Coming straight to the point, what I'm trying to say is that if a woman rightfully has the legal option to escape the physical, emotional, and mental trauma of an unwanted pregnancy, the man should also have the legal power to withdraw from the financial trauma of unwanted child support.

To explain it better, let me create a scenario. Think of a unmarried couple, who gets pregnant prematurely say in college. The woman is highly religous, so she opposes abortion, but the man does not want a child at the moment . Now the problem is that WHY is the man legally compelled to pay child support when he does not want to have a child?

The law rightfully gives women an option to abort an unwanted fetus, but WHY does the man face the consequences when the woman wants to carry on the unwanted pregnancy against his wishes?

Aren't we living in the age of equality? This is not fair to the man. I believe the law should give the unmarried man an option to withdraw child support if he does not want the pregnancy.

Her body, her choice. Yes.

His money, his choice. Yes.

That is true justice.

Edit: My argument summarized:

If the fetus/child is secondary to the mothers bodily autonomy, then the fetus/child should also be secondary to the father's financial autonomy.