Ontario, Tuesday. Now legal for men to absolve themselves from parental role prior to impregnating a woman by signing a pre-sex waiver. Bill 28 "All Families are Equal Act", passed today, makes this legal as of Jan 1, 2017.

Rasalom72 · 2016-11-30T05:27:36+00:00

Have a pad of these made up and sitting on your night stand.

The only problem would be getting it to stand up in court once the women claims she was too intoxicated to enter into a binding contract.

cld8 · 2016-11-30T09:00:35+00:00

This is a step in the right direction, but why does it have to be before sex? Why not after sex but before birth, which is the time in which the woman has the right to get an abortion?

AnotherDAM · 2016-11-30T09:04:38+00:00

Does this matter when it can be repealed 10 years down the line, then applied retroactively? I still wouldn't feel safe at all.

JackGetsIt · 2016-11-30T13:23:27+00:00

This is a small step in the right direction. I'd like to see some more legislation in this same realm.

Right for a men within marriage to not have women abort their offspring.
Right for men to opt out of financial obligations if the women refuses to abort after insemination (out of wedlock).
Right for men to adjust alimony payments if income status changes. (RIP Dave Foley).
Elimination of Excessive alimony and childcare. Just because she married a wealthy man doesn't mean if she divorces him she's entitled to a 10k food budget every month after divorce. Wealthy and semi wealthy men should only have to pay a respectable pay out that is reasonable to raise the children to age 18.
In general marriages need to be eliminated or treated a lot more like individual specific contracts.

rg57 · 2016-11-30T17:30:35+00:00

This is a good step, but nowhere near enough.

Women do not have to decide before sex whether they want to be a mother. Men shouldn't have to decide whether to be a father at that time either.

Bill 28 should be called the "Men Are Still Lesser Act".

What does it say about sperm theft?

And what does it say about women who cheat on their husbands?

jimmywiddle · 2016-11-30T10:09:46+00:00

Sounds awesome to me. Finally some equality for men in this regard. I would like others have said have a stack of these pre-made, pre-signed and good to go.

Celda · 2016-11-30T16:14:00+00:00

A committee at Queen’s Park will continute its review of the bill on Tuesday with a view to having it voted on later this week.

That's what the article says. Did it actually vote and get passed?

TheRavenousRabbit · 2016-11-30T14:13:01+00:00

This is absolutely huge.

McFeely_Smackup · 2016-12-01T05:08:14+00:00

A friend of mine told me as a homosexual man, he has been “assisting some of my lesbian friends” in having children by “donating my sperm to them”

your friend is an idiot.

CanadianHerbivoreMan · 2016-12-02T02:41:25+00:00

I'm truly sorry to have to burst the bubble here, but what you guys are jumping for joy about is not what is written in this Act/amendment. You can read it here (http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&Intranet=&BillID=4176) but here is the relevant part: "7. (4) This section is deemed not to apply to a person whose sperm is used to conceive a child through sexual intercourse if, before the child is conceived, the person and the intended birth parent agree in writing that the person does not intend to be a parent of the child.". Section 7 determines whether or not the biological father is legally considered a parent. The key word is "intended". It seemed vague to me so I thought there was a chance that it meant what you guys thought, but the explanatory note at the bottom of the Act shows what is meant. Here it is: "4. If a child is conceived through sexual intercourse, the person whose sperm resulted in the conception is also a parent of the child. Rebuttable presumptions are set out respecting how that person may be determined. An exception is made in the case where two persons engage in sexual intercourse for the purpose of conceiving a child, but agree in advance in writing that the person providing the sperm does not intend to be a parent of the child (insemination by a sperm donor). (Section 7)". So as you can see, a written agreement means nothing unless sex is had "for the purpose of conceiving a child". Ironically, if you want to have sex but don't want responsibility for a child, you have to have sex with the intention of getting her pregnant. Again, sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but did you really believe these people would take the noose off our neck's?

thrway_1000 · 2016-11-30T11:34:05+00:00

http://archive.is/Nd70y

Lethn · 2016-11-30T14:26:27+00:00

This is great news, one thing I immediately spotted scanning this article though as is typical of these types of news sites.

A good deal for some men to absolve themselves of any responsibilty? A bad deal for future children who may never know whose DNA helped create them?

This is all about protecting men from blackmailing mothers who will try to claim child support from them after finding out who they are and other fraudulent tactics. This has no bearing on the child, I expect there would be ways still they could at least find out who their fathers are and it's only the women involved in this who will be stopped from having any influence and that is 100% a good thing.

I'm extremely surprised to see Canada of all places being at the forefront of this sort of thing though, would never have expected it, women should never be able to blackmail men with pregnancy.

2016-11-30T20:46:54+00:00

This is excellent. Single men in Ontario, prepare your printers and start carrying pens around haha.

Another thing this could be good for, is preventing false rape accusations, since if the woman signed, clearly she consented as well.

Comments