 2022-09-26T11:08:08+00:00

To be honest, it’s a messy situation although you can’t have sex and not expect things to go wrong. Especially people that don’t bother using protection at all and rely on birth control only. There’s different way to make BC unreliable which some people are not aware. You might have not gotten pregnant for different other reasons but once you get too comfortable, it can happen. If you have sex without protection (double even) you’re consenting to a child

Audacity_of_Life · 2022-09-26T11:49:16+00:00

He does. It’s called not signing the birth certificate. A man can always relinquish parental rights. Most do not while also complaining they don’t/didn’t want the child.

YveisGrey · 2022-09-26T12:40:25+00:00

Financial abortion will never be a thing and it isn’t right nor can it be justified by pro choice abortion laws.

Let’s start from the top:

It won’t be a thing because it increases the burden on the state to provide for children which is why child support even exists in the first place. We live in a democracy for the most part and no one would vote for it. I can’t even imagine a politician legitimately running on that platform.

It’s can’t be justified by legalized elective abortion because the rational for allowing abortion is that fetuses are not considered persons. Abortion aborts fetuses and embryos who are “non persons”. “Financial abortion” abandons children who are born and considered persons. Therefore from a purely legal standpoint the two aren’t the same and one cannot justify the other. In fact the main debate concerning abortion is the status of the unborn child after a certain point in the pregnancy usually around viability a fetus is considered a person and generally cannot be aborted. So unless someone is trying to argue that their 3 year old child isn’t a person and is not entitled to care/protection/support etc it won’t work. And just because I know someone might say this, “financially aborting” a child before birth doesn’t solve the problem either because the financial abortion only affects children who are born, as in the result would be a child is born and has no support from one of their parents. Yea society isn’t going to vouch for that.

Plopolok · 2022-09-26T14:13:03+00:00

I'd prefer if it was allowed. But we should have a relationship contract lighter than marriage but still imposing paternity obligations. A kind of governmental facebook where you can declare yourself as in and out of a relationship at the touch of a button. If a man hasn't done that, the state won't force him to do anything for a child.

Btw, this governmental facebook should also serve as a public parental registry, listing who has children with whom (along with custody and child support status). It restricts privacy, but we don't have to allow anyone to keep this private, bringing a child into the world is a serious thing.

anon-sucks · 2022-09-28T02:23:07+00:00

Women can financially abort via safe havens. I see no reason why men can’t.

Financial/paper abortion - legitimate arguments against?

Comments

6 “Thou shalt not kill”

Title	Financial/paper abortion - legitimate arguments against?
Author	_revelationary
Upvotes	26
Comments	547
Date	September 25, 2022 5:12 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/xnt2eq/financialpaper_abortion_legitimate_arguments/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/financialpaper-abortion-legitimate-arguments.1133912 https://theredarchive.com/post/1133912