A Swedish political group, the youth wing of the Liberal Party, has proposed the idea that men should be given an equal say in whether or not they wish to become a parent, and be granted the option to abdicate any lawful responsibilities to an unborn child. The proposal suggests that a man be able to cut all legal ties and responsibilities to an unborn child up to the 18th week of a woman’s pregnancy. A man who chose this option would not have any child support obligations, but he would also lose all parental rights to the child.
This suggested legal rejection of paternity would be irreversible, and the man would be required to renounce all parental duties and rights of any access to the child once it has been born. (Some news sources are referring to this proposed process as “legal abortion”).
This proposal would give men more choice in the decision of becoming a parent. According to Marcus Nilsen, chairman of Liberal Youth of Sweden (LUF) West, the establishment of this proposal would set up a system by which there is a clear legal decision about the role men are required to play in their child’s life. This proposal has initiated quite a debate in Sweden over the roles of men and women in parenthood and the issue of voluntary parenthood.
In many countries, women have access to contraception and abortion, in addition to the option of placing their child for adoption. In countries such as this, parenthood has become a voluntary choice for women. Those in favor of the Liberal Party’s proposal argue that men do not have the same choice as women. In the United States, for example, if a woman conceives a child with a man and she decides to continue the pregnancy, the man will be legally responsible for paying child support for that child. He does not have the choice to abdicate his legal obligations to the child. The different options that men and women have create an imbalance with respect to the rights of men and women in this situation. Some argue that men should be given more options in the case of an accidental pregnancy.
The social consequences of requiring men to have a legal relationship with a child to which they did not agree may include the reality of men who legally are fathers but who do not have any relationship with a child beyond paying required child support. This may lead to negative consequences for all involved. The social consequences of allowing men to abdicate all legal responsibility for a child may be equally concerning to society. If the ultimate goal of society in these cases is to protect children, what would be the best solution?
Is the current system respecting the rights of men to have a choice in the decision to become a parent? Would it be more ethical for men to be given more control over when they become a parent?
Is it ethical to allow men the opportunity to abdicate legal responsibility for a child if they do not want to become a parent?
Finally, is there another way to handle the question of choice with respect to parenthood? Should fatherhood or parenthood have a different definition than the biological one currently used by our legal system?
I think this idea is a good solution. It expresses all the equal rights for women and men. It is very fair.
It would be more ethical for men to choose if they want to become a parent or not because woman have the right for an abortion. This happens even if the man wanted to be a father.
This system not only seems extremely equal but women would be more prepared and know for sure if the father wanted to be there. Also, women and men should be given more options in the case of an accidental pregnancy.
This is a very interesting question whether a father should have the legal rights to give up his parental/financial rights when it comes to an unborn child. I understand that in this country it does not seem fair that a man is still financially responsible for the child, even if he did not want the woman to continue with the pregnancy. In my personal opinion, I feel he should be financially responsible for the child until the child turns 18 years old. We are forgetting the child’s rights and he/she deserves to all the rights that this world has to offer. I have been privileged to witness the product of a one-night stand. Names have been changed to protect their privacy. Lisa and Michael met in college and one thing leads to another and nine months later, a beautiful baby girl named Brittany was born. Michael has been financially supporting Brittany since the day she was born. In addition, every summer Brittany spends a month with Michael who has since married. I have seen this young woman become a caring, smart, funny and intelligent person. I strongly believe it’s because she had two parents who ever though made a bad choice to have unprotected sex, decided to do the right thing for the sake of the child.
We also have to remember that supporting a child emotionally is just as important as financial support. As humans, we all want to feel loved and wanted.
One final note on Brittany, she will be attending college in the fall. Michael and Lisa who are both married to other people, we will be assisting Brittany with her college expenses.
In my personal opinion, I feel that if a man and woman decide to have sex and they are not being cautious with protection; they are responsible for the consequences. There has always been that sex education class in school, so people do know you cannot conceive a baby without both the egg and the sperm. This means, no excuses for either the man or woman. If a man does not want to become a father, then it would be their own responsibility to protect themselves so that becoming a father does not happen. A man is not forced to have sex without protection; he does have a choice. Obviously, there will be situations where there was a fault in the protection used and there is an accidental pregnancy but how often does that really happen? Not very often.
With our society today, people do not want to accept full responsibility for their actions, and that it not fair or right. No one had the choice 20 years ago to decide whether or not they wanted to be a parent, so that should not change now. Unfortunately, we are an always changing world. If there became a law for men to have the right to hand over all rights and responsibilities of their unborn child, then it should be based on the decision of both parties involved. I do not believe the man should have sole decision based on his own regrets and selfishness. If a woman decides to have the child and the man does not, then they both can take it to court and let the court decide what happens or both be mature and figure it out together. There are a lot of single men and woman out there now that do not need or want help from the opposite parent and they do just fine. This is because they made their own choices.
So with that being said, no I do not think that letting men have the decision to father a child or give up their rights is ethical in the words of parenthood. If this was to happen then there would most likely become a lot of unfathered children or a lot more abortions. That is what would be unfair to the future of our children. It would become the domino effect, lots more disturbed and disappointed children wondering why they do not have a father.
Ethical Discussions: Should parental responsibility be a choice? #spcethics
Is the current system respecting the rights of men to have a choice in the decision to become a parent? Would it be more ethical for men to be given more control over when they become a parent?
In my opinion current laws do not do anything to support or give men any protection from un-justified, un-reasonably forced, 18 year financial commitment and obligation to bear responsibility for the life of an unwanted unborn child, or otherwise, when and if prior disclosure of feelings to such were made open and clear when having entered into the relationship. There are so many variables and circumstances surrounding a pregnancy in any relationship that any one law designed to favor one parent or another can be bias almost from its onset. I feel that whether a man or a woman wants to create and have a child with or without certainty, or by accident, it should be absolutely discussed and made clear as soon as possible in any intimate relationship that could lead to conception. If societies did better at educating sex partners of any age to all realities concerning parental rights and obligations prior to and after conception and birth takes place, I feel that society would then be better equipped to handle the critical thinking required in the assumption of such a responsibility as that of pro-creation.
Is it ethical to allow men the opportunity to abdicate legal responsibility for a child if they do not want to become a parent?
I personally feel that as laws are right now, they don’t allow for avocation of a man’s parental rights, but also don’t offer any protection for those men whom perhaps did everting right to prevent conception but perhaps were tricked or deceived by their partner in order to conceive for purposes other than true love and family. These are one of countless real life scenarios that play out every day in which men find themselves throughout everywhere in life.
Finally, is there another way to handle the question of choice with respect to parenthood? Should fatherhood or parenthood have a different definition than the biological one currently used by our legal system?
I feel the question of parenthood as is defined by the courts of law today are in-adequate for our current times and should have their purpose and premise re-examined with the intent to make any amendments that will reflect adequately the desires and sentiment of a collective society. Our courts must move with the will of the citizenship majority.
This situation could lead to two serious consequences that could effect the father, mother, and also the child. Let’s say that this “legal abortion” did go through and did become an actual law. What would a mother that has nothing to live off of do for the next couple of years after this baby was born? Can the mother be independent and raise a child with her income that she receives? For this reason I would say that “legal abortion” would be considered a bad thing. There has to be more in depth analysis of both parents situation in order for the child to be brought up in a good or ethical environment with only the support of one parent.
Now the reason that I have understood for this “legal abortion” to be even considered would be for the father to have rights to the child and to maybe get out of paying childcare. These two ideas can be supported with the fact that there is a certain type of unfairness in these scenarios. The father does have some right if the pregnancy was caused by an accident. The father should have as much rights as the mother in these types of situation. The father should be able to help the child grow without paying child support or not be with the child at all and accept the terms of the “legal abortion”. These same decisions are what tie a women to the child they are about to bear. So in fairness why can’t men have the same choices. For this reason could this be considered a good thing.
I think it is ethical to give men the same choice as females. If a man does not want to be part of the family and does not want to do anything with the child, he should have up to 18 weeks to say so and not be responsible to pay for child support or have parental duties. After all, women have the same option if she does not want the baby she can abort it. I think there should be some kind of deal were a man, after terminating his parental rights, can not be involved with the child even after the child is older. However good the intentions are of providing this option, men may still use this option as a selfish act to only get out of paying child support.
This was a very interesting article. It really made me have to think about the role that men have on deciding if they want to become fathers. In my opinion, I think it should be an equal decision between the man and the woman. It certainly took both of them to partake in the activity. So how is it that the male can decide not to be involved? Yes I know that women have options as well. But if both parties participate, then both parties should be liable.
The man should not be able to take the easy way out. If he did not want the responsibility, then he should have taken the proper measures to ensure that he will not bring another life into this world. I think that in the article, the system is respecting the rights of men to have a choice in deciding if they want to become a parent. But like I said earlier, if the male doesn’t want that responsibility, from the start he should use all preventive measures to avoid bringing another life in this world. It is hard to say, because women can use birth control, and have an abortion, so in that case men should be allowed to control when they want to become a parent.
If a child is brought into this world, then I think that both parties should be responsible for that life. I think that things have to be equal between both male and female when it comes to parenthood decisions. Yes I think that fatherhood and parenthood should have a different definition than the one that is used by our legal system.
Louise Haberer
April 11, 2016
Professor Vaughan
(Word Count 330)
Should parental responsibility be a choice?
Yes, parental responsibility should be a choice and an obligation, when a man and a woman has unprotected sex, it is both of their responsibility to become parents, some of the times the woman wants to be a parent and majority of the time the man does not want the responsibility of becoming a father, but they never think about the consequences that is involved in having unprotected sex with a woman. Men look at life different then us woman, when the man is told that the woman is pregnant he may or may not freak out at the time, then he will wonder how did this happen, and what are they going to do about this unborn child of theirs. Then the man starts thinking that his life is ruined and that he won’t have any freedom because of the child, or he may be scared, and thinking that they have a responsibility and an obligation to help with this child and he don’t want the child. When you have unprotected sex and you want to play around then all rights should be responsible and obligated paying support for this child, they need to also help with any needs for the child, they help make this child, then they need to be a man and own up to being a responsible parent. In the United States any woman that knows who the father is to their unborn child is legally obligated and held responsible for paying child support, this law needs to be passed overseas to all the countries.
I understand that the Liberal party is probably looking out for the man’s best interest, but the liberal party should not be able to support something like this law that they want to have happen. I think that the law needs to be forth coming over seas as it is here in the United States.
I find this to be a very touchy situation and as far as I see society will always fail to make the correct decision on anything so controversial. For the reason of it being controversial, not all will agree and therefor no correct decision will come to be had. Of course we can simply say that those that oppose us are wrong or that they are not accepting their responsibilities. I personally believe that people are entitled to their opinion like any others, whether or not we categorical align it to something is on our end not theirs. To say that a mother has the choice of aborting the child or not, but the father does not have a choice of paying for the child is simply not fair.
In my opinion if abortion is legal than this should be legal, they are both giving paternal control or they are both not given paternal control. I find the decision to be more learning towards equality than it is to moral decisions, if abortion is legal than the father should also have the choice of having any legal bindings to the child. I think we can all agree that paying for a child is not as bad as aborting one, now that is a different moral question entirely, but we can see that an abortion IS ending the potential of a life while not paying for said life does not condemn it to death. Of course there are always exceptions to the rule and I truly believe there should be exceptions to rule. I detest broad stroke decisions such as these. I think it is a inherent problem with large societies that ethical values are such controversial subjects, so we will never truly agree in this. I personally just seek for what is equal and considered fair decisions from both parties.
I’m in favor of allowing men the same sort of choice as we give women. From an ethical view point it seems only fair and just to allow both possible parents the same options. Up until now women have held the ultimate decision about whether or not to follow through and give birth to a baby. If a man and woman disagree on the fate of their future child is makes no difference. In the instance that a woman gives birth to a baby, knowing that the father is against it has no effect because genetically this baby belongs to him and he is now legally responsible for providing for the baby.
I think that if the man states from the very beginning that he has no desire of being a father and is against going through with the pregnancy that he should be relieved of any involvement. If the pregnant woman is aware of the fathers position on the pregnancy and she still decides to follow through and have the baby then that is her decision and the man shouldn’t have to be involved at all. How is it fair to hold a man responsible for a life when he was clear on his feelings from the start? A man has virtually no control over whether or not a woman gives birth. His honesty on the situation may alter a woman’s decision but will not make it altogether and because of that he should be free of any involvement. There are instances when woman abort babies against the fathers wishes or even knowledge but yet they owe nothing to the man, how is this any different?
I think this is a swell solution. As some have stated above, both the man and the woman involved in pregnancy are equally at fault if this is the consequence of unprotected sex; then a selected few in this post have stated that “men think differently than woman,” I find this extremely chauvinistic and offensive. Not only are those select few people contradicting themselves saying that both are at fault, they then say that only the woman gets to choose on whether she wants to birth a child? One, where is the morality and two, it takes a sperm and an egg to even make this happen. Yes, a woman carries on the development process-, but BOTH parties partake and are at fault so why cannot BOTH choose? What happens when the man wants the child, but the woman does not? That is why I am starting to see the extremist side of this whole feminism movement– I like to view both sides, put my shoes in the woman’s shoes as I am a man I already know what I have to deal with. I live with my mom and my sister, I know the female gender quite well without having to feel the “aches” and “pains.” Yet, I never see one’s opposite gender thinking about the male’s feelings and thoughts- not saying all do not, but most of the time we are classified as “pigs” or soulless beings, and the fact I am even typing this and putting this much time into this shows how long I have been wanting to display this to the public.
In the same breath, I think communication is the failed concept by both parties and these thoughts and feelings should be conveyed. If I am going to ever have unprotected sex, I would make sure that woman would be on birth control or another contraceptive- or willing to undergo abortion. If not, I will be protected 100% of the time, simple as that. Communication goes a long way, and one thinks this law is a fabulous ideology to propose to the people. Not only will people be more cautious with their behavior, it will force individuals to actually communicate what the want with the relationship, and if certain things happen then certain actions would be taken. If this law was enforce, if the man told the woman, that if she got pregnant then he would not take legal responsibilities if she gave birth then that is solely up to the woman. One cannot just assume and be ignorant, enforcing the birth and legally bind the man. I have even seen/read cases where the woman are on the search to become pregnant to live off child support and welfare. Not only could this be damaging to the woman and man wealth and life wise, but this would destroy the offspring mentally and possibly physically.
If we want equality within the entire spectrum, lets start to see it. I am all for equality between women and men- I love people and think all is a stepping stone to a greater future.
So what happens when the man wants to have the child, but the woman does not? Like you said, it takes BOTH the sperm and the egg for this to happen and both should pay the consequences for their actions. Do not degenerate all of men, if anything it would be entirely selfish for the women to have the child and the man to be forced, there has to be a law, we can not go to court and play “who has the best attorney game.” It is this childish behavior where we all will not progress in society- if we all want equal rights then I do not see the problem.
After reading this several times, hoping to come to a better conclusion, I am still undecided on whether or not I agree with parents having the choice to legally abdicate their rights. On one hand I think that it is fully justifiable for men to abdicate their rights if they are not willing to take on the responsibility of being a father because women are free to abdicate their rights by choosing adoption or abortion. However, I do not think that the abdication should be irreversible because a child should know who their biological parents are and if the father ever wanted to be a part of that childs life then I think that is acceptable. Although, I do believe that there should be a required parenting class in order to reverse the original decision. Sometimes people abdicate their rights simply because of fear and that’s understandable but at the same time I don’t think that any parent should abdicate any rights pertaining to their legal financial obligation. Unfortunately, if someone does not want a child there are certain precautions that they should take or just abstain all together.
Children have no say so in this type of situation and that is why I also disagree with this proposal. If anyone is affected the greatest, it is the child. They are the greatest stakeholder with the most to lose. If one parent decides to give up rights, that child has to grow up not understanding what he/she did to be rejected. That can create a lot of built up anxiety, fear, turmoil, and anger. It is also teaching that child that it is okay to not take responsibility for another life because all a persons has to do is sign a piece of paper. It doesn’t set a good example for our future generations.
All in all, I think that there should be a mutual decision between the parents and if a mutual decision cannot be made then there should be a program that educates parents on the pros and cons of all of the different choices. After their education course, they should be required to have their decision in writing and notarized or brought in front of a judge. I truly think that it comes down to making an informed, responsible, accountable, decision.
I think that Sweden is on the right track by looking into the problem they acknowledge that there is one. Giving a man the right to ignore his responsibilities does not seem to be the right answer for me. I do believe that equal rights should be put in place for both men and women; However, to leave a child with only one source of his or her parental income is not fair either. It has occurred to me that there are way to many unreasonable parents in the world today.
There must be a better solution that will take care of the children as well as keeping the parental rights intact. The only solution I can come up with is that pregnancy be taken away from all people until they are ready for the responsibility it takes to raise a child. I put this on science the solution to this will have to be left in their hands in order to find the proper and easiest way to eliminate unwanted pregnancy’s whether it be by man or woman.
The current system does not respect the man’s right to reproducing. If a woman gets pregnant the state protects the woman’s decision on either keeping it or having an abortion. There are many times that men are tricked into pregnancy and feel obligated to be there for the child and mother, but it makes the men feel trapped which can lead to a negative outcome for the “family”. It would be more ethical to allow the father of the child to decide if they want a child or not. This decision could lower cost used by the state to help raise the child and could also lower the child support rate for men when they did not want to have a child in the first place.
Majority, of the young girls in society are quick to hold a child over the father’s head as a sort of bribe which is unfair. If the man does not want to have the child, but the women does then the man should not have to pay or acknowledge the child. But that would mean that the women would have to make sure that nobody knows it is that man’s child except for when the child got older and wanted to find out. Many adoption agencies allow the biological parents to visit with the kid without asking for anything from them so why could this not be the same when only one of the parents wants to have a child? The system that is in place now is pro-mother, but in all case’s it should be done that way. There are just as many good fathers as there are deadbeat mothers.
To bring a life into this world should not just be a quick decision because the life of the child is affected. Men should be given more rights in deciding if they are ready to have a child just as much as the rights are given to the women.
When briefly reading about the case of Matthew Dubbay in the Abortion Chapter, I had already formed an opinion about this case. Matthew Dubbay made very clear to his at the time partner that he did not want kids. His partner told him it would be fine because she couldn’t get pregnant anyway. In this scenario I think that father should have a choice to legally and emotionally separate himself from any responsibility. If the mother chooses to continue the pregnancy and keep the child, she alone will be financially responsible. This case is not the same as every other one, a number of things can cause my opinion to change. The first being if both parties decided to get pregnant and the relationship ended before the end of pregnancy, in the case they should both be responsible. In a case where a man has many children with many different women, he should be required to at least pay some support to the mom if she chooses to go thru with the pregnancy. This is a very tricky subject because the situations can vary from person to person. I don’t think it is fair to have a standard law on this, I think the outcome should be chosen on each case.
My biological father decided he didn’t want financial or legal responsibility of my sister and me at the ages of 2 and 3. Now granted we were already living children so this changes things a bit. My mother got married to my step dad and had my bio dad sign a document stating he wouldn’t be required to pay any child support but he would not be allowed any contact or legal say over my sister and me. He ended up wanting contact when I was a late teenager, probably thinking he wouldn’t have to pay child support anymore so it was worth it, well he ended up having to pay back child support. This day and age we have access to so many different types of birth control to where an unplanned pregnancy can be avoided. If both parties are responsible enough to make the decision to have unprotected sex, they then are responsible enough to deal with the consequences.
WC 374
I think it is ethical to allow the existence of the choice for a male to abdicate all legal ties to a child because there are so many varying scenarios for all different people. Asking whether a man should have the right to cut ties with a life-long obligation of such great magnitude is like asking if a woman should have the right to abort a baby who was conceived during a raping. The circumstances in which a man might want to abort legal responsibility over a child may be a little different such as a woman having a baby that the man is not at all ready (mentally, financially, emotionally, circumstantially, etc.) to take care of. For the most part, I believe that the man is a large determining factor in when a baby is conceived. To opt out of being legally responsible for a child, I believe that an investigation should be carried out to fully understand the facts of the relationship. If a guy fails to use protection, implies to the girl that he wants and is ready for a child but decides to bail at the last second, he should absolutely be forced to provide some type of support for his child. If there is an accidental pregnancy, and the guy has made it clear that it needs to be terminated or that he is not suit in any aspect to be a father, hopefully a formal investigation can lead to the surfacing of a fair situation for all involved parties.
The current justice system is structured to ensure that the mother and the child are well taken care of under the responsibility of the father. Truthfully, I believe a man needs to have his head on straight and make good, logic-based decisions and to be clear in his intentions. However, I do believe that unexpected hardships do occur in everyone’s life and there should be room for earnest inquiry as to what the right thing to do is. In most instances, I believe that the biological definition of a father should remain a relevant part of the consideration process, but in retrospect, it would benefit us more as a society to consider progressive alternatives to scenarios that need it.
This is a very interesting topic to discuss, and poses many ethical arguments towards this suggested new system for parenthood. I think that the current system does respect men in a way because if they do not sign the child’s birth certificate then they will not be forced to pay child support. Also, i think that if you are sexually active it is important to deal with the consequences. A woman should not be left alone to pay for and take care of the child when the father is equally responsible for creating the child and should own up to the consequence.
Since the woman has opportunities to abortion, i do think it is ethical to give men control over whether they want to legally become a parent, even though they are biologically the parent, in certain situations. Also, i think that in certain situations it is ethical to abdicate a fathers legal responsibilities when it is necessary for the children’s safety, such as the father being an alcoholic, drug user, or other toxic habits for a child to be around. Fatherhood/parenthood should have a different definition than the biological one we currently use in our legal system because sometimes the father has no relationship with his child except for paying child support, and they may have a non-biological father figure involved. I think that could cause many issues and consequences for everyone in that family due to his lack of involvement, and maybe this new suggested option would have helped the family. In conclusion, i think that it is ethical to give both parents the choice of whether they want to be a parent.
I have thought about this issue a lot sense reading the chapter in the textbook about abortion. Most of my thinking revolved about the man’s options when it comes to rather the women has the child or not. I can say that I never thought of this option and this option sounds a lot better than any options that I came up with. I definitely agree with this option and I wish that it would be enacted here in the United States. This gives men more options when deciding if they are really ready to become a father.
Abortion and adoption allows women a way to solve issues of being a parent while men’s only real option is to run. With this option men now can forfeit all their responsibilities to the child if the women decides to keep it. Now men wouldn’t be legally responsible to provide for the child which would eliminate them having to pay child support. This gives men more options on what they want to do and rather they are ready to become a parent. I think this should definitely pass and I believe it would be a benefit to everyone involved.
Word Count: 199
I personally feel that this idea is not very ethical, because it is giving men an easy way out of parenting. If a couple decides to have a baby and have discussed it, then both the partners should have the responsibility to take care of the child. Let’s say the man wanted to have a kid with the woman, then later on feels as though it would be a big burden on him and leaves that is not right. You decided to have this child, now you are going to be responsible for it. You cannot just walk out and cut all ties from it and the mother. It was your choice, so you have to deal with the baggage that comes with being a parent. Same goes for the mother too. Another situation might be that the couple accidently had a baby. They are still equally responsible for the child. Both the man and the woman have a moral obligation to take care of the kid, whether they like it or not. They had sex without protection, so they have to deal with the consequences.
This idea is not equally fair and actually sexist. Why is it that the man has the option to choose whether or not they wanted to parent a child? What about us women? What if we do not want to have a kid, but it happens anyway? We get stuck doing everything ourselves like paying for a house, food, water, etc. We would have to work many jobs in order to support the child. We do not get help. This is an unethical situation overall and I hope it does not get passed.
This is a very intriguing and sensitive discussion. I personally believe that we all have the rights to choose what we may think is right for us. I can’t honestly decide whether to agree on giving the man a right to choose to becoming a father or not, but I think it is also unfair for their parts of becoming a parent against their wills. But in my opinion, men should also be careful and mindful by their actions. If the guy knows that he does not want to be a father or getting a girl pregnant either he knows her or not, he should take precautions and protect himself from future consequences. Furthermore, it is also unjustifiable to force a man to become a father when he does not want to. I think this would only create a problem and drama to the mother and child. Either way our system here structured to ensure a single parent/ mother and the child financially even without any financial support from the other parent. If woman has the rights to choose whether to become a mother or not, I think it fair enough for men to have a choice at the same time. Although I think this behavior is still unethical since we are talking about a life of an unborn child.
It is sad that our society has reached to this point of view. Both parties should not only think about their selves but also for the child. The most affected on this situation is the child.
Why does a woman have a right to choose but a man becomes a dead beat dad if he doesn’t take financial and ethical responsibility for a child he doesn’t want? If a man and a woman conceive a child and she states that she cant get pregnant or is on birth control and the man assumes this is the truth then why is he responsible for the child if she becomes pregnant if he is clear about not wanting to be a father? On the other hand what if the woman gets pregnant because the condom has been in the mans wallet to long and becomes ineffective and he says it is new and as effective as that condom maker stated? In another scenario is the condom company responsible to raise a child if the woman becomes pregnant because the condom breaks and becomes ineffective ?
I feel that the father should have the right to not have to raise a child or be financial responsible for that child if he doesn’t want it just as the mother has the freedom of choice. I do agree however that there should be a deadline and that once the father puts his name on the birth certificate he has then taken responsibility. However if the father truly does not believe in a woman’s right to choose and is strongly against abortion than that right to choose is no longer valid and should be considered at time of conception. He can’t ethically and conveniently pretend to believe in abortion once she finds out she is pregnant so he doesn’t have to take that responsibility.
I believe that both sides of this debate is right and equally wrong as well. I can understand where both sides are coming from and I believe this is a tough choice. I think that it is a smart idea to have the cut off date be 18 weeks into the pregnancy because then, there might still be a chance for her to have an abortion if that would be what she wanted. And if she wanted to keep the baby even without the fathers help, I think that it gives her enough of a notice that she can start planning things for the unborn child. An interesting point to this too is that the decision would be permanent. Yes I believe that it is a good thing because that means the child wouldn’t have to go through split parenting. But on the other hand, maybe the birth father turned over a new leaf later on in life and he would have no rights to his child.
I also believe that it takes two people to make a child so two people should be responsible for raising that child. Even if the birth father is only providing money to the mother, the mother is still getting support from the birth father. And if the father did want something to do with the kid later on in life, maybe he would be able to have a relationship with that child.
This article goes about saying that men need a legal right to saying “I do not want to be a father” and the ramifications of that decision affect the support of the child. That decision of having a baby may not be in the hands of the father, but he definitely has a right in the support of the baby. Every situation in pregnancy is different, but the overall consensus is the father will be taking care of the baby financially whether he wants a baby or not, which that is not right.
Men should have a right in financial support of a baby. Only because the right of life is sorely in the hands of woman, and she can decide against the potential father’s wishes of abortion. Now if we had this as right of support for the father, it may relieve the father the pain of financial burden. Downside is of course never knowing your son/daughter after giving up on all paternity. Which could cause remorse, and wanting a reversal on the decision.
I believe the decision to give men equal rights as women when it comes to children could be both good and bad. There are countless times you hear or read about, Men who try to stop an abortion. Fathers who want nothing to do with their child. Although it isn’t quite fair. There are plenty of women out there who don’t believe in abortions so when they fall pregnant they feel as though they have no choice but to have the child. Some may argue that adoption as an option but as a father myself I couldn’t imagine women carrying a child in her womb for 9 months then just giving it away. There are some women who can do it. I’m just indifferent about the whole situation. To many what ifs and factors to put into play.
Parental Responsibility
I believe the decision to give men equal rights as women when it comes to children could be both good and bad. There are countless times you hear or read about, Men who try to stop an abortion. Fathers who want nothing to do with their child. Although it isn’t quite fair. There are plenty of women out there who don’t believe in abortions so when they fall pregnant they feel as though they have no choice but to have the child. Some may argue that adoption as an option but as a father myself I couldn’t imagine women carrying a child in her womb for 9 months then just giving it away. There are some women who can do it. I’m just indifferent about the whole situation. To many what ifs and factors to put into play.
The think it is a good decision for men to have equal rights but I don’t agree with it because its not fair to the women and the child. If the men knew he was having unprotected sex than the female gets pregnant and wants to keep the baby I don’t think the men should have a choice because he had a choice to use protection and he didn’t. So now that it is a child involved he shouldn’t be given the choice to not have anything to do with the child. My question is how would this work if the man wanted to keep the child and the mother didn’t want to give birth to the child. Would they force the mother to carry a child she doesn’t want for nine months just because the father wants it. All in All I really think its a tough situation.
I believe the right to give men the same rights as women is good. Although I don’t like the fact that if a man lays down with a female and have unprotected sex knowingly I feel as if he should be held accountable for his actions and vice versa. I don’t think its fair for a man to be able to turn away from all rights of a child he help create. I also think its not a good idea because men could just be around here making babies with women then saying oh they don’t want anything to do with them sign a paper then everything will be ok. Question for the people making this law would be: What if a women decided she didn’t want to keep the baby but the father did? Would they make the female carry a child she doesn’t want any parts of just for the father I don’t think so. So with that being said I think they better stick to abortions which I do agree with either or if they don’t want the child give it for adoption.
In my opinion both sides of the debate are considered to be right, but on the other hand it is equally wrong. Men may not be prepared when hearing the news of a new child. This is why in many countries it is essential that a man shares the moment of delivery that strengths the parental feeling. I do not agree of setting a time of 18 weeks as this can give the mother a chance for abortion at time that mainly the baby is formed. Both can make a decision at a time that may be difficult to undertake any decisions. The law can also encourage men to get out of their obligations and strength the family ties that there may be a chance to form one. In USA, we find that most of welfare benefits goes to encourage marriage for many States as Oklahoma in an opinion that this will stable the society welfare in general and strength family ties.
I also think that permeant of a decision, however it can be also bad and good as parent is a parent at the end of the day. If man or woman at some point in life decide to get out of any parental ties, they may regret it in future as parenting is a nature which God creates in us. If the parents decide one day to be together in a relationship that lead to pregnancy, both should be responsible of their consequences. I also do not agree to give an option for abortion as this can affect the health of woman, and encourage women to go for abortion option to get out of problems. This can lead to instability of the society especially in young generations. Having a baby can encourage both parents to change their standard of life and seize new job opportunities for the family stabilization. This what also states in all religion holly books.
I feel that this a subject that could go either way. On one hand the man should have just as many choices as the woman does when it comes to having a child. It takes two people to have a baby and the choice should be for both parents to choice. On the other hand this may give a Man the excuse to get woman pregnant and not have to do anything about it and just walk away.
I feel that this should be a choice for the man; but there should be rules about this like a man cant get 20 girls pregnant because he slept with them all and now they all are having his baby and he feels like he doesn’t need to do anything. Yet in a case that there is an accidental pregnancy and the man feels that he would not be a good father and it would be better for the child then yes i feel they should have the right to choose. In the end if people were to practice safe protected sex then we wouldn’t be even having this debate to give man more rights or to keep it the same. We have a right and a responsible to ourselves and others to do the right thing, whatever that may be.
I do not think men should legally have the right to decide not to be a parent. That notion in general is ludicrous to me. That would leave so many women as single moms left with all the bills, support, care and stress. If a man takes the action to create life he needs to be aware of the consequences. Too much this day in age we see these irresponsible fathers and mothers creating children with no reality of what it is to be a parent. I do not solely blame the fathers of course but I think it is not fair to give the father that choice to leave and have nothing to do with the child. What if this law was legal and an 18 year old boy decides he does not want to be a father. He is immature and childish at this age and of course would not want to assume responsibility. But what about when he hits maturity and realizes his mistake? What if then he wants to be a good father? That happens frequently now with fathers not paying child support or avoiding their children but then realizing what they are doing. In turn they sometimes turn their lives around and make better choices and the outcome is positive for the father and child. I also think this law would promote irresponsibility. Immature men would have more unprotected sex and make irrational decisions knowing there wont be any consequences. This would become and epidemic! They would live their lives pretty much understanding they can get girls pregnant and just deny responsibility when it came time. There needs to be laws in place to teach these men responsibility. That is why I agree with the way things are currently. Of course some men still are not responsible as well as some women. But at least they understand what will happen if they mother does keep the child.
I think that the arguments for this decision would be that it gives both the female and the male equal opportunity. Just like women who have many different options to choose from, men should have the same opportunities granted to them as well. This is a good idea according to some because if men decide they don’t think they could handle the responsibility of being a father then maybe parenting isn’t for them. At the 18th week mark of the woman’s pregnancy they have to have already made the decision of wanting to be a parent or not. This option makes the man exempt from paying child support as well.
A few arguments against this in my opinion would be that it isn’t right necessarily. If a man has the energy to make a baby, then he should have the energy to take care of one. A man should be able to take on the responsibility of parenting when he made the child. There should be rules to make this okay legally if it were to go through. The man shouldn’t be allowed to just make a baby and keep making babies and then be allowed to keep saying that he doesn’t want to be the father of the baby. If this were to go through legally, then they would have to suffer the consequences granted with this decision as well.
This is a very interesting topic, I have never even thought about this situation until now that it’s brought up. This article is goes about saying that men should have a say in whether they want to have legal rights to be the father or not. Every situation and pregnancy is different in my opinion. There are some situations where the mother want to keep the baby, but the father does not or the opposite, the man wants it and the women does not. There is a system in place that women have the option for abortion, and even adoption. I think men should have some sort of say if they want to be part of the baby’s life or not. Let me elaborate! If women have the choice to be a mother or not, so should men. If not, neither should have a say, and would have to keep it.
There is a counterargument about my opinion that makes me second guess my decision. I think that if both the woman and man have sex no matter if protected or unprotected and become pregnant, they should both face the consequences about their actions. If one wants to keep it and the other does not, they should keep it, it is the only fair option. If they do pass the law about giving the man the option to be a father or not, there should be rules and limitations. They should still have to pay some type of money for the baby’s expenses. It is not fair that just because the man does not want it, the baby has to suffer with just a single parent.
This is the most excellent idea to solve many problems created by an unwanted child. It takes a man and a woman to create a baby; however, they don’t have the same rights in making decision about the baby. As we all know a woman is the person who is going to carry the baby in her stomach for months and then give a birth to the child. It makes the most sense that she should have the right to decide whether she is going to have a baby or not. However, many women make a decision to get abortion even though the fathers disagree with it, and they take it as their right to do so because they are the ones growing the baby inside their bodies. When we are talking about fairness, how come fathers don’t have the right to make their decision? Since it takes a man and a woman to create the baby, the father should have the same right to decide if he wants or is ready to have a baby.
By letting the fathers have the right to decide whether they want to be a parent or not, many troubles would be solved. There are so many cases in which fathers don’t take care of their kids, don’t pay support, and simply don’t want to be fathers. If the father informs a future mother that he is not going to take any responsibility, she can make different decision about having a child as a single mother or accept the fact of being a single mother. Law cases about fathers that don’t pay child support would be solved since the guys let the mothers know that they don’t want to have a baby and are giving up any responsibility towards their babies. It might sound unfair to some people, yet the only think that is unfair is that fathers don’t have the right to decide about their parenthood.
I feel that both parents should have equal rights in the decision making process. Accidental pregnancies happen, however, I feel as if both parties are consenting adults then why should they not have the right to decide what is going to happen to said child. In certain cases, the father, or mother may not want anything to do with the child. It would in a sense legally free them of any obligations to the child. While this idea may have some repercussions, the same could be said about the alternative. A child should not have to deal with an absent parent, It can effect the child in numerous negative ways.
Looking at the larger picture however, we have to take women’s rights into account. It is after all, her body. In the US, if the mother decides to keep the child then the farther must either a: accept it or b: pay child support until that child reaches an older age. Eliminating option b would legally free up some options for the man or women. Parents who do not want kids and treat them with such disregard probably should not be parenting.
After reading this post I did some research on the current rights of men regarding parental responsibilities and what the solution would be for men to have a parental responsibility choice. During my research the solution I came across, presented by a woman is as follows; when informed of a partner’s pregnancy, a man should get a single, time-sensitive opportunity to choose fatherhood; second by accepting, a man would assume all the responsibilities of fatherhood, but by declining he would legally be no different than a sperm donor, finally for low-income families, state-funded child support. (Make fatherhood a man’s choice!)In my opinion the government has already been stretched to its limits when it comes to providing the public state-funded programs like WIC, SNAP, HUD and EBT. Why should the government provide further assistance to families while the father of the child decides he should not have to pay for the consequences of their natural responsibilities? Furthermore if a woman and man are married and accidentally get pregnant does the father need to consent to responsibilities for that child? And if he consents, will he need to pay his wife child support?
As an educated society we all understand how a baby is made, we know that unprotected intercourse can lead to not only unwanted STDs but an unwanted pregnancy. As a consumer if you would like to prevent a pregnancy you have the responsibility and the ability to buy contraceptives as well as the ability to ask your partner if they are on some sort of birth control. To make a child it requires two people, if the male in the act that is cause of a fertilized egg would like to be treated as a sperm donor will he also be getting paid to create this child as if he had attend a sperm bank and made a deposit? My opinion is that this shouldn’t be a discussion of parental rights but a discussion of sex education and the lack there of.
Works Cited
Make fatherhood a man’s choice! (n.d.). Retrieved June 24, 2016, from http://www.salon.com/2013/11/02/make_fatherhood_a_mans_choice_partner/
I do not agree with the law the Sweden is trying to pass. The man should have to help support the child. I agree that it is a tricky situation but it puts women at risk. This makes too easy for men to leave women in helpless situation. When two people undergo sexual intercourse they should be aware of the consequences and be able to deal with them if they occur; not avoid them like they are a child.
If this law would to be passed there would likely be many men who lie about willing to support some women just to have sex with them. We see it all the time how there are guy who will say anything just to get into some girl’s pants. It also is a stressful time when someone finds out they are going to be a parent. Out fear and shock the male may renounce his responsibilities and because this is irreversible there will likely be cases where he regrets his choice.
This is an interesting proposal, and I think that many would consider this to be a viable option. I don’t. The article speaks about how women have more rights than men when it comes to procreation; however I find no reference to the rights of the child they created. Instead of debating if the current system respects the rights of men to have a choice in the decision to become a parent or not, or allowing men the opportunity to abdicate legal responsibility for a child if they do not want to become a parent, the focus should be on the child.
The child is the ultimate stakeholder in this situation. The child didn’t ask to be conceived or created. The child is the product of two people behaving irresponsibly. In this day and age, where there is an abundance of methods that can be used to prevent conception, failure to utilize them is nothing more than careless stupidity. In the words of a wise person, “stupid should hurt.” There are consequences to actions. If people don’t want to be held accountable, they shouldn’t do the deed. Bottom line: If the man is not prepared and willing to make financial and emotional deposits in the child’s life that he helped to create, then he should not be making any unprotected “deposits” in women.
The article poses an interesting idea when it comes to the choices of parental responsibility. Personally, I’m not sure whether this is a good idea or not. I think it’s currently unfair that women get to say whether the child gets to live or not, and men have to live with those consequences, whether it’s in favor of what he wanted or not. That being said, both people made a choice to have sex, and it resulted in a child. Everyone is aware that even if one is using protection and is also taking added precautions (pills, implants, etc), a pregnancy can happen. Both parties should be prepared to take responsibility for that life.
However, we as humans sometimes simply don’t think of consequences in the moment. If a child happens and precautions were taken to try and prevent the pregnancy, the parties shouldn’t be liable for the baby. If the mother keeps the baby, the father should have a choice in whether or not he wants to keep the child as well. Only if there is proof that the mother was taking a contraceptive and they tried to prevent the situation in question.
At the end of the day, people should become responsible for their actions and deal with the consequences. It shouldn’t be a choice to opt out for one and not the other. The situation should be talked out between the parents and compromise.
This is a very good article and as i do not agree with this it could be a good option for some. A man knows what to do if he does not want to have a baby. If a man does not use what is necessary they should be responsible for that child and have a healthy relationship with the child. It would be unfair to the child he did not ask to be put into this world so the person that brought it here should be responsible.
This would be helpful although because it could eliminate a lot of problems with the parents of the child. This also helps with giving man and women the same options the women have to option and with this the man will too. Every situation is different although and should be handled in the most morally right way always keeping the child in thought.
This is a big topic that can go either way. I am completely against bringing animals that are already extinct back to life. These animals went extinct naturally and should be set to rest. Although bringing them back would be good for science these animals should be left alone it could mess up out whole ecosystem.
The best solution would depend on the two parents and the child as well, I grew up with my parents divorced, and only saw my dad every other weekend, as a kid, I wondered why my parents would do that, I asked my dad and he said “your mom made it that way,’ and I asked my mom and she said ‘you’ll understand it one day’, But after growing up and maturing into the adult I am today, thanks to my mother, I realized why she did what she did and I saw my father for who he really was, a lousy parent, and a horrible friend who only wanted whatever was best for him in life.
If you had unprotected sex and the woman decides to keep the child, then its ethically correct for him to help raise the child, or at least provide for the child via child support. But I don’t think you can force someone to become a parent if they’re not ready or don’t want to, but that all leads back to using a condom during on sex. I think it really comes down to the father and whether or not he is ready to become a parent.
Holding personal beliefs against abortion, I think this is a bad idea for generations growing up. It may seem fair for the men to just leave but it’s not fair at all to the child. The child would be growing up never knowing their real father, assuming it’s a legal binding contract. It has an effect on children. Kid’s need both parents growing up, it may be argued against, but two parents really make raising a child a better environment.
Today’s society is use to divorces, abortion, and growing up with dead beat parents, but we shouldn’t advise it. We should try to fight against this degeneracy. Families are the only way a culture can grow, and when there are no authority figures in a family, children are susceptible to learning habits from peers. While the family system is breaking down, the children are suffering, the divorce rate is rising and there is no commitment anymore. It’s a choice to have sex, and there is risks, but you must determine whether having a child is a risk you want to take, not raising a generation believing there’s options in case of pregnancy.
This one is a very interesting question. The proposed law advocates for the equality of rights for men and women alike. I do support the freedom of choice and equality for all. However, it is not as simple as it may look. On one hand, such an opportunity to abdicate the responsibilities and parenthood rights in the case of an unwanted pregnancy does give men freedom of choice. After all, women can undergo an abortion without even disclosing the situation to the potential father. On the other hand, when people do have sex, they have to be aware that it may result in pregnancy. Moreover, modern medicine and technology provide for various contraception types. Why not exercise the right of choice before the intercourse? In this perspective, the proposed law may seem to protect irresponsibility and will to remain irresponsible for some individuals. When both, man and woman, are responsible for the pregnancy, people are more likely to do more in order to prevent pregnancy if they do not want it.
There is another aspect to this dilemma. It seems like some fathers want to abdicate their parental responsibilities so they do not have to support their offspring. Then, who besides the mother will be responsible for upbringing such a disowned child? What process will be initiated if the mother to fail? Children services? In this case, such an abdication endangers the child and its future by making the child prone to undergo the children services care. Men, who renounced their fatherhood, make their disowned responsibilities to be more likely to become a responsibility of a society ratifying this law. The worst of all, the proposed law does not seem to care about rights of the unborn children, even less to make them equal to the rights of their parents.
Reading this article personally I see both sides. I think that men should care for the child if they forced themselves onto the women or gave her no option. The man shouldn’t be able to just walk out on the women. He had just as much of a contribution maybe even more than the women. People have to take responsibilities for their actions. It’s an equal responsibility on both the people who had a part in conceiving the unborn. They should both take parenting seriously and be willing to provide for their child.
On the other hand not having a father isn’t all that bad. I think the decision should still be taken to court to see if the man is eligible to leave the mother to care for the unborn by herself. But if the man decides to not want any ties to the child than I believe that should be an option but he will not be allowed to be in contact with the child until the age of eighteen when that child is of adult age and can make decisions by their selves. I think the current system does this and I think that it treats the opinions of men equally to women’s. If both parents don’t want the child then there is always other options also.
It’s saddening this law is even being considered in any part of the world. If a woman becomes pregnant, it’s because a man helped her get there. The woman now has to either abort or birth the child. Walking away and forgetting it happened is not an option for her. No one, especially a man, can fathom what this is like unless it happens to you. So it’s beyond comprehensible to me that any person thinks the man who helped create the baby can have the option of taking the safe way out and simply leaving the child and woman with NO support. Why should the man walk away with absolutely no burden?
To be clear, I think situations in which the couple agrees that one of them cannot be in the child’s life and is happy with them not paying child support are perfectly fine. If a woman or man is happy with raising a child on his or her own then there is no problem. But forcing a woman to raise a child alone with absolutely no support when she has no choice but to either give a baby a low quality life or not have it at all is absolutely cruel and should not be tolerated, allowed, or even considered anywhere.
This is a topic I have never thought about before as a woman, but I agree with it. I think that men, like women, should be able to choose whether or not they want to have a child. If a woman gets pregnant, she has the option to choose whether or not to have an abortion, give it up for adoption, or raise the child. If a woman is able to make that choice I think the man should have an equal opportunity as well.
There are the opposers to say that if you choose to have sex, then you have to deal with the consequences but things sometimes just happen. It would not be fair to the child if it were born to parents who were not stable enough to have a child. It takes both the man and the woman to have a baby so why should they both not have the choice to decide if they want to keep it or not? I think America today is pushing so hard for equality and women say all the time that they do not have the same rights as men. So when it comes to deciding what to do with an unwanted pregnancy, I do believe men should have the same ability those women do in deciding whether they want to be a parent to that child.
The choice to be an essential part in the life of a child is to be considered very seriously and responsibly. There are many situations where it leads to unwanted or unplanned pregnancy and there are many options taken into consideration by the people involved. There are many cases where father doesn’t want to be a part of the child’s or the mother’s life Id the mother decides to have the child. Cases where it’s one night stand, unplanned pregnancy due to not using protection can cause many decision making and contraception pill, abortion are options but that’s usually decided by the mother. The society and the system holds more power to the decision of the mother because she has to bear the child. I think even though it might not be the best idea to have the father involved involuntarily because it would lead to bad psychological and emotional affects on the child once its able to understand the severity of the situation. Most situations that involve this decision to be made, the fathers are usually involved just financially.
I think if two people ever end up in this stage, they should be able to decide what would be the best decision for the child as they have to raise them financially and emotionally. Though involving the legal system would decrease future problems and create a more serious understanding of handling the situation, its essential for the parents to think responsibly. I think the father should be involved at least financially because unplanned or unwanted, both of the people were involved and should be equally responsible. They have to accept the responsibilities if even one of them decides to have the child. There might be instances where the father would mature and feel responsible for the child, and having this harsh legal system law would disable any chances for the child to have a chance to legally know the other parent. So it should be up to the parents to consider the decision wisely in order to protect the future of the child and the family.
This is such an emotional and touchy subject to discuss, but very valid points were made. So many women advocate equal rights for men, but when it comes to men having equal say if it involves women, women suddenly retract ideas of equal rights and liberties. As adults we know the consequences that could follow after the act of having sex. Unless there are certain circumstances such as rape, or known health issues that could cause death of the child, mother, or both, I personally do not believe in abortion. I think the abortion laws are far too lenient, and it is allowing women to use abortion as a method of birth control.
However, I do not disagree with this proposal, but under certain circumstances. I do not think any man should just be given an opportunity to disregard his role as a parent, or even duty to provide. In cases where two people may have just met and engaged in sexual activity, I think then the man has the right to forfeit his role in parenthood due to both parties being irresponsible. However, in cases where two people have been in a sexual relationship for a period of time, he is no longer granted the right to evade his financial obligations.
This is a very interesting ethical issue, one I had never truly considered. I personally do not support abortion or revoking parental responsibility for a child. However, I understand that most people don’t share that belief. If I am looking at this from the majority point of view, where a woman has a right to decide she does not want parental responsibility and can get an abortion then it would make sense that man should have a way to revoke parental responsibility as well. When looking from the point of view that there should be equality and that a woman is able have an abortion, it would be fair to men that they should be able to have a “legal abortion” as well. If people truly want equality and the right to decide whether or not they can be parents, it should apply to both genders.
However, still I do not agree with women having abortions, or with men having “legal abortions”. I think that when a child is conceived the parents of those children need to take care of that child. Sex can create life, and the people who conceive need to be willing to love and care for the child, or children, they create. I believe that abortion is killing a child and is wrong, I also believe that a “legal abortion” is also harmful to a child because that parent will not be a part of that child’s life and can leave emotional damage. Once two people conceive a new child, that child is their responsibility. It is not fair to kill a child or disregard one’s duty to take care of that child. I believe when having sex people need to take in to account the possibility of creating a child and use condoms, or something like that, to prevent a child from being conceived. By taking those measures men and women will not have to worry about having abortions or “legal abortions.”
I find this post very interesting. I believe a man has a choice of fathering a child if he wants, but is it actually fair to abandon a child who did not ask to be brought into the world. It is not ethical for a man to participate in creating a child and having no parts in the necessary steps to prepare the child for a life. If a man decides to have no involvement with the mother of his child, or his child up-bringing, then he should not expect anything from the child once he/she is grown and become a well off wealthy individual. Nor, should a man have that opportunity to decide if he should or should not take care of his child.
I don’t agree with the judge having the last say of what a parent should do to provide for their child. A judge is suppose to come up with an agreement between the parents if they can’t agree on a parental term. A man should be a shame if he decides not to take the responsibility of raising his child. I feel if a man does not want any part of a child, he should not part take in any sexual activities to create one. I understand the condoms are not 100% guaranteed to prevent people from having children, but at least it’s a start. Even though the system can be unfair, I don’t think men should have that opportunity to be able to excuse his self from being in a child life. As a man my self, it’s not a job to be there for my child, yet it is a responsibility and as a man, to protect and provide for my child.
This article was very interesting and had myself going back and forth between sides. After thinking I have decided it would be unfair if the father had the option to just walk away and essentially act like nothing happened. The mother is then forced to choose either to abort the baby or have the child but then have to raise the child on her own with no financial help, either way the mother doesn’t have the option to just walk away. Also no matter which route is taken it cost money, the mother shouldn’t have to front that all by herself, she didn’t get herself pregnant, it takes two. Lastly, everyone took sex ed, everyone knows what the repercussions are if you have unprotected and even sometimes protected sex. You took that risk and now you have to deal with those consequences.
Furthermore, a father could sign this agreement but 10 years later when he’s matured and ready to meet this child he wouldn’t be able to and then the child would never be able to meet their father. Yes, it can be very devastating to a child to have a parent that is in and out of their life but that’s why the mother, when the time is right, should be able to use good judgement and allow the child to meet their dad when everyone is ready.
I have to admit, I find this topic intriguing, on one hand , I agree men should have the right to renounce responsibility, if they don’t want to have children, but who will this law protect? the celebrity athlete who travels constantly having unprotected sex with random women, the married man who already has a wife and children,and had an affair, or anyone else who was willing to have sex with someone but not willing to have children with them,( the random hook-up?). Yes, Although I agree men deserve more rights in this arena, I cant agree with this. If a woman does not have the financial mean to support the child, this would legally force her to have an abortion. Knowing she would not get support from the paternal father. Hypothetically lets say this becomes law, although the man will have no legal rights it doesn’t mean he wont show up, when the child is ten and decide he want to be a father. It happens more often then you think. Perhaps there could be a partial child support clause where the father is only obligated for five or ten years, enough time for the child to get into school where the mother doesn’t have to worry about daycare and enough time for the woman to get a adequate paying job, if she doesn’t have one already.
The reason I don’t think this would be ethical is because it does not protect the innocent. That being the unborn child, notice I didn’t mention the mother, it takes two to people to make a baby( traditionally). I think the mother should have the right to have her baby, and not have to worry about being forced into an abortion. In turn I think a man should have the right to legally be able to fight for the right of a baby even if the mother want to have an abortion. where the mother will give up custody but would be bound to carry the baby to term. I understand that these cases are on a case by case basis, but I don’t see any victims here. Especially where there is such a multitude of birth control. perhaps its an age thing, I would like to see a more equal parental rights, but this sounds like a selfish law, and was incorrect, when it stated that the father would have no right except to pay, most father have many rights, the ones that are not allowed to see the child have been proven violent or unfit, in fact the mother could be charged if she impedes visitation, allowing the father a relationship with the child. Those are my thought.
I do not believe the current system respects a man’s right to choose if he becomes of parent. In my opinion the woman has all the rights to determine if she carries the child to term and then to decide if she will raise the child or allow it to be adopted. I do believe a man should have the ability to determine if he wants to play a role in the child’s life and if he do not then he should give up all rights and responsibilities of parenthood. However, if the man does give up the rights, it does need to be irreversible. Legal adoption should be the only way to restore his rights and responsibilities.
While to most people fatherhood and parenthood means the same thing, I can see where there might be a use for difference in definition other than the biological one we currently use. If a man isn’t given the choice to relinquish all right and responsibilities prior to birth, then he is forced into becoming legally and financially obligated for a child. Not all men want to become a parent to a child that was conceived accidently where the mother chooses to deliver and raise the child herself. In these cases, the term fatherhood would apply. He fathered the child but is not parenting the child. By legally delineating the difference between the two terms then parameters could then be applied in which financial and legal responsibility could be attached.
The Liberal Youth of Sweden West has put forth an interesting and very relevant topic. This issue brings to my mind the case where a Florida man tricked his then girlfriend into taking Cytotec, an abortion pill. The girlfriend believed the pill was the antibiotic amoxicillin and after experiencing very painful stomach cramps she miscarried. What was interesting to me at the time, about the case, was the fact that he obviously did not want the responsibility of becoming a father. He did not want the responsibility badly enough to take drastic measures to ensure that he did not. I then thought of the many times women stood upon the fact that they have the “right to choose” whether they will have the baby because it is “their body”. While, it is true that it is “their body” and they definitely should have the “right to choose”, what gives a woman the right to make a life-long, life altering decision, of not only rearing but being economically responsible for a child, for the man? The man seems to have no other recourse in the matter than to be held sway by the decision of the woman. Who stands for the man in those instances where he would like to keep the child and the woman does not?
In this age where anything goes and people engage in one night stands and such, there appears to be no consequences until an unexpected pregnancy occurs. So, although the suggestion by the Liberal Youth of Sweden West is thought-provoking, I think if the proposal passes it would set forth a dangerous precedent. It seems that this proposal is just as one-sided as the current situation where the woman has all the say. The proposed solution is no solution at all. The option to simply relinquish all paternal rights and walk away is too easy. This issue brings to my mind the instances of where women have had upwards of four or more abortions. Now the man can become a serial “relinquish-er” of paternal rights. There must be a better way. It also appears as if the woman, in a sense, is being pushed in the direction of an abortion. Either you agree to have an abortion or you agree to raising the child alone without the loving care, financial support, and protection that a father provides. In no way am I insinuating that a single woman cannot raise a happy, well-adjusted, and emotionally balanced child, however; I do believe that society should not devalue the importance the father. In the end the child will be the one who suffers for the decisions that were made by his or her parents.
I feel the reason that this topic is so difficult to address is because while the focus is equality, the nature of reproduction is inherently unequal. While it does take both an egg and sperm to create what is to become the baby, it is the mother’s womb which allows the baby to develop and it is through her body that the baby enters the world. The mother is the one solely exposed to the health risks – from hyperemesis to preeclampsia to hemorrhage during childbirth (or abortion) that can lead to death. I myself almost died giving birth to my daughter via Cesarean. This seems to be very overlooked and is the reason you cannot apply the same standard to both genders. If a woman wants the baby and the man does not, he is not forced to risk his health and life. If a man wants the baby and the woman does not, it is not ethical to force her to take on those risks to become his personal incubator although I can empathize with the sadness he must feel as a result.
There are a lot of factors to consider and I think this has the potential to be beneficial, but I do not think it should be a blanket law. Any man in any scenario should not be able to have this choice. If a woman was led to believe he would be there for support and/or they had an established relationship and he suddenly decides it’s not for him – he should still bear at least financial responsibility. If there was no such understanding and no relationship, he should be able to sign away these rights. He should not be able to just waltz back in at a later time when it is more convenient for him. Just as a woman wouldn’t be able to if she was pressured into an abortion because she knew she wouldn’t receive the financial support necessary to successfully raise the baby.
These cases should be heard on an individual basis to prevent a man from being able to simply sign away his parental rights time and time again.
I think men should be held responsible, a man has been for years why change this now. Men know that even on birth control there is a chance for pregnancy. Why change what has been known for hundreds of years. Why now are we considering if the man considers if he wants to be the father or not. I feel that if he decides he doesn’t want to be the father (then don’t have intercourse). I feel as a society we decide to change things to suit us. It all boils down to being responsible partner, understanding the risks. Also, if a man has a right to choose, it leaves the state to have to take care of another child. A man can say that he doesn’t want to have intercourse, you cannot force a man to have intercourse.
A man should already know what comes with the territory of having intercourse. There are also ways to prevent a man from getting a woman pregnant it’s called condoms and a vasectomy. A woman can also prevent herself from getting pregnant. I think that if a child is brought in this world then both parties are responsible, but in the real world it is not always like that. So, with this we need to be more careful who we decide to have intercourse with. There are ways to overcome this all, and that is for the man to have a vasectomy. Then he never has to worry about getting anyone pregnant. He can go ahead and live without fear of ever fathering a child.
Michele Thompson
I do believe men should have the same parental rights as women. But, it wouldn’t be fair if a man says yes to have a child and the women agrees thinking they would be raising a child together, and all of sudden the man decides at the 18th week of pregnancy that he wants out. How fair is that to the women that has been caring for that child for that amount of time. Again it’s great for the man, and gets a way of making that choice and the choice of not having no obligation to that child. Meanwhile the women have already starting to have obligation to that unborn child.
I do agree if the couple had never talked about having a child, and then all of a sudden the women became pregnant they yes I agree men should have not ties to the child, even paying child support. Unfortunately, there are women out there that want a child and will trap a man, in that case it’s not far that a man should have to pay anything especially for a child that he never wanted. It is so important that women wo do that should be taught a lesson and should have 100% control of all obligation to that child. Financially and all other decisions regarding the child.
The best solution for the child would be honesty. The mother makes that decision to have a child on her own then she needs to be prepared to tell that child when he/she is old enough how they were conceived. That’s a really hard decision to make, but it’s the right one.
Finally, is there another way to handle the question of choice with respect to parenthood?
When two people make the choice to have sex, they should be ready to make adult decision what would happen after they choice to have unprotected sex. I think if there is a child, that if after the child is born if the mother doesn’t want the child and the father does, then the mother should have no rights at all to that child, financially or any decisions regarding that child. And vice versa. But that has to be a really talked about question before having intercourse. Maybe if people had that serious talk “what if” before having sex there would be a lot less unwanted children in this world. Or children that are in constant court battles with their parents. For decision to be made that the child had really nothing to do with, but the courts don’t care and put these poor children through the system.
It is ethical to allow men the opportunity to abdicate legal responsibility for a child if they do not want to become a parent? If a woman has a right to not want to have parental responsibilities of a child, then I do think men should have the same equal rights to have a ‘legal abortion”. It should be equal for both genders.
This topic had me teeter-tottering on what the ethical decision would be as I read. I feel there is a valid argument in there, somewhat. The main thing to think about here though isn’t if the man wants to be a father or if the woman wants to be a mother, it is that the child has no choice about being born and was created by the man and woman together. Now although I have nothing to base my statement on I feel like abortion is usually something decided on by both the man and woman as a team, so I don’t think that should really be applied to a way out of parenthood for the woman alone. When you put yourself into a situation where becoming pregnant is possible (unprotected sex) you are accepting at that moment the responsibility of possible pregnancy, and becoming a mother or father. If a man wants to “decide when” he becomes a father he needs to not take those risks before he is ready to accept the possibilities of his actions.
The child is the one that needs to be the priority in this situation because they had no choice in being born or not, or if they want one parent or two, etc. If a father doesn’t want to be a physical part of the baby’s life he still needs to provide financial support to help the child grow with every opportunity it desires. I don’t think it’s ethical to allow a man to opt out of fatherhood. If they didn’t want to be a father that bad they should have take the precautions to prevent it until they were ready. Overall the children are #1 in this decision and they need to be protected. Someone should not be able to so easily walk away from decision they made that dramatically affect other’s lives.
I feel as if this solution could work out and benefit both men and women. Many women in America today are going through issues on being a single parent and raising a child on their own. There should be some sort of help if the fathers sign their rights away. For the women who must raise the child on her own some sort of assistant program. We can’t have all these men getting out of paying child support either there must be some rights and laws set on how to avoid paying child support. I believe there must be a mutual argument from both parties on the father signing over his rights. If the father of the child signs over his rights as a parent I believe he shouldn’t have any say or any right to that child. The father should not be allowed to have visiting rights or demand anything from the mother of the child as well. As for the legal responsibility, I believe the father should not be allowed to have any say or legal action on the child or mother once he has signed is rights away.
When it comes to our legal system on the biological aspects of this situation I believe once the rights are signed over then the father can’t have any say on how the child should be raised. If a woman can have a choice on keeping the baby or having an abortion, then why can’t the father have a choice as well? If this was implicated here in the United States, there would have to be big legal action taken into consideration with something like this. I know everyone views it as its beneficial for both parties but on a legal stand point where will the support come for the women raising a child as a single parent? That’s the number one thing I keep in mind that why would a woman want a man to stop paying child support if he was the one who fathered the child? There would have to be state laws and regulations taken into effect for something like this to happen. I do believe that men should have every right to sign over his rights if he wants to. It takes two to have a child and if women can have a say in abortion and adoption then men should at least have some sort of say in signing their rights away.
Word Count: 408
I find it interesting the great lengths people seem to want to go to, to not have parental responsibility. If you don’t want a child or are not equipped or capable of raising a child, then a solution would be to not have sex or be more cautious when doing so. I am highly against abortion so this proposed “solution” for fathers that don’t want to be a father is ridiculous to me. Lets make an example of a women who is against abortion and adoption and isn’t ready to be a mother. If she and a man decide to have sexual intercourse and it results in an accidental pregnancy that neither of the two planned nor wanted. We know that she would not give the baby up nor would she have an abortion but with this proposed act the father would be able to give up his rights, now were leaving a mother to raise a child by herself and may struggle to do so.
As we can see now we already have a large issue of fathers who are absent in a child’s life just because they don’t want to step up to the plate and take responsibility for their actions. My opinion on the matter is simple, if you decide to have intercourse and it results in pregnancy it is now the two people’s responsibility to decide what is best for the child I feel the plan of allowing a man to dismiss all legal responsibility will only add to the problem not create a solution. Also an issue with the proposed plan is that if a man decides to go through with this and completely dismiss all responsibility and parental rights that action is permanent. It is common for people to make a decision and later on regret it. It is also common for parents to not want a child or have a child expectantly and the child become the love of their life. I am not oblivious to the issue we have of women having the right to abortion and men not having a right to say no, however i do not see this as a proposed solution nor do i see abortion as okay.