Do you think that when a woman is pregnant and doesn't want to abort but the man doesn't want the fetus he should be able to sign a document to the government that says he doesn't want this fetus and then he doesn't have to pay child support when it's born?

motosandguns · 2024-08-04T06:09:20+00:00

Yeah. I think the man should be able to financially abort, and then the woman can decide if she wants to physically abort or not.

If she wants the baby and is willing to shoulder the entire cost alone, that’s up to her.

omega_dawg93 · 2024-08-04T13:49:29+00:00

$$$. the state does NOT want another child on their roster. so, under EVERY choice except abortion, they want the guy (ANY GUY) to take-on child support payments. men are encouraged and forced to take care of kids that aren't their own for this same reason.

most single women will end-up on a govt assistance program to help with her children. society has SEVERAL safety nets for women so they don't fall hard and end-up homeless, hungry, and without shelter, ESP. if she has kids.

Agile_Scale1913 · 2024-08-04T06:57:08+00:00

Yes. Nobody should be forced into parenthood.

raspherem · 2024-08-04T07:57:26+00:00

Yes. That's what true pro-choice means.

LopsidedDatabase8912 · 2024-08-04T15:28:32+00:00

No.

It should be simpler.

No legally acknowledged father without a paternity test.

black_orchid83 · 2024-08-04T06:01:46+00:00

Sure. It would solve the alternative that some people do of just walking away like nothing happened. I understand not wanting the child but go about it legally. I also think it would solve the problem of forcing men to parent when they don't want to.

Hopeful-Sir-2018 · 2024-08-04T17:34:00+00:00

Yes, I've said this for years. The only responses I've heard from feminists were the same responses conservatives told them: "You should have had protect sex then" - or - "it takes two" - or - "You knew what you were doing when you did the deed".

Funny how now that Roe versus Wade is overturned - they don't like hearing those same responses thrown back at them, do they?

That would make it more fair

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Feminism isn't about fairness or equality.

It's exclusively about women's rights. At no point do they ever fight for men. In fact when someone does talk about men - they actively, and often aggressively, shut them down.

As someone who thinks abortion is the result of a sick society,

I would argue abortions, on the whole, are simple accidents. Two folks get excited and fuck up somehow or another. Nothing more, nothing less.

This is, of course, excluding rape.

hendrixski · 2024-08-04T13:47:46+00:00

I think all human beings should have agency over when they are ready to become parents. Regardless of race, gender, creed, or sexual orientation.

We're not in the middle ages anymore: there are no valid reasons anymore to force either a man or a woman into unwanted parenthood given our technology and social support networks.

This should be even more protected in the law for cases where a child is raped by an adult and forced into parenthood. Sadly, I still see people with a medieval mindset saying that boys who were raped by their teachers are deadbeats if they don't pay child support to their rapists. These sick people need to be set straight.

vikarti_anatra · 2024-08-04T11:23:04+00:00

Yes. With addition he doesn't allowed to have ANY rights for this child (including financial support when child becomes adult and parent becomes old, some countries allow to for 'reverse' support in such cases)

dpero29 · 2024-08-04T06:28:44+00:00

If it should be allowed for a woman to kill a fetus, it stands to reason that it should be allowed for a man to abandon it. Neither is an optimal choice.

_name_of_the_user_ · 2024-08-04T13:32:33+00:00

Yes. Allowing women to control if a man becomes a parent or not, with no input from him, is allowing extortion.

Yitastics · 2024-08-04T08:34:31+00:00

Yes, the people saying a woman has 100% say over the baby are wrong. You work together to have the baby and once the baby is there you need to care for it, but while the baby is in the mother she holds all the strings, its crazy.

You made a deal that if ur gf gets pregnant she needs to abort, shes fine with it. Then she gets pregnant and she out of nowhere said shes gonna keep it. You break up with her coz of the broken trust and the state expects you to pay Child support for 18 years. Its a big middle finger to men.

Its unequal for men to have no say over his baby life, the mother can even abort the baby while the guy wants to keep it and everybody expects the guy is fine with his gf killing his baby

Methodless · 2024-08-04T16:02:13+00:00

All this will do is cause women to not tell the father that she's pregnant until it's too late

Illustrious_Bus9486 · 2024-08-04T20:21:51+00:00

Yes. It is often discussed and called a "Paper Abortion."

Main-Tiger8593 · 2024-08-04T07:15:32+00:00

we should also keep in mind if she chooses to raise a child the father did not consent to = it is her responsibility if the child has a terrible childhood "even with child support"

that said i support parental surrender no matter your gender and im aware that social security nets would be required for that -> otherwise we pay for it in alternative ways like justice system and loss of qualified working force or orphanages

how to fund and organize it "private vs state" is up to debate

mrmensplights · 2024-08-04T06:33:45+00:00

I don't think abortion is a result of a sick society. However, I do think that men should be able to get a so-called "financial abortion". However, we'll probably never see it happen. Here's why.

Every social program we have works by collecting taxes from all and using the money to fund social programs. If rearing children is a considered a benefit to society then parents who are in a financially precarious situation should receive support. A centralized, taxation-based system could pool resources more effectively, distribute funds more equitably, and ensure a baseline of support for all children, reducing administrative costs and enforcement challenges. Such a system would better achieve the goal of supporting child welfare uniformly across society, addressing inefficiencies inherent in the current approach.

That's not what happens though. Instead, the entire system is set to maintain and achieve the the mating goals of women. When women choose a mate, a big part of choosing a mate is about security. That's why they are hypergamous and attracted to wealth. When she manages to get pregnant by a man but he won't dance to her tune, she leverages the power of the state to point a gun at his head, threaten him with prison, and extract the money she feels she is owed on her behalf.

Direct payments between individuals creates variability in enforcement, collection rates, and the adequacy of support. This system often results in disparities based on income, legal resources, and compliance, leading to inconsistent outcomes for children. A more typical social program would be better in every conceivable way. Except one. Women feel viscerally, as in biologically and evolutionarily, that they are owed that money from the man in question, and society allows her to leverage the power of the state to get it.

There is one other 'program' that uses this 'direct payment' method that also runs counter to how all other social programs are run: Alimony. Given my explanation you shouldn't be surprised why. In fact, you'll find more "special case" programs which are biased and punitive but uphold the interests of women in every situation where the interests of men and women intersect. e.g. divorce, human rights tribunals, false accusations...

bocaj78 · 2024-08-04T15:51:26+00:00

In theory, sure, but it’s going to take some complicated legislation to make that possible. The state has an interest to prevent this so I would gander that legislation to do this would be dead in the water for at least a few decades (speaking of USA)

volleyballbeach · 2024-08-05T02:39:18+00:00

Yes, within first trimester, or indefinitely in situations that he can prove she concealed the pregnancy past that deadline.

thefinalhex · 2024-08-05T22:04:22+00:00

Yes, I have always thought this. It is decidedly lopsided.

As Dave Chappelle said - if y’all can kill, I should be able to abandon.

Current_Finding_4066 · 2024-08-04T08:20:01+00:00

Yes, I think it would bring mens rights on par with women's rights.

CguvanyeStol4151 · 2024-08-04T17:11:05+00:00

unless you are underage or raped, you should have to pay child support.

Hothead361 · 2024-08-04T08:33:00+00:00

Yes this is exactly how it should be I'm bit against abortion but it should be fair for both men and women.

KalemThrale · 2024-08-04T14:56:37+00:00

Should? Yes, but it'll never happen. The state would rather force the father to pay than the taxpayer.

welcometothejl · 2024-08-04T13:54:05+00:00

I think if abortion is legal, men should have more responsibility as well as more options, but I don't know if making it as cut and dry as signing a document would be the best policy. Let me explain.

If men could simply sign away their rights, a guy could get 10 women pregnant at the same time and just walk away. If all 10 women have kids, that's a big burden to the system if the women don't have the means to take care of them.

And so we may be thinking, "those women should just get abortions if they don't have the means." I definitely understand that. But should the physical, financial, and emotional responsibility all rest on the woman? Should taxpayers, who are mostly men, be burdened with the financial responsibilities of so many potential fatherless children if they decide to have the kids? Probably not, so let's rectify the issues.

Firstly, I think we should shift the financial burden of abortion from women to men. That would also lighten the emotional burden for women because it would make it more of a joint decision.

Secondly, I think men should only get 1 chance to sign away rights if a woman chooses to have the child. That would align with my personal opinion on abortion that they be safe, legal, and rare. This would also create an artificial limiting factor for men. Women already have a physiological limiting factor in that the body can only carry one pregnancy every 9 months or so.

Additionally, if abortion is legal, men should have a framework or a pathway to get joint custody without having to pay child support. How many women are motivated by the financial incentives of child support? That needed to go away a long time ago.

Basically if women get more rights, it should come with more responsibilities, and if men take on more responsibilities it should come with more rights. But that's just my opinion, what do y'all think?

BelCantoTenor · 2024-08-04T17:06:10+00:00

Yes!

Siganid · 2024-08-04T18:42:47+00:00

Of course.

Joker_01884 · 2024-08-07T13:00:50+00:00

Was talking about the same thing on Facebook. A femcel literally made 2k comments about how it's not women's fault when they get pregnant and men must take responsibility for an unwanted child or a child he never wanted.

LHT-LFA · 2024-08-04T12:07:59+00:00

"the fetus"...you know that we are still talking about a human being here? I know how women use pregnancies, but still.

If you want to minimize the risk of pregnancies, get a vasectomy, use rubber and on top of that do not have sex.

JACSliver · 2024-08-04T09:51:10+00:00

Sure.

FugginAye · 2024-08-04T11:07:47+00:00

I like this idea.

HauntedJuice · 2024-08-04T12:26:32+00:00

That's already a thing in some places. It's called giving up your parental rights.

avocado-afficionado · 2024-08-04T16:31:17+00:00

I think this should absolutely be an option but only under the assumption that abortion is widely accessible to all women within a reasonable amount of time (so not like those under 6 week abortion bans where most women don’t even know they’re pregnant). Otherwise, yeah absolutely men should have the option to not pay child support if she insists on keeping the child.

JT98191 · 2024-08-04T18:16:53+00:00

Yes, paper abortions should be far more accepted in our society. The fact that this is controversial tells us exactly where the rights of men stand in western societies. It’ll take another five decades for men to potentially have the rights and privileges on the same level that women currently have in our society.

ABBucsfan · 2024-08-04T15:27:58+00:00

No. It's already bad enough some women choose to end a life growing inside of them. Don't make it even worse allowing deadbeat parents as an option if the mom actually decides to take responsibility. I wish every mom would choose to keep the baby, but forcing them to do so is a complicated issue that infringes on personal freedom/autonomy (on the other hand who's going to speak up for the child who has no voice at this point?). I'm surprised america actually went there with abortion after the cat was out of trh bag, never thought it was possible.

So yeah I would always lean towards both parents need to be responsible. Thr fact mom's are allowed to ditch some of that responsibility justified by body autonomy doesn't mean we should demand and stomp our feet for the ability to be just as irresponsible. There's always a small chance of pregnancy even with some birth control. Make sure you think about who you're choosing to climb into bed with. I also think we should be doing everything we can to encourage mom's to keep the child. A well support mom is more likely to choose life. If you start allowing people to financially bail how much more will abortions go up? Not to mention if we start allowing deadbeat parents taxpayers will ultimately pay for the support. Thr parents should be the first one responsible. I find this concept shameful and lacking honour, but we live in a selfish society that's about individualism and putting yourself first, which is why women are killing their offspring instead of treasuring them while others are so sad they can't conceive..it feels like we are talking about a race to the bottom for avoiding responsibility and doing right by the kid

sanitaryinspector · 2024-08-04T07:25:01+00:00

This can't be possible in law systems where the right to abortion is built upon the principle that only women's consent or denial to reproduction have legal value... Instead of it being a matter of who carries the baby can decide whether to go on or stop the pregnancy.

So, allowing that men's consent to reproduce is necessary would give him decision power over the pregnancy too instead of his parenthood only, because who wrote the laws on abortion was narrow minded

CraftistOf · 2024-08-04T13:46:08+00:00

honestly... I believe it should be possible only if the father was forced into parenthood, e.g. by a woman stealthing.

if two sane adults decided to make a child, had sex without a condom and birth control, the father shouldn't be able to later say "nope, I'm outta here". abortion can hurt a woman's health (I don't know if actual birth damages her more though) so I understand when she would rather go through the pregnancy.

if she lied to a man in order to get child support, though, and the man clearly didn't want a child, then it's fair game to financially abort an unwanted child.

if fully functioning contraception fails, then idk, it's a gray area to me. I could understand both sides here.

NorskChef · 2024-08-04T14:42:55+00:00

This is where the "Men's Right" movement has jumped the shark. I hope this isn't a widespread view here. If you've had sex then you've just given your consent to parenthood. That's been a law of nature since the dawn of mankind.

flipsidetroll · 2024-08-04T09:44:19+00:00

Ok. Here’s an idea. An app. That both sign (maybe with their fingerprints) to show what they consent to, and in the event of a pregnancy, what they are willing to do. What could be easier?

rockinarmy · 2024-08-04T17:25:14+00:00

Only fair.

van_gag · 2024-08-05T01:49:17+00:00

The state will just pay then in the form of government assistance so that is increased taxes that everyone except the unemployed bums that would sign their rights away anyway. So dad pays or we ALL pay.

Capable-Mushroom99 · 2024-08-04T09:50:27+00:00

How is it fair that you pass the cost on to me? You fucked her, you pay. Stop pretending that the government has some magic money fountain that can take away peoples responsibility.

nezar19 · 2024-08-04T09:30:18+00:00

Difficult to say, because the guy could get her pregnant (like a gf) by saying he will be there, but then he goes and says he does not want the kid. The safest bet for both parties would be to “remember to sign the C-01 permit before any act that could result in a child“

Historical_Plate_318 · 2024-08-04T09:15:39+00:00

Abortion is murder.

jhny_boy · 2024-08-04T14:30:26+00:00

Guys, I don’t know where you live that this is still a subject of conversation, but in the US, you can just choose not to sign the birth certificate, effectively freeing you of any obligation to the child. I could be wrong but I believe that is how it works

Comments