Roe v Wade for men

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

This isn't about that how people SHOULD act. It's about whether the government forces it under law vs leave as voluntary.

Yes, this is exactly it. Should the child be victimized because the father (or mother) does not want to deal with him/her? The child didn't volunteer. And the consequences should be borne by those who set the thing in motion.

Quote

It's easy to sympathize with many of the scenarios available to underpin the case - as well as the scenarios that oppose it.

This is true. Point given. There's plenty of sympathy coming from me, but I merely chooe to direct the brunt of it to the child.

Quote

I don't think a generic law either way is a good solution, the specific cases will vary so much.

Actually, I think it's a GREAT way to deal with it. Simple, bright-line rules. That's why every guy out there knows, "If I knock this chick up, I'll be on the hook for the next 19 years!" And yet, it keeps happening. "The woman lied." "The condom broke." There's a legal doctrine I like to call the "Tough Noogies Doctrine," and it applies here.

I mean, making a generic law certainly doesn't do much good for my bottom line. A fault-based system would help me make some pretty good money. I'll argue intent, fraud, etc. I can go hold a 5-day trial for each of these cases to glean the woman's intent. I'll do depositions, etc. We'll get witnesses, declarations, evidence, etc. All at my hourly rate. I can easily run up a $30k bill. This is better for me than using that computer program to figure out support.

And a fault-based system will tie up the courts to no end. Your day in court will come in another year or two because every father out there wants to take this issue up.

Come on, guys. Feed me business. Trust me - without generic rules, you'll be paying lawyers like me a freaking fortune to escape financial liability.

That's a sensible approach.

Quote

If the woman has the ultimate decision without any input from the father, then she HAS to also have the total responsibility too.

I disagree. The "best interests of the child" do not often lie with the woman bearing full responsibility, financial and otherwise. Again, why should the child suffer while the father does not?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[livendive 8]

There's no way this lawsuit works for anything other than publicity. What'd do a lot more to prevent these types of pregnancies and the resulting responsibilities would be more birth control options for men that are comfortable, effective, convenient, and temporary. I'm old enough now to consider getting snipped, but it's just so freaking permanent. I've got another year or two in which I want to keep the option on the table, so a vasectomy doesn't work for me right now. My only other option is condoms, which leave something to be desired in the comfort, convenience, and effectiveness categories. If we could pour 0.1% of all state-targeted child support (i.e. for those women on public assistance) into research programs for better male birth control methods, I think there'd be substantially fewer pregnancies in which the woman wants to keep it and the man doesn't want her to.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I'm old enough now to consider getting snipped

No, snipped, remove a segment, tie it off, AND cauterize. x 2. And check to see if the patient doesn't have backup tubing as well - it's not that uncommon.

half an hour, in and out, next day back in action

If you do it, make sure the doctor is THOROUGH.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Quote

I'm old enough now to consider getting snipped

No, snipped, remove a segment, tie it off, AND cauterize. x 2. And check to see if the patient doesn't have backup tubing as well - it's not that uncommon.

half an hour, in and out, next day back in action

If you do it, make sure the doctor is THOROUGH.

And do your research as to the potential complications.
When a vasectomy goes bad, it can be very, very bad.
The statisics are decent, but the odds weren't good enough for me to take the risk.
YMMV

[rehmwa 2]

Spoken like a true, new father. And admirable at that.

I'm on your side on the morals of it. But deadbeats will remain deadbeats, and responsible men will remain responsible men no matter what laws are in effect. (Ditto on responsible women vs the deadbeat female equivalents).

It's still about responsibility going with the ability to make the final choice. The discussion is hugely important.

Do you consider an abortion the equivalent means of the mother to dodge that same responsbilities that you think this type of law might allow for the fathers?

It's obviously the parallel discussion that's being encouraged by this effort.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[livendive 8]

Quote

Do you consider an abortion the equivalent means of the mother to dodge that same responsbilities that you think this type of law might allow for the fathers?

It's obviously the parallel discussion that's being encouraged by this effort.

Agreed. I'm kinda curious whether that aspect was considered an unavoidable side-issue, or if was the primary motive of an unwinnable case.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Just a thought. Personally, I wouldn't have the abortion, but if I were in a situation where I wanted to have one and the man didn't, I could definitely see him using this precedent in his favor. I know it's a weird argument - using a case where the man didn't want the baby to support a man who now does - but if the court says that the man has some obligation to support the child, that obligation could certainly turn into whether the man should have some say about whether this obligation comes to fruition or not.

I don't see it ever being played out to a state where you would be forced to carry a child to term, because your health rights would still reign as the first priority. I see this suit pushing the issues of what the financial responsibilities are and what the visitation/father rights are if the baby is born. At the moment those rights are extremely unbalanced against the man, and not justifiable reasons per the well being of the child.

I don't see that being fixed in the courts - I think it needs to be solved by legislation.

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Quote

and should NEVER EVER have the right to tell a woman what to do with her body.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the court decides in this case that yes, the man does have responsibility for a child that he didn't want to concieve, then it may follow that he may have some kind of right to have a part in the discussion of whether to terminate the pregnancy.


Brie

Both issues have been litigated.

Men have financial responsibility for children they did not want to conceive. It happens all the time. It is commonly referred to as "child support".

Men do not have the right to force a woman into an abortion for unwanted children. This was decided some time ago. I don't recall all of the details. Women have the right to make the decision on their own. A husband can't stop a wife from having an abortion.

This is not even close to "equal rights". That is why I support the concept of "financial abortion" for men.

• Quote

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Agreed. I'm kinda curious whether that aspect was considered an unavoidable side-issue, or if was the primary motive of an unwinnable case.

It's so glaring that I can't imagine it not being the primary motive. But even if it's logical, the abortion debate is not pursued by either side with logic, it's 100% emotion on both sides.

So the argument might make a good discussion, it won't make significant waves in that storm.

And the case might not be unwinnable, have to sit back and see. I'm not sure where I fall on this one. The disparity needs addressing, but how to do it without the swing going too far or the children being even more victimized by selfish mothers and fathers.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[livendive 8]

Quote

It's so glaring that I can't imagine it not being the primary motive. But even if it's logical, the abortion debate is not pursued by either side with logic, it's 100% emotion on both sides.

How DARE you suggest I use ANYTHING other than logic regarding something as SERIOUS as abortion??! I'm fucking OUTRAGED that you have the nerve to stand in JUDGEMENT on my COMPLETELY NON-EMOTIONAL viewpoint!

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

How DARE you suggest I use ANYTHING other than logic regarding something as SERIOUS as abortion??! I'm fucking OUTRAGED that you have the nerve to stand in JUDGEMENT on my COMPLETELY NON-EMOTIONAL viewpoint!

Nice

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Richards 0]

Can of worms. Can of fucking worms!

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[bch7773 0]

That law will never pass... but I think it does raise a very good discussion.

two people fuck each other... ones a man, and ones a woman. They both can use birth control, or tell the other partner to use birth control.

if she gets pregnant, then suddenly the man loses all rights and say in the pregnanacy. She can decide to abort or not, or adopt, or keep the kid. All he can do is wait for her decision, and if she keeps it and wants money, he has to pay.
of course, he doesn't have to go through the pain of pregnancy, but is that worth $500 a month for 18 years?

MB 3528, RB 1182

[happythoughts 0]

First, I don't equate "child support" with supporting the child. At all.

Second, if the concern is about the child, why is visitation never enforced ?

Are we talking "equal" rights ? Everybody is all about the rights of the child, etc, unless it means giving up an advantage that the court system confers. Those become "my right".

If a man forgets to pay child support, there is a whole dept down at the court house to enforce it by just making a phone call. In fact, the money can be taken out of our taxes at a Federal level. The Federal govt enforcing a municipal court judgement. I am unsure if that happens a lot in any other area.

If a woman refuses visitation? The man has to set a court date and bring it back into court and pay attorneys fees. This could drag on for months. In the meantime? No visitation, but payments continue. This is a judgement that has already been made, he just wants enforcement. There is no dept on his side. The state of visitation rights in this country, and their enforcement sucks. Where is all the "concern" for the good of the child then ?

People need to get past this "it's for the little children..." crap.

[Keith 0]

Quote

It's a bit of a cheap shot, Keith, but is this a case of you voicing an opinion from the safety of the sidelines? Sort of like men who are content to say no women should be allowed to have abortions?

No it's not a cheap shot. Let's suppose you really want a drink after work. You know you should only have one or two, but you have six. You get in your car and head home. On the way you hit a parked car and are arrested for drinking and driving. Who's fault is it? The parked car's? The manufacturer of your car? How about the bar tender who served you the drinks? NOPE it's your fault. You knew the consequences of drinking too much and to chose to do it anyway. It's the same thing with getting a woman pregnant. Men know the consequences of having unprotected sex and choose to do it anyway. You are the only one who can control Your actions. If you don't want kids take the necessary precautions not to have them. Plain and simple!

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

You get in your car and head home. On the way you hit a parked car...

...because the person who last worked on the car swore that the brakes were fixed.

Since we are doing analogies, this one is a little more appropriate.

She told the guy that her brakes were in excellent, safe, working order. In fact, she told him that he didn't need to worry about any accidents. They both agreed that this was the goal.

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

Men know the consequences of having unprotected sex and choose to do it anyway. You are the only one who can control Your actions. If you don't want kids take the necessary precautions not to have them. Plain and simple!

The issue is that a man's choice begins and ends with abstinence or permanent birth control, whereas women have additional options (to abort or not), and a man has no say in what becomes of his genetic material or his own future.

Biology isn't fair, but it seems to me that we need a better way to deal with this.

There are cases of men who paid child support for years, only to find out that the child they were supporting was not their child (genetically). But I believe that the courts in at least one (if not more) of those cases ruled that the best interest of the child required that the payments continue.

We all know men who have been snared, and we also know women and children who have been abandoned.

We need a better way.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[livendive 8]

So what if I ordered non-alcoholic drinks, that's what the server told me I was drinking, and I didn't (and couldn't) feel drunk. Still a legitimate DUI?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[likearock 1]

Quote

Quote

This isn't about that how people SHOULD act. It's about whether the government forces it under law vs leave as voluntary.

Yes, this is exactly it. Should the child be victimized because the father (or mother) does not want to deal with him/her?

I would say that a child in such a situation is much more victimized by the absence of emotional support than financial. Should the state intervene in that regard as well? Should it mandate visitation by a reluctant parent? After all, it's all "in the best interest of the child".

Furthermore, there's no guarantee that money paid as child support is ever used for that purpose. The mother has total control to spend it as she wishes.

[Keith 0]

Oh puuleeeeeezzzzze Dave

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[boringjen 0]

I haven't noticed anyone clamoring for biological parents to pay child support for children they put up for adoption. I don't really understand why it's acceptable for both parents to decide to put a child up for adoption (or for a mother to secretly put a child up for adoption without mentioning the pregnancy/child to the father), but it's unacceptable for the father to effectively do the same.

Abortion and adoption are both legal. No woman is ever (legally) forced into parenthood. You can't say the same for men.

Wear your rubbers, gentlemen.

Jen
"I am ready to meet my Maker. Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter." - Winston Churchill

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

You get in your car and head home. On the way you hit a parked car...

...because the person who last worked on the car swore that the brakes were fixed.

Since we are doing analogies, this one is a little more appropriate.

She told the guy that her brakes were in excellent, safe, working order. In fact, she told him that he didn't need to worry about any accidents. They both agreed that this was the goal.

Well, if you wanna go into that, the condition of your brakes is what we call in law a "non-delegable duty." This means that it is YOUR ass that is liable to the owner of the parked car that you hit.

So, we see a nice analogy here:

"Your car - your responsibility"
"Your dick - your responsibility"

Thank you for making a nicer comparison.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

If a woman refuses visitation? The man has to set a court date and bring it back into court and pay attorneys fees.

Actually, it doesn't. That's why we do things like register the court order with the county sheriff. A visitation order isn't obeyed? Call the sheriff. They send a deputy out, you show them YOUR copy of the order, and they enforce it. It's almost too easy.

Quote

This is a judgement that has already been made, he just wants enforcement. There is no dept on his side.

Yeah, there is. It's called the Sheriff's department.

So, then you show the court that you are being denied visitation. You go to cour and request visitation of your own. It can take a few months, but meanwhile you are noting all the bitchy things she's doing and prove it in court, and YOU get custody.

Now she pays support. Sounds groovy, eh?

Quote

If a man forgets to pay child support, there is a whole dept down at the court house to enforce it by just making a phone call.

I've seen women pinched for it, too. And there are usually wage garnishment orders, etc. And public defenders for the deadbeats.

Quote

In fact, the money can be taken out of our taxes at a Federal level. The Federal govt enforcing a municipal court judgement.

Yep. The municipality has a lien under the tax code. Easy way to avoid having your taxes seized is to pay your support. (By the way - lower your child support and don't claim the child as your deduction - claiming the deduction increases your disposable income, hencehigher child support - take THAT, Junior!!!)

I mean, I work in this system. I do family law, among other things. I do child support, custody, visitation. And just because this is the way it's set up and the way it's done, hopefully it won't alter your impressions of it. I mean, I speak from experience here.

There must be some really shitty lawyers out there. Does the system fuck up? Yes. Often. But not nearly as often as a guy fucks up. Or fucks down. Or fucks sideways, resulting in a kid.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Well, if you wanna go into that, the condition of your brakes is what we call in law a "non-delegable duty." This means that it is YOUR ass that is liable to the owner of the parked car that you hit.

So, we see a nice analogy here:

"Your car - your responsibility"
"Your dick - your responsibility"

Thank you for making a nicer comparison.

It used to be legal that women were chattel property.
Slavery was quite legal.

Was the law right then? Or is the law right now?

So, the law isn't always right. That is what we're talking about here.

The fact that a company doesn't have any liability when they fail to fulfill their professional obligation is another example of a really stupid legal system.

It turns out to be a perfect analogy. The system is broken and there is some really stupid laws out there.
Thank you for making the comparison.

I'm not going to pick and choose over what laws were/are valid or how they apply. I do not have the slightest interest in discussing law actually. I'm more concerned with right and wrong.

Since there is supposed to be no "perfect justice", the law is supposed to supply the closest approximation of truth and justice.

It doesn't. When it doesn't, people change it.

When people engage in fraud and it costs others tens of thousands of dollars, there is a problem.

If the law is important, let's come up with a contract that people can sign. They agree to assume responsibility for kids. If you don't have that agreement, no deal.

We could call it... a marriage license.

Oh wait... the lawyers decided that it was legal, but is wasn't right... so now, we are here discussing this.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

I mean, I work in this system. I do family law, among other things. I do child support, custody, visitation. And just because this is the way it's set up and the way it's done, hopefully it won't alter your impressions of it. I mean, I speak from experience here.

You work in the system? I worked with the system.
So have 30 or so of my buddies. Good parents who worked for 20 years, love their kids, and have nothing.

Speak from experience ? Experience sat on most of the guys I know and arm-locked them.

In Iraq, there is people who shoot bullets and receive them. Perspective is what makes experience different.

Quote

There must be some really shitty lawyers out there. Does the system fuck up? Yes. Often.

I was told. "You can get a divorce for $2k and you'll be poor for 8 years. You can try to get custody and will doubtfully win for $5K. I can give you the name of a guy who will guarantee you win for $15K, but your kid will need therapy."

There is fucked-up lawyers on everyones side. That is not the issue. It doesn't matter, the system is fucked up and stacked, so it doesn't really matter.

Doesn't anyone care about fixing it? No. It isn't in their fucked up interest.