A tale of two pregnant girls...

Demonspawn · 2013-09-24T18:08:42+00:00

what's your opinion?

"This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent. [1]Specific and direct harm medically diagnosable even in early pregnancy may be involved. [2] Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. [3] Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. [4] There is also the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it." [enumeration mine]

According to the 14th Amendment, if we give women the right to avoid parenthood for those reasons, we must also give men the same rights.

If sex = consent to parenthood, it must work that way for both genders. If sex != consent to parenthood, it must work that way for both genders. Treating men under one standard and women under another is a violation of the Constitution.

or, the asshole way of it all: Your body, your choice, then it's your fucking responsibility.

crankypants15 · 2013-09-24T17:57:09+00:00

Okay, I'm going to start off this post by saying I'm a feminist. When I say that, I mean that I believe in fighting for equality for both genders, and as such I am also an MRA. I don't agree with the so-called 'feminists' who have completely lost the point of the whole movement and are bat-shit crazy.

Thank you for explaining your position on feminism and speaking out against hate groups. More women need to do this. There is a huge misunderstanding about which subgroup an individual is from. Welcome here, I hope you don't get scared away. More MRAs need to know there are moderate feminists out there. Because in real life, 99% of my experience with feminists was with the extremists. And no, I'm not joking. I suspect that's true of most MRAs also.

As for child support, I do not support the current child support laws because the rates have nothing to do with how much it takes to raise a child. In Michigan, CS is determined by the parents' incomes, not the actual costs to raise a child. Michigan CS rates are designed to keep the child in the luxuries to which they are accustomed. That said, in this current system, I would be against any child support since the options are "max child support" or "nothing". My base CS was $1500 per month. This is the minimum that Michigan has determined, with the help of "experts", that the child absolutely needs for merest survival.

I would however, support a reasonable child support if the father agreed. Ruining someone's life (man or woman's) should not be the outcome of an accidental child. The girl above chose to keep the baby, the man should not be punished for this. "Her body, her choice" should not affect the man, because currently, the man does not have a choice, and has no say in adoption or abortion.

So a reasonable child support rate IMO would be $300 per month, to be split by the parents. This is the actual cost (rounded up a bit) I had when my kid was done with diapers and child care. (Child care was $500 per month alone. And I was curious about the expenses.)

lordslag · 2013-09-24T18:42:04+00:00

If sex is not consent to parenthood for women, then it isn't consent to parenthood for men. Equal is Equal; End of discussion.

On the other hand, if it's your body and your choice, then it's YOUR responsibility.

empirical_accuracy · 2013-09-24T19:40:07+00:00

Most of us here and elsewhere view Robin Hood as a hero. We know that there are some people with lots of money and some people who are poor, and that some of the people who are poor are more deserving of money than some of the people who are rich.

So why don't we run around stealing from random rich people who can afford the loss and giving to the poor? Because that violates the rule of law. We shouldn't have one rule for unpopular people and one rule for popular people; we want one rule for everybody.

Your female acquaintances both chose to have and keep a baby; and in both cases, the dad didn't have a choice.

One dad can't afford the child support he's being charged with and took reasonable precautions; the other was a bonehead and can afford to pay out; but both deserve to have a choice.

We allow women to abort or to give children up for adoption regardless of whether they conceived as a result of condom failure or failure to take any precautions; regardless of whether it was rape or consensual sex.

There are some truly awful women whose poor reproductive choices cost us as a society; we're not going to deny them abortions, force abortions on them, deny them the ability to give babies up for adoption, or sterilize them so they stop costing us money. And we will only force them to give babies up for adoption/foster care if we can demonstrate they are unfit parents.

All women, whether horrible or wonderful, have the same rights. All men, whether horrible or wonderful, deserve to have the same rights that women do.

2013-09-24T20:31:38+00:00

I hate that guy though. I hate him for constantly complaining about condoms until she agreed to not using them anymore

She didn't have to agree. She could (and one could argue for should) have dumped him rather than cave into his demands. She could have gone on the Pill, got an IUD, used a diaphragm... there's a LOT more options out there for BC for her.

I think he deserves to pay every penny of child support, despite that fact that he didn't want the child.

Do you think that because you hate him, because you think she needs it, or because you believe the child will need it? Because with your venting about his choice to spend money on himself (which is his right, as it's his money), it's hard to tell, and actually leans me towards thinking you just want him to get his comeuppance.

In all, she's had a lot of choices she has made which has led her to her current position. She didn't do more to prevent herself getting pregnant in the first place, didn't seek other ways of getting the money she needed for the abortion she wanted, changed her mind about adoption (I can't blame her on that. My son's nearly 32 weeks, and I'm already ascribing character traits to him...) and so on. She's had all the power to stop it, and she hasn't. Thus it's her choice, her responsibility.

Epywa · 2013-09-24T19:58:49+00:00

Best option for the child: Child support and father's presence. (Or just a normal couple life, no need for child support in that case.)

It should'nt be a matter of who's right or wrong or even who has to pay. Parents, even though they didn't want kids, should always look for the best of their kids, no matter what, otherwise they are bad parents. To me it is childish and selfish to not look after your offsprings.

Both of these couples got in trouble as a couple, now it's their duty to get out of it as a couple.

femdelusion · 2013-09-24T21:05:00+00:00

Welcome! I broadly agree with what you're saying here (Sonja puts the quibbles I'd have quite well, I think, so I won't repeat them).

The thing that sticks out for me is why the second guy refused to pay, or even help pay, for the abortion. That fact does seem to be relevant to me. Even if we accept the principle that he shouldn't be assumed to be financially responsible for the child if he doesn't wish to be a father, he still very much should be financially responsible for the termination if your friend decides to have one. It seems to me he is not taking responsibility for his actions here.

May I ask why he refused to help pay for a termination (if you know)?

lafielle · 2013-09-25T10:28:44+00:00

I'm discussing the second case here. First case we agree upon.

Let's compare this to a bicycle accident where I ride my bicycle into another cyclist. Luckily we're both fine, but the wheel of the other drivers bicycle has become crooked and the steering wheel is now loose. The bike cannot be safely driven anywhere.

We might argue over who should pay for the damaged bike and who is responsible for the accident. Maybe we both are.

In the case of the 20 year old, both chose to have sex. Both are equally responsible. To be clear, he is as much responsible for the pregnancy as she is.

However, what if the other cyclist chooses to - a week later - drive on their damaged bike and subsequently the bike breaks up during a descent from a hill? Suppose they fall and induce medical bills? This is clearly a consequence of driving the broken, unsafe bike.

The driver might argue that since I did not pay to fix the bike and they had to get to work. They might argue they could not afford to pay for the repairs. They might argue they could not afford to pay for a taxi. Thus they might say they had no choice but to drive the bike to get to work, so I should now pay for the medical bills.

But why should I have to? I did not force the person to drive a damaged bike. They could have had it repaired or they could have called for a taxi - it would have been more expensive, and they might have gotten into debt, but they had that option.

Since I was partially responsible for the accident, I believe the other cyclist should be able to sue me for the damage to the bike. Presuming they needed to get to work right that instance, they might even sue me for the taxi costs to get to work on the day I damaged their bike, which I might be liable for to get the person out of their immediate jam.

But a week later, they had time to get the bike repaired to find alternative transportation or to get a loan. They could have walked to work (might have taken more time of course).

But just as I would not be liable for medical cost if they got into an accident while walking to work (even if they might not have walked to work if the bicycle accident had never happened), I should not be liable for their medical cost after they get onto a bike that is not safe to use when they had the option not to, even if those options were more expensive than using the damaged bike.

In fact, legally I'd only be liable for the direct damage I caused. Not for the damage that was caused beyond this damage because the owner of the other bike did not repair it. Liability only goes so far.

Comparing to your situation, though the mother took some risks in using an unsafe method of contraception, he took the same risks as she did. They both were aware of what they were doing. When the method failed, they were faced with the consequences: pregnancy. Both were equally responsible for this.

For this reason I feel he is legally responsible for part of the costs of the abortion. I think she should be able to sue him for half the cost of an abortion.

That said, in our society, she has options in this case and he does not. She can get an abortion. He cannot. He cannot force her to get one, nor can he prevent her from getting one. Its 100% her choice, so whether or not she has the abortion, its 100% her responsibility.

The other cyclist can choose to get onto the damaged bike or not. I cannot force them to, nor can I prevent them from doing so. its 100% their choice. So whether or not they get on that damaged bike... its 100% their responsibility.

I think the 20 year old women was in a very difficult position. She had to make choices where she'd lose either way - get in debt or be a mother. Give up a child she has grown attached to or not. That is very unfair. But it is her choice. Not his.

When she chose not to have an abortion - even if it was hard to pay for it - she accepted the consequences of that choice. And she accepted those consequences again when she did not give the child away for adoption.

She is an adult. She can make those difficult choices. And sometimes she'll have to accept the negative consequences of impossible choices. Since he is partially responsible he should pay for those consequences as well, but only those where he had a choice. Not those where he did not. So he should pay for the abortion cost, as I should pay for the bike. But not for the child, as I should not pay the medical bills for the cyclist if they fall riding their broken bike.

Now, him working at a posh restaurant and buying a new macbook is completely and utterly irrelevant to any of it. Even if he was Warren Buffet, it doesn't matter. How he spends his money and how much he has is his business. It does not entitle her to any of it. Except the parts that he owes her as a consequence of his actions. Which is half the cost of an abortion.

I feel he should pay her that - and I feel he should have paid her that when she asked for it. If he did not, she might have additionally sued him for interest she paid on a loan to pay for his half of the abortion cost. But beyond that, I do not feel he should owe her anything. Even if he was a billionaire.

rightsbot · 2013-09-24T16:46:17+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

theoysterismyworld · 2013-09-24T23:47:20+00:00

I can't say I disagree with you at all, your judgement is excellent in my opinion. Glad the other baby wasn't put up for adoption and ended up with at least one loving parent rather than possibly having none.

2013-09-26T22:23:35+00:00

Sluts get pregnant...often.

Karissa36 · 2013-10-01T16:00:56+00:00

"The 19 year old got pregnant when her condom broke while having sex with her casual fuck buddy."

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: The morning after pill is available without a prescription in pharmacies nationwide. Current federal law allows it to be sold to all women age 17 and up without a prescription. Some pharmacies don't stock it due to religious objections, so call around first and find one that does. The morning after pill should be taken as soon as possible, and definitely within the first 48 hours. The sooner she takes it the more likely it is to be effective. If the condom breaks, don't just hope she won't get pregnant. Get the morning after pill immediately.

oneiorosgrip · 2013-09-25T01:47:50+00:00

Okay, I'm going to start off this post by saying I'm a feminist. When I say that, I mean that I believe in fighting for equality for both genders

When you say that, as a 41 year old woman who has been watching feminist activism all of my adult life (and during much of my youth) I see "I don't know what feminism really is, but I like to claim to belong to that label because I like what they tell everyone they're doing."

The feminist movement has a terrible, hateful history that is separate and different from genuine women's rights activism. I've described it before in response to the "I'm a feminist and an MRA" line. Here is a link. What you're actually describing about yourself (I believe in fighting for equality for both genders) would make you a human rights activist - or a women's rights activist, and a men's rights activist... not a feminist.

That, however, is a side issue.

Let's talk about your friends' situations... or rather, the series of decisions they made between "let's fuck" and "pay up, mister!"

First, there's the decisions made by both parents.

The decision to engage in sexual intercourse
Deciding with whom to engage
Whether or not to use birth control/make birth control a condition of consent

As to birth control, he has condom use, or if he wants to never be a father, vasectomy.

This is where the male partner's choices end. Once he agrees to sex with a woman and settles on a birth control routine, his stage is set.

The woman has greater choice when it comes to birth control. She doesn't just have whether or not to use it. She also has:

What kind, and how many types of birth control she wants to use. From these, even a woman who wants to be able to someday have children has the option of using 3 different types of birth control simultaneously: Hormonal, chemical (spermicide), and barrier. She has:
female condom
diaphragm
sponge
spermicidal cream
spermicidal gel
spermicidal film
spermicidal suppository
intrauterine device sans hormones
IUD with hormonal supplement
hormone pills (a variety of formulas)
hormone shot
hormone skin implant
nuvaring
tubal ligation (if she wants to never be a mother)
whether or not to be fully honest about her use of birth control. A woman can say "I'm on the pill" and there's no way her partner can be sure. All he can do is trust her, and go on, or distrust her, and refuse to go on.
emergency contraceptives. Once a condom breaks, the wearer is shit out of luck. There is no emergency birth control for him. For the female partner, on the other hand, there's plan B, which prevents conception, so even if she hears "oh, shit - the condom broke" or if she realizes after sex that the pill she thought she took yesterday is still in the container, she has an option after intercourse to prevent pregnancy. She is the only partner who has that option.

Regardless, let's say that for whatever reason (it really doesn't matter) conception occurs. Now, all of the choices are hers.

Early in the pregnancy, the woman has the choice of chemical abortion - it's not surgery, and it's not as expensive as surgery.
Surgical abortion is the next choice if she's too far along in the pregnancy to chemically abort.

Let's say she doesn't like those choices. Not all women are pro-choice. I'm not pro-abortion. I think the abortion industry grievously exploits women. However, disliking those choices doesn't mean they don't exist. It simply means the woman has opted out of using them.

In the specific cases of your friend, I also have to point out that access to abortion isn't dependent on whether the father pays for it or not. It exists whether the woman is handed the money for it, or has to pay for it herself. A woman who genuinely wants to have one will, with or without the financial support of her boyfriend. So your story is lacking a key statement. Your friend chose not to use abortion to get out of her situation because her boyfriend wouldn't buy it for her.

Back to the choices, because there still are some. For whatever reason, there was a pregnancy, and no abortion, so the woman gives birth to the child. At this point, most people think "well, she's stuck." Fact is, she's not.

She still has options.

Relinquish custody to the father (if he's willing to accept)
Relinquish custody to another family member if the father is unwilling, but someone else wants to raise the child
If both parties don't want parental responsibility, she can opt for adoption
She can use a safe-haven drop off and even bypass the adoption system (and in some cases, the father's parental rights)

meaning that even if she gives birth, a woman still has a minimum of 2 choices that don't end with her being a custodial single mother.

This means that in cases of unplanned pregnancy, a woman who lands on the "custodial single mother" square in the game of life has encountered 9 different points along the way where she made choices that contributed to her position, and some of those choices were multi-faceted. Two-thirds of those choices were known unilateral choices (made on her own.)

Accepting the position of custodial single mother is a choice. It's not imposed. There is not a single choice the father made that she did not also make, but she made a minimum of 6 that impacted his life, and she didn't even have to consult him to make them. There is no excuse for a woman to bitch and moan about the hardship brought on as a result of her series of choices, and expect the person she dragged along against his will for the last 6 out of 9 of them to take responsibility for her actions. That's ludicrous.

Sexist, in fact, because it relegates the father to a subordinate position; his rights are subordinate to her will.

This is why it's unjust that women can drag men unwillingly into parenthood, and why neither of your friends was morally owed child support. Both of them could have refused to accept parental responsibility, and they chose to accept anyway. The fathers should have an equal right to refuse, even when the mother chooses to accept.

Title	A tale of two pregnant girls...
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	11
Comments	20
Date	September 24, 2013 4:45 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1n1ekv/a_tale_of_two_pregnant_girls/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/a-tale-of-two-pregnant-girls.1163041 https://theredarchive.com/post/1163041

Comments