Help me explain opting out of child support

EricAllonde · 2017-06-08T05:13:49+00:00

Here's something I wrote for a previous discussion, which I think is a helpful way to frame the issue:

Women now have both the right to consent to sex and the right to consent to become a parent.

In the past, abortion was either unavailable or illegal, so a woman consenting to sex meant that she automatically consented to become a parent if a pregnancy should result. But now we have legal abortion, both surgically and through the morning after pill. Women can also unilaterally decide to give a newborn child up for adoption, and thereby relieve herself of any responsibility for the child.

Thanks to the legal availability of these options, women have the right to consent to become a parent that's entirely separate to their right to consent to sex.

Men have the right to consent to sex, but they are explicitly denied the right to consent to become a parent by our current laws.

If a woman becomes pregnant by any means, including:

theft, e.g. taking a used condom from where it's been discarded and using the semen in it
deception or dishonesty, e.g. lying about being on the pill when she isn't; poking holes in the condom before sex; or offering to have oral sex and then impregnating herself with the resulting semen
fraud, e.g. by forging the man's signature on a form to get access to his semen stored at a fertility clinic without his knowlege
rape, i.e. forcing a man, or even an underage boy, into having sex with her

...then in all of these situations, she can force the man whose sperm she used to financially support the resulting child for 21-26 years.

No, I'm not making this up. Yes, there have been court cases which confirmed legal precedent for all of the scenarios given.

The laws state that if a man's semen was used to create a pregnancy, regardless of the circumstances in which the pregnancy occurred, then he is financially responsible for any resulting child.

I can't think of any other circumstances in our society where Person X can face serious legally-enforced consequences for the actions of Person Y, which were taken without the consent and/or without the knowledge of Person X. Can you?

For example, imagine a woman being hauled into court and told, "This man ran over a pedestrian with his car and we're sending him to jail for 10 years. But now we know that you had a one night stand with him 3 months ago, so instead we're going to lock both of you up for 5 years".

That scenario would generate absolute outrage! People would rightly insist that the woman had no role in the accident, in fact she wasn't even aware of it, and has no connection to the man apart from having had sex with him one time. So it's completely unreasonable to make her share his punishment for actions that he alone decided to take.

Yet our legal system treats the unwilling father in exactly this way: he's forced to share the cost of raising a child he didn't want, didn't consent to have and may have been completely unaware the woman was intending to create.

So the legal system explicitly denies men the right to consent to becoming a parent, a right which is explicitly granted to women by the law and in fact is considered almost "sacred" to women - just look at the level of outrage attached to any winding back of abortion rights by comparison.

Instead, the law sees men as a mere utility to be exploited in order to provide financially for women choosing to have children. The man is not entitled to reproductive rights or choices - those are reserved only for women. The man's only role is to work and provide financially; his wishes are not relevant, only his wallet matters.

The societal justifications for this situation do not stand up to even superficial scrutiny:

"If he didn't want to pay for a child, he should have just kept it in his pants. If he wants to play, he has to accept that he might have to pay." This is essentially the pro life argument against allowing access to abortion. If you make this argument to women, a majority of society loses their minds with rage. Yet we are supposed to believe it's acceptable to make this exact same argument to men?

"He does have reproductive choice: his choice is whether to have sex or not. All the choices after that are up to her." If we were to say that her reproductive choice is whether to have sex or not, then options like abortion and adoption become unnecessary. Just like the above, this is the pro-life, anti-abortion argument.

"This is not about men vs women, it's about the rights of the child. The child support money is needed to raise the child and that's why the man has to pay." How convenient that the child has no rights at all when the question of abortion is being considered, since that would limit the mother's available options and choices, yet the child immediately gains an inviolable right to forced financial support from an unwilling biological father the moment it is born! It's almost as if...the current system was designed to perfectly suit the needs & preferences of the mother, with no concern at all for the father.

If we accept that men and women are supposed to be equal under the law, then either both sexes are entitled to the right to consent to becoming a parent, or neither sex is. We cannot reasonably provide women with access to options like abortion and adoption, yet at the same time deny men any choices at all.

No amount of mental gymnastics can justify granting rights to women and explicitly denying those same rights to men.

The reason why the current laws are so lopsided is because they separate rights and responsibilities, which are normally granted together. For example, your drivers license gives you the right to drive a car on public roads, but you also take on the responsibility for complying with all traffic laws along with responsibility for any harm you cause to people or property through your negligence or breach of any laws.

Yet when it comes to reproductive rights, the two are separated in a way that's not done anywhere else in our society. Women are given rights without the responsibility that would normally accompany those rights. Men are given responsibilities without any rights.

If a woman makes the decision to become pregnant and have a child, or the decision to continue an unplanned pregnancy, against the wishes of the biological father, then under a fair system of laws she would also take on full responsibility for the consequences of her choice. Feminists have long argued that all such reproductive decisions should be left entirely to the woman to make freely on her own; that no one else should be entitled to any say in her choices. Fair enough. But rights come with responsibilities. It's completely unreasonable to give the woman full and free choice over whether to start or continue a pregnancy, but then stick half the financial responsibility for the resulting child onto a man who's had no say at all in creating the circumstances.

Her body, her choice, her responsibility to pay for her choice.

There was a time when women were denied some rights that men had, and feminists are still outraged about that fact now, 100+ years later. So there's no excuse for the reverse scenario. It's past time to give men the same reproductive rights than women have long enjoyed, including the right to consent to becoming a parent.

WaitWhoMe · 2017-06-08T04:14:54+00:00

Rather than opting out of child support, I would frame it as whether they should be coerced into having children. If two people agree to have a baby, they should both be on the hook for that baby's well-being.

But men should not be coerced into parenthood any more than women should.

They'll likely, and reasonably, respond that the point of child support isn't fairness, but rather, child support. If that's the case, why isn't it an entitlement program like welfare, where everyone pays into the welfare of all children equally?

Demonspawn · 2017-06-08T12:30:08+00:00

Ask them if they agree with the following:

"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 man's decision whether or not to abandon his child. The detriment that the State would impose upon the ~~pregnant man~~ putative father by denying this choice altogether is apparent. Paternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the man a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. 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."

If they say that's bullshit, then inform them that they just disagreed with Roe v Wade.

theothermod · 2017-06-08T08:12:27+00:00

These are great responses, but a bit lengthy. Is there an elevator pitch we could come up with - something that summarises the key issues in thirty seconds?

One of the great advantages of a forum like this is that everyone can contribute toward refining an issue down to the bare bones, and the most persuasive way it can be presented in practice.

It would be very handy if an elevator pitch was available for all our issues. Then we could cut-and-paste it into online conversations.

ThisGirlIsHellaCrazy · 2017-06-08T14:57:08+00:00

If it's the sole decision of the woman to have a baby, it should be her sole responsibility.

Some examples from real-world cases, where the man was held responsble:

she lies about birth control
she fishes the condom out of the garbage
she rapes a minor child
her roommate fishes the condom out of the garbage
she keeps the ejaculate after oral sex, and uses it to impregnate herself
she's married, but gets pregnant by the boyfriend (the husband pays)
she gets artificial insemination, and then later discovers who the father is, and makes him pay
she has a kid who is not yours, but lies about it being yours
she gets pregnant, and doesn't tell you for 10 years... and then asks for 10 years of retroactive support

I could go on...

In all of these cases. it's 100% the woman's decision to get pregnant, and 100% the man's responsibility to pay for it.

Strong, independent women shouldn't need a man to take care of them.

DevilishRogue · 2017-06-08T09:33:24+00:00

You don't consent to be a parent every single time you have sex.

No one should be able to force you to pay for 18-21 years for a child you didn't consent to have.

Just as women have the rights to choose abortion, abandonment or adoption, men should have the same rights as women once the child is born.

Bluehusky24 · 2017-06-08T03:46:20+00:00

There was a post on r/askaliberal not too long ago (maybe a week ago max) that I commented on it would have some good points

ee4m · 2017-06-09T09:01:56+00:00

The courts have properly determined that a man should neither be able to force a woman to have an abortion nor to prevent her from having one, should she so choose. 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. That’s according to Karen DeCrow, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW) from 1974 to 1979. “Or, put another way, autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice.”

https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/the-legal-paternal-surrender-faq/

v574v · 2017-06-08T12:33:56+00:00

Pro-life people tell women and men that if they don't want the responsibility of children they should keep their pants on.'

They are consistent in their message to both men and women - their position is a gender neutral one.

Your friend probably only tells men that 'if they don't want the responsibility of children they should keep their pants on.'

You and I are pro-choice for men and women.

EricAllonde · 2017-06-08T17:24:08+00:00

This graphic sums things up pretty concisely:

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/629/297/303.jpg

2017-06-09T02:37:51+00:00

Telling your friends that men should be allowed to "opt out" of child support is probably not going to go any better on round two. I think some users here already know that I don't agree that men should be able to opt out, but that's fortunately not what we're discussing. You want to know how to convince progressive (presumably liberal-minded?) friends of something that is distinctly non-liberal. You'd need to start by finding common ground between their views and yours, and ease your logic into the framework that they already have in their head. Basically, you'll want to be speaking their language. It's easier to learn to communicate with others than to force others to learn how to communicate with you.

But, like I said, you're probably going to find this challenge insurmountable. The welfare of a child is one of those things that is hard to change someone's mind on.

2017-06-09T06:20:42+00:00

Women have a right to do what they want with their body.

Many women don't get abortions due to the changes to their body. Seldom to women ever say "I'd love a child, but the big belly and stretch marks?! no way, please abort this". Many women have abortions because they feel they aren't ready in life to raise kids, a big part of that is financial.

So a woman gets to choose based on many factors if she gets the baby. If Dad doesn't want it, we can't force a woman down and kill her child, that's insanity. Her body her baby.

Lets flip, Someone finds out they don't want to be a Dad, they aren't ready for that responsibility, they have the exact same reason to not want a baby as women. It has nothing to do with changes to his body, but it does when it comes to changes to where he is in life and finances.

By allowing him to financially abort the child, it allows him the exact same choices the woman has. Have the baby and pay for it, or, no baby and no cost. This allows both parents to make individual choices instead of forcing his life based on her choice. (doesn't apply to mothers killing babies, but its enough for the argument of financial abortion)

ee4m · 2017-06-09T09:00:11+00:00

Maybe use a quote or two from this ex President of NOW.

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... autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice. Karen DeCrow Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/k/karendecro686951.html

ShiningConcepts · 2017-06-09T20:14:27+00:00

If the woman has 100% reproductive rights and the man has 0% reproductive rights...

Then the man; hint hint; is not 50% responsible for the child.

ThisGirlIsHellaCrazy · 2017-06-08T05:51:35+00:00

What do y'all think should happen if the guy wants the baby but the woman wants an abortion? I'm anti abortion, personally except in extreme cases, so I have no input. Curious about your stances on it, though.

ee4m · 2017-06-09T08:58:14+00:00

You don't opt out of child support. Putting it that way means a child is born that you are responsible for and you opt out.

Paternal surrender (would) happen during the time a woman can still legally get an abortion and if the man had no agreement to start a family.

You have to chose your words very carefully to get that argument across.

SECTION	CONTENT
Title	The limited reach of the child support enforcement system
Description	Want to ask the panel a question? Go to https://www.sli.do and enter code AEIEvent to submit a question for consideration by the moderator. Child Support Enforcement is a crucial government program that requires noncustodial parents to take responsibility and provide resources for their children. The program has in the past enjoyed broad political support, and research has linked it to positive outcomes for children. Yet, evidence points to the program reaching fewer families that could benefit...
Length	1:33:18

Title	Help me explain opting out of child support
Author	ThisGirlIsHellaCrazy
Upvotes	70
Comments	122
Date	June 8, 2017 3:31 AM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/6fygz7/help_me_explain_opting_out_of_child_support/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/help-me-explain-opting-out-of-child-support.920942 https://theredarchive.com/post/920942

Comments