Please read. - Marriage Builders® Forums

This is a letter I am working on. I would appreciate any help or criticism. Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion for women in 1973. Paternity laws should also protect men from accidental and unwanted pregnancies. “While several laws protect women from these detriments, the law actually rewards women who infringe on men's rights by compelling their victims to pay them child support! The protections given to men and women are light years apart! Men have been treated as an under class without reproductive rights since Roe v. Wade in 1973, despite the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection", and we seek to emancipate men from this hypocrisy. Forcing only men into parenthood is demeaning and offensive to the basic principles of human dignity.” Many argue that it is a man’s responsibility to use a condom during sex to prevent pregnancy or abstain altogether. However a woman’s failure to use birth control does not prevent her right to abortion. Condoms are not a substitute for real reproductive rights that women have enjoyed since 1973. Whether male or female, forced parenthood can mean disrupting one’s education, mental health and even one’s marriage. Legalizing reproductive choice for men should recognize men’s procreational autonomy. Some argue that it is the man’s responsibility to pay for an unwanted child because it is a financial burden on the state. However, fundamental rights such as procreational autonomy may not be infringed by the state merely to save money. Women can force men into biological parenthood after accidental pregnancies by refusing the options of abortion and adoption. Then it is just a matter of time before the state can force a man into legal fatherhood. Men are not equal partners in making children when a woman declines an abortion or adoption. Legalizing choice for men is not a way to allow men to get out of paying child support. It is a way to allow men the same reproductive freedom that women have been privileged to since 1973, to decline parenthood. It also permits men to plan their families free from government intrusion. The 14th amendment states “No State shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. “ No where is there a clause in that amendment that states ..” unless you are a man seeking reproductive equality.” [This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited July 26, 2001).]

jtigger,I think this sounds great. If only this could see some real light. But I don't think any politician will come forward to support the men. They claim that child support is for the children. It is so true that if a woman doesn't want to be a parent she can choose not to be, but not the guy. I watch the news in this day and age, and I really don't think this will change. I want it to. But when farmers can't water their crops to keep their families because of sucker fish, than no one is going to give men their just rights. But I am going to keep hopeful, I think it is a great letter. I will gladly sign any petition or letter.babstr.

The argument that I am going to present is that this is not about the rights of the child, this about an individual's rights. The rights of one class of citizens does not out way anothers. All they can do is tell me to get lost. I'll never give up hope. We all need to keep fighting to be heard. I just need help in making this letter as persuasive as possible. jtigger[This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited July 26, 2001).]

Jtigger,Please, email me as soon as you get the chance. I know of a person (including myself) who may be VERY interested in helping you with this letter, along with giving additional ideas of where else you might want to send it. If you're interested, I should be up for another hour or so. Thanks and take care, CoR

COR, My e-mail address is ********. I will leave this on here for about 10 minutes.jtigger[This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited July 26, 2001).]

Got it. Be expecting an email in a few. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Jtigger,Very well thought out and written...and I feel the same.But I am curious about men in a marriage...should a legal contract between two people be enough to keep the man or woman from preventing the other from having a family? What I am saying is (im bad with getting my thoughts down..sorry) if there is a married couple and there is a child born to the couple what then? Should the rights be the same or does the marriage contract throw in another twist? This is something I have wondered about a lot, because I totally agree with you, but then I wonder about my marriage and what if I were to get pg and my H decided he didnt want it.....just some thoughts.

broken wings, Very good question. I truly believe, and did before all this , that a man should have EQUAL say in a pregnancy. Married or not, if he does not want a child then I think the couple must decide whether or not to stay together. I don't think a marriage license disolves a man's right to choose. Jtigger

Most of you know my first child was out oot of wedlock and I and the father were young teenagers. can you even imagine what the teen pregnancy rates would be if the teen boys knew they could get off the hook anytime for an unplanned preganancy? What if the man purposely gets the women pregnant but than decides he doesn't want to be responsible? I can see why we women, the ws, may be against cs but it IS for the child and cs laws are NEVER going away and i for one pray to god they never do and i would be marching to prevent them from changing, and that is from a ws who helps pay almost 1300/moth for the oc. that is just my opinion and i support your right to your opinion.

BW, As JTigger said, it is a good question, but if you look at it in a different light, it might help answer it.Say you have five kids (or even none at all) and simply do not want anymore. Say you tell your husband and he's excited, and wants this child even though it will place a great burden on you for the rest of your life. Leaving out our own moral decision, say you cannot abort the child. (As it is now, many states do not have laws preventing a married woman from aborting without a signature from her husband - he doesn't have the right to know anything.) This leaves you with two choices. The first is, you continue in the marriage even though you do not want this child and have no choice but to include this child in your family life. The second choice you have is to leave the marriage, but still, you have to pay support every month for the next 18-21 years of your life for a child you never truly wanted in your life but was forced to have. When I first read of this type of movement of "free choice for all", my first reaction was that the viewpoint would allow many men to walk away from children simply because the law will allow it. However, walking away IS a choice women have had for centuries and one men should have as well, regradless of issues of biology. In states where presumed paternity are on the books, men fair even worse. Married women have affairs and sometimes, as we all know, affairs produce children. In these states, husbands have NO choice but to support this child: 1)even though it's not biologically his 2)he very well may not want the child at all. Some men have raised children NOT knowing they were not biologically theirs. When they find out the child isn't theirs, they still must pay support simply because they have been "acting" as father prior to discovery. I have heard of a few cases were the husband is paying for support for a child which is not biologically his, to an ex-wife who is living with the real bio father of the child. Women have had more and more opportunities to relinguish their rights as parents. They can drop off an infant at any hospital, church, "home with a basket" etc .. no questions asked, no criminal charges placed, and face little moral backlashing from society as a whole. Instead, it's viewed as a "wonderful gesture of kindness" on her part for saving a child she doesn't want nor can or wants to care for. Granted, in some cases of abuse and or neglect, I would much rather have this out than none at all, particulary since we hear of many newborns being found in trash bags. However, fathers aren't provided ANY "out" at all. They are forced into parenthood because the states says they are parents who are responsible for the monetary upkeep or a child, whether they are good parents or bad parents. If they are granted NO visitation, they still must pay support. However, mothers who abandon their children or place them in foster care, are not forced to pay anything at all. This is all probably much more than you wanted to read, but I firmly believe if we are handing out choices, we shouldn't hand them out on a gender basis only. Take care, CoR

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by whatif?: What if the man purposely gets the women pregnant but than decides he doesn't want to be responsible?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Although I respect your opinion, I do have just a few questions:If a man is responsible for preventing unplanned pregnancies, why not women too? What if a woman gets pregnant on purpose? Should he still have to pay support? What if the father was a teen and the mother was older? Is he still responsible? Did you know, in some states, that even if a grown woman is charged with staturory rape of an teen boy he still has to pay support to the child? Again, I respect your opinion and completely understand your point of view, but pose these questions as a way for you to see that the laws we have now are biased. Take care, CoR

JTigger,What a wonderful letter!! I have felt this way for so long and it is good to see there are some others that do too. Please let us know if there is anything we can do or send to do what we can to change things. Every little step counts.CoR - I so heartily agree with your replies and reasoning.Whatif - Maybe if women knew they would be help 100% responsible for the financial responsibility of the child they chose to keep, the women would be more likely to give the child up for adoption. It is WRONG that women have 100% of the reproductive rights, but men have zero once they have sex. I can imagine what the teenage pregnancy rates would be if men had a say in deciding their role and responsibility with a child. They would be lower. Men (and boys) do not have sex to make babies very often. I have not heard of a man trying to trap a woman. Many women have had children to trap men.I have been here lurking since May 30 and haven't felt the need to post until now. DDay was in Feb, but we found out about ow's pregnancy much later. She felt she didn't need to tell h about the pg, but since he ignored her for many months, she got mad and started threatening court and other crap. She says she is giving the child up for adoption, but there is nothing we can do to ensure this plan. It is all a big mess.I am sorry I have to be a part of this group. I never thought I would allow myself to be put in this position. One thing the a did was show us how much we really mean to each other. He is now almost the perfect husband. It is too bad the price was so high though. A child should only be conceived in wedlock and with the willingness of both parties - anything less than that is a wrong doing against the child. Life is hard enough, but to find out you were conceived out of lies, deception and pain has got to be very hard for the child to take.

Good thought JT, But I too have to wonder what the ramification of something like this would be. The person (sorry Brain disfunction here) that made the analogy re: teens was VERY right on. and unfortuantly our court room would be nuts with these cases...because women would claim, they (the men) too wanted it (the Preg) come on..pillow talk is just that for men (to get the sex) but to a woman..it is real. I believe and this may be a very unpopular point..but I am sorry it is the plain truth...if the man is fertile, and he choses to have Unprotected sex, he in fact is making a implied consent to fatherhood...period. WE are not talking teens who cant think about consenqueces...we are talking MEN ( our H's)...the bottom line is MY H (as highly educated as he is) made an implied consent to have sex with a women, who told him she cant get PG (on birth control)...BUT he did not use protection to "make sure", that was HIS responsiblity and he chose not too, so he IS RESPONSIBLE for what may have come from that..including any STD's. it is not a big secret, how to avoid pregnancy...and in the heat of passion, I guess these smart men get stupid...but they have to own up to their stupidity...should anyone BE FORCED to participate in the raising of their stupidity...NO, but we do have a finacncial obligation...and that is the bottom line. I understand what you all are saying, and how madding this all is, BUT they KNEW...it does not matter what the OW told them (or lied to them about) If they wanted to MAKE SURE...they would have used a condom, and for any reason not to come home and infect their W's with OW "goobers". ..it will never fly ..because even though women are protected.(Roe vs Wade)..so are men, they have choices..use a condom, or dont have sex...because every man knows sex can lead to PG and they know if it does THEY ARE responsible... I understand all your frustration ( I only lived it briefly) BUT, our H's did have choices...and they in their better judgements chose NOT to do anything. NOW their whole family pays, emotionally and financially....BUT A POINT I WANT TO MAKE AGAIN FOR ALL THE OW LURKERS....THEY ONLY HAVE A FINANCIAL RESPONSIBLITY FOR THEIR ACTION...THEY DO NOT...REPEAT DO NOT HAVE TO RAISE THAT CHILD...OR BE IN THAT CHILDS LIFE...just like the OW who gets pg, can chose NOT to place for adoption or abortion (once the "mistake" is made) the men have the CHOICE...HEAR ME THE CHOICE wether to be in that childs life or not...YOU OW HAVE CHOICES, AND THESE FATHERS HAVE CHOICES...so get on with your lives, and raise those OC, alone (of course with finanacial assist) but that is all... anyway that is my opinion, though it may be unpopular, it is how I feel. I guess I see things differently. I think we would have a real crisis if we did not Keep the fathers responsible..USE A CONDOM!!!...i STILL LOVE YOU GUYS...MC

Here is an idea that no one thought of.... If you don't want a child.....1. Don't have sex 2. Don't have sex with someone you are not married to. 3. Don't have sex with someone you ARE married to if you are not open to the possibility of pregnancy even if it only a tiny, tiny chanceGee, wouldn't this solve a lot of problems. Anything to pass the buck!

So, Suzi, are you saying that because you had sex with a married man for five-six years, you wanted to have a child with him? If not, you broke your first two "golden rules".

Here's another idea [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

If you dont want to end up with a "scumbag" OW like the one above...all the above also should apply [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Sorry JT, I know I promised..BUT the PG hormones have got the best of me....

Here's another thought ..The husband and wife get full custody of the OC while the other woman visits the child every other weekend and pays child support, medical costs and day care expenses. Wow. What a twist huh? [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

tigger, Very good letter. Couple of reasons I like that thought. I bet you would see a whole lot of ow suddenly not getting pregnate. with love flowerseed

My Cross,You posted ***so are men, they have choices..use a condom, or dont have sex...because every man knows sex can lead to PG and they know if it does THEY ARE responsible... *** I completely understand what you are saying but I think I'm not making my point clear. This IS NOT a child support issue to me. IT IS an equal rights issue. You cannot sacrifice the rights of one gender or group of people to enrich the rights of another gender or group. Women have been screaming for "equal" rights for years, but to me equal does not mean preferential treatment just because I happen to have a uterus. And I have believed this since I was in high school. ( Which was longer ago than I care to admit on a public forum ;-) So please nobody think this is a new cause for me since oc issue came along. I'm afraid that I am one of those women that truly thinks equal should mean equal. Yes I agree that consenting to sex implies the knowledge that a pregnancy might occur. My objection is the choices offered to women after the pregnancy is discovered that are not offered to men. Again I state, equal should mean equal. If a woman has the state supported right to walk away from a pregnancy or child the same right must be afforded to men or we are all hypocrits in claiming our equality to men.jtigger[This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited July 27, 2001).]

This is scary! I have never encountered a more backward group of women in my life. Are ANY of you upset with your husbands? You are here on a campaign for his "rights" What is wrong with you? You are so focused on what the OW did to him and to you? HELLO???? Did someone force your husband's penis into her vagina? It is women like you who set us so far back! And to the nutcases accusing me of being an OW....is that really the best you can come up with? Come on now ladies. Am i the only one who thinks this nightmare was caused by my husband? I can't believe you are here on a campaign for his reproductive rights! It's got to be the funniest thing I've ever heard of. It's priceless!

Ok, what of this....what if we had some sort of paper that had to be signed and notarized by both parties having sex, that says if a preg, does occur both parties will be responsible. This would probably stop a lot of one-night stands or start up a 24 hour notary service. In all seriousness it would make woman think twice before having sex with a man whom they are not in a real relationship with. If there is no paper guess who has all the decisions...abortion, adoption, or raising the child alone. That way both parties have rights. If there is a paper and he changes his mind later well tough stuff buddy.Just a suggestion... bw

I mean be serious for a moment - do you honestly see your husbands as a "victim" in this situation? How can you say that? What was his penis doing out of his pants? Does he not know that's how babies are made? Jeez, when I look at my H the LAST thing I see is a victim. And no, I don't see him as stupid either. He KNEW exactly what he was doing. He knew the risk of sex. Let's see, if your husbands had caught an STD, should they be able to sue for that too???? Honest to God ladies, what in the world ever happened to personal responsibility? This is such liberal bolony. No one wants to just take responsibility. Everyone's looking for an excuse and a way out. It's become the American way.

bonniebb , ******Honest to God ladies, what in the world ever happened to personal responsibility****** Bingo !! You just made my point !!!!!!!! Or do you believe that only the man has "responsiblity" and the poor little woman is too dumb or helpless to be held accountable for her decisions ? Or maybe you believe the man is too stupid too make a decision so it is only right that he must live with whatever decision the woman makes.jtiggersorry ladies, I know I'm not following my own advice but good Lord !! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !!![This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited July 27, 2001).][This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited July 27, 2001).]

See, Suzi, this is where you get confused. The issue JTigger brought up has nothing to do with our husbands. Oh sure, you would like to think so, but really, it has nothing to do with men, women and OC's. What it's all about, Dr. Laura, is EQUALITY, women taking responsibility, THE SAME responsibility men have taken for years. You scream and scream about men who impregnant women to "Do what is right". Well, let me tell you ONCE again what I think is right. If a single woman sleeps with a married man, and gets pregnant, and the WIFE is willing, I think it would be extremely advantagous for the child to live with the married couple, giving FULL CUSTODY to the father his wife and make the other woman pay the support and visit on weekends. If you balk, then you're not for what's right nor what is equal, but instead are a hypocrite. [This message has been edited by Couple_of_Reasons (edited July 27, 2001).]

Couple_of_Reasons, thats just what we wanted to do in the beginning. (for the child to live with the married couple, giving FULL CUSTODY to the father his wife and make the other woman pay the support and visit on weekends) but then reality struck knowing that it just dont work that way. We decided it best to just walk away. with love flowerseed

Ladies, Ladies,But we digress....you realize it is not fair to play mind games with the unequipped, do you not?Back to the point at hand, would it then be totally fair if there had to be a legal binding contract between two people to agree to parenting? Then you could really say they both knew what they were getting into and if they didnt they should not have signed.

Broken wings, At this time it would not hold up in court . The courts view is the rights of the children supersede the rights of the parent. No parent can sign away the rights of the child, such as signing away cs or parental obligations. With that being said, H requested that he be allowed to terminate his parental rights. He was informed only the mother could request that.Jtigger

+++d+don't like the ow?[QUOTE]Originally posted by Couple_of_Reasons: [B]Here's another thought ..The husband and wife get full custody of the OC while the other woman visits the child every other weekend and pays child support, medical costs and day care expenses. Wow. What a twist huh? [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Why? Because we as ws don't like the ow? I hate the ow but she is the oc's mother and i am onw who truely believe unless there are MAJOR problems children belong with their mother. i am really starting to LOVE the oc and i love being the stepmom but i will NEVER be their mom.

I was in the kitchen washing dishes and I had a thought that started to trouble me and wanted to share.The courts have for many years recognized that a woman has the ultimate say in whether or not sex is consentual. If she so deems the act of sex can be classified as rape. In cases where women have said, "no", but their actions spoke differently, men have been convicted of rape.So why I wonder, if the court recognizes the woman is the last word on whether or not sex is mutually consentual or rape, do they not recognize that a woman who allows herself to have sex is the last word on whether or not she "allows" her self to be impregnated. She is expected to have the power and rights to allow her self to have sex, but is not expected to have the power and rights to "allow" her self to not be impregnated? Just a thought... any feedback???? oh, yeah, one more question... what happened to a male birth control pill. I think there's a conspiracy out to keep from inventing such a drug. Probably headed up by the OW's Union! [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

------------------ Zebra Baby ...Lord, give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

zebrababy, Very good point.Jtigger

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by whatif?: Why? Because we as ws don't like the ow? I hate the ow but she is the oc's mother and i am onw who truely believe unless there are MAJOR problems children belong with their mother. i am really starting to LOVE the oc and i love being the stepmom but i will NEVER be their mom. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No, it truly doesn't have anything to do with liking or not liking the other woman. However, what's to say this father couldn't be more of a positive role in this child's life? Why do we have to deem mothers bad and have horrible things done to our children before we consider giving custody to the father? Who says mothers are the better parent? Because they went through labor? I hardly think so. Whatif, nationwide statistics show that 60 percent of the cases of child abuse list the MOTHER as the abuser, not the father. Sixty percent, Whatif. So, you're telling me these fathers must WAIT until the mother causes such serious and irreversable harm to a child before we even consider POSSIBLY giving the father a fair shake at raising his own child? There are NO stats which say mothers are the better parent. THere are NO stats which say fathers can't be an even better parent. It's all preconceived notion that mothers are the beginning and end of children. Yes, we carry them, we labor for them, but sometimes, Whatif, we certainly aren't always GOOD to them. As I said, sixty percent of the reported cases of child abuse, and neglect lists the mother as the perpetrator. And what do YOU consider "major"? Drugs? Prostitution? Physical abuse? Medical and Educational Neglect? Sexual abuse by a boyfriend or even the mother herself? If you consider these bad, I'm glad, but the courts often DO NOT. I once spoke with a father whose 6 year old son had 18 cavities. Six year olds only have about 20 teeth at this age. Is that awful enough for you? DO you know what that poor little kid had to go through? Do you also know his father spent nearly 20 grand fighting to get custody of this child and the courts have YET to grant him custody MAINLY because of the very preconceived notion YOU have about "children should be with their mothers" even if it leaves devastating marks on a child for his/her entire life. One statistic we DO have about fathers is, children who have a constant father figure in their life fair much better than children who don't. It can be a natural father or one who chooses to act as father. Since this is the case, wouldn't it seem more appropriate to take on the attitude that since children fair better, children shouldn't just "BE" with their mothers simply because we carry the uterus? JMHO, CoR[This message has been edited by Couple_of_Reasons (edited July 27, 2001).]

COR, I agree on some level with you, if the father is a better parent than let him have the4 primary custody over the mother. i was really trying to get across that the oc should not just be givin to the father because he is married and the ow is not. Who is to say the father stays marries? The father is just as guilty and should not just get oc. Our ow for the most part is a good mom to the oc, she is a pian in the ars to me but a good mom. I have worked with enough abused children to know that mothers can be and often are worse abuswers than men. I don't know i just feel if the ow wants to raise the oc and is a good mother she shouldn't be asked to give the oc to the father and the bs because they are married. i was a single mom for a while so i am sure t6hat is why I feel that way. I could have given my first up for adoption which is what many of you suggest the ow should do, no i wasn't a ow i was a dumb teenager, but who is to say the child will always be raised by a mrried copule? Couples that adopt do divorce and single mom can get married. i think it should all be looked at on a individual basis. look at cd's case. ovioulsly the oc is being raised by a unfit mother who is causeing great pychological harm to the oc. In her case i believe the oc would be much better off bei9ng raised primarily by c and her husband.

sorry double hit key

By the way, the Glory B gals thought this topic was a doozy. They had posted the original letter in all its glory on Friday. It was funny (as in sad) to see the different attitudes amongst the ow. You can sure tell which ow were more than happy to get knocked up by their mm and which ow had their heads screwed on right.

Where on glory b ? I would love to read their comments.

You guys keep coming back to the same argument.....but, but, but, the OW is responsible too. Well who ever argued that? How is the OW NOT taking responsibility? Is she not raising the child and paying her share of support? No one is asking your H to do more then his fair share. Stop trying to make him the victim! He isn't the victim here, YOU are and the OC is in case you have forgotten!

Jtigger,It was on Friday's board and you know how quick things drop off on there. Those gals either have much more time or need much more support. I don't know. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Actually, their responses were kind of like on here. Some ow we incredibly upset that this would even be said. They seem to blame everything on the man. Other OW said they agree with this and it is the responsibility of the woman for her own reproductive rights. It was about 50/50 - probably the same ones that were upset by this would be the same ones to get pregnant (on purpose or accident) and keep the child while demanding rights for their child and themselves. It is funny how they demand rights for their children, but when the greater good for the child would have been adoption, they forget about the rights of the children to have the best life possible. Instead, they are quite selfish and want to keep their child and the rights that come with that child.

What's a glory B gal???z.------------------ Zebra Baby ...Lord, give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

glory b is a board for ow's.jtigger