If a woman refuses an abortion when the man wants to have one, there should be a legal document signed releasing the man from obligation and his paternal rights.

ZippityD · 2013-09-28T16:13:42+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Nutz76 · 2013-09-28T16:13:24+00:00

To answer the OP's question, YES men should be able to opt out. It's called Legal Paternal Surrender. Here's an entire video series arguing for it.

Lastly, even some notable feminists agree:

"Justice therefore dictates that if a woman makes a unilateral decision to bring pregnancy to term, and the biological father does not, and cannot, share in this decision, he should not be liable for 21 years of support. Or, put another way, autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice." -- Karen DeCrow, former NOW President ( National Organization for Women, U.S.A.)

RIGHT-IS-RIGHT · 2013-09-28T16:09:52+00:00

What if the child is born? Should the parent still have the option to walk out free from obligation?

Skulder · 2013-09-28T17:16:34+00:00

It's just missing something - the father also accepts that he has no right to seek out the child until that child has reached 21 (or 18 or whatever) years of age, and that any such attempt makes the document null and void, making the father responsible for back pay of child support.

rebuildingMyself · 2013-09-28T18:11:25+00:00

It'll never happen. Why? If he doesn't support, then big pappy government will have to do it. So the incentive, as always, will be to fuck over men's right to freedom to benefit everyone else.

RedBigMan · 2013-09-28T15:43:13+00:00

[permanently deleted]

hbhutt · 2013-10-02T15:24:39+00:00

are we considering the child's feelings and needs?

zook54 · 2013-09-28T23:30:28+00:00

I agree.

alt30313 · 2013-09-28T15:06:24+00:00

The quote below made me rethink my pro-choice stance. Also, what you are suggesting will never happen because the government and women have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo of the current system.

"Until males have their own affective birth control options, beyond condoms and blaming women, their opinions about female health issues and abortions should be significantly limited, and men should not be allowed to legistlate the care of organs they are born without, beyond generally accepted patients' rights provided citizens of both genders."

Definitely a /r/mensrights post or needs MRA flair

10J18R1A · 2013-09-29T17:52:18+00:00

I have found my home.

I've been making this same exact point for years. Either have this legal document, or ban abortion. I'm personally pro choice, as I don't think women should be told what to do with their bodies. I just am also pro choice for men. Sad day when being for equality makes one a misogynist.

30years · 2013-09-28T17:20:47+00:00

Would never happen here in the US even though women are allowed to kill their fetuses. And yes, it's killing. You know why? A man killing a pregnant woman is charged with TWO murders - the woman and the baby. A woman killing a baby is just an "abortion" smh.

TheRabid · 2013-09-28T14:45:15+00:00

I see this working in theory because it would produce a reasonable outcome. Then again, in theory, no one in the world should starve either.

evilmonster · 2013-09-28T23:57:58+00:00

I agree insofar as yes, I think it's bullshit that a man should have to pony up money for a kid he doesn't want.

... but I wonder just who would end up being punished in these instances. Obviously we want mothers to live with the consequences of their choices, but there's also a kid in the midst of all of this who could be suffering for his/her mom's shitty decision-making.

Male birth control: we need it.

evilmonster · 2013-09-29T04:27:43+00:00

I can't help but contest this idea, if for no other reason than how close to home it hits for me.

A cousin of mine recently gave birth to the child of her ex-boyfriend, who left her after she refused to abort. He hasn't had to pay a dime so far, doesn't even want to see or hear about the kid he helped create, and his current girlfriend knows all of this and is still his number-one fan (perhaps attributable to his super-Red Pill demeanor, which I can verify after an encounter or two).

I'm probably biased because my family was involved, but one crooked thing about him not having to pay child support is the ridiculous income disparity between his family, who own something like half of his town, and my cousin's, who are at best solidly lower-middle class and now having to raise his spawn all on their own. Yes, his spawn. I'm aware as well as anybody how plotting and malicious some women can be in child support/custody cases, but they can't reproduce by themselves, having to be aided in this pursuit by men in an act to which, ordinarily, both parties fully consent.

In short: if you're not ready to handle all possible consequences of sex, most of which are usually preventable, you're not ready to have it. Don't attempt to blame women for an outcome which you also helped to determine; last I checked, one aspect of Red Pill theory was seeing through and disregarding denials of responsibility, etcetera from women, so why should we hold ourselves to a lesser standard of conduct?

realniggasstandup · 2013-09-28T16:16:10+00:00

Financial abortions are a pipedream.

Not even leftoids, the stalwarts of anti-personal responsibility, support a man walking out on his obligations to his children. A woman killing her child to abdicate the same obligations is seen as more acceptable because, as we've come to know, women are children and even feminists know this subconsciously.

The only equalizer (that is possible) in this is outlawing elective abortions.

rcglinsk · 2013-09-30T17:24:57+00:00

What about just not getting pregnant in the first place? - Contrary to popular belief, accidents happen, ignorance happens. So not all babies are created on purpose. Telling young adults to only have sex for the purpose of having a child works about as well as the abstinence campaigns did when we were kids. So you can relieve yourself of that fantasy. Sex happens.

So, basically, being responsible for the consequences of one's actions is not going to alter one's behavior, therefore no one should be responsible for the consequences.

Eminently familiar logic there. Maybe we should call it manstering?

rattamahatta · 2014-02-10T18:55:37+00:00

there should be a legal document signed releasing the man from obligation and his paternal rights.

The father's obligation should be towards the child, not towards the mother. She can't sign away what isn't hers.

2013-09-29T18:32:18+00:00

Are you guys for real?

IDOWNVOTECATSONSIGHT · 2013-09-28T14:48:29+00:00

/r/mensrights

psilocybes · 2013-09-28T15:41:20+00:00

The risk of sex is a child. What don't you understand about that?

LasherDeviance · 2013-09-28T23:49:40+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Valdincan · 2013-09-29T01:33:48+00:00

A woman should not be able to refuse an abortion if the man wants one

dUdV · 2013-09-28T16:05:46+00:00

If a woman refuses an abortion when the man wants to have one, there should be a legal document signed releasing the man from obligation and his paternal rights.

Kids raised by single-mothers ends up way too fucked up for this to be an acceptable practice. Just force an abortion and tell the bitch to get a new sperm-donation from a willing father instead. Problem solved.

EdgarAllenNope · 2013-11-19T05:34:47+00:00

I don't know about that, OP. First of all, abortion should be illegal as it's murder. Secondly, it's your responsibility as a parent to support your children.

Offensive_Brute · 2013-09-28T18:18:08+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Comments