I am also pro-choice and I am very worried about the future of reproductive rights. I also agree father's should have more options or, at the very least the system should be more equitable. That might not involved giving men more rights - it might involve extending the same responsibilities to non-custodial mothers.

The way I understand it, a father CAN claim parental rights over an adoptive parent. Perhaps I'm misinformed. I think he has like 2 years from the time he's notified.

What I don't know is whether, if a woman gives up her rights and the father steps forward, he can sue her for child support the same way she can sue him. I don't think it works that way and I would advocate that type of change. Rather than forgiving men their responsibility, I suppose I'd work for equity by making mothers equally financially responsible in the event they hand over the child to the biological father.

In the event of a stranger adoption (traditional) then I'd say they're both off the hook.

Mys

From reading through the thread again, it is obvious to me that the women on this board are threatened by the idea of a man having as many choices as they do in regard to procreation, and to avoid it you've turned it around on me and used my own personal experiences to chastise me for my opinion.

I'm not the least bit threatened by men having as much choice in the matter as me. I NEVER had sex unless I was prepared to deal with a resulting pregnancy. Men should take that same stand in my opinion.

I have made comment for years that women seem to be in the catbird seat as far as the "decisions" are concerned.

She can choose to have the baby...she cannot be forced to terminate. She can choose to terminate...because she cannot be forced to carry to term. Yep, it's her body, and her decision. It's a pretty simple formula if you ask me.

The thing that has grey area is carrying to term and then placing the child up for adoption. I read about a lady that got pregnant by her MM...and he wanted her to terminate. She refused...and moved clear across the country to have the child, which she placed for adoption. Fast forward a few years....the MM finds out that the child had been born...and placed up for adoption...and he went on the warpath to get that child back. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

The Bio Mother refused to give him ANY information and he got the courts involved. He found the child and tried to negate the adoption on the grounds that HIS parental rights had not been considered. He should have been given first "dibs" on the child.

Well...he didn't get the child because the trauma that the child would suffer was noted. So, he filed a civil suit against her...and the attorney that handled the adoption. Her argument was that he didn't want the baby...because he tried to make her terminate...so she just assumed that she could make the decision to place it up for adoption.

Sad to say...it didn't fly with the judge. She LOST...and so did her attorney...to a hefty tune too.

It was in the newspapers here for weeks because it was a prominent local family.

I would suggest you get your Congressman involved if you want to change how it works.

committed

Pep, that's a good point.

I guess it boils down to this: a person who is not willing to raise a child should abstain from sex.

I still feel that fathers get shafted in a lot ways when it comes to reproductive, domestic, and familial matters.

I have gotten more involved in Father's Rights issues in my state over the last two years. I will continue to help in whatever way I can.

I was never trying to say that the blame should lie soley with OW/OP or solely with the H/W for choosing to stray unprotected. I just though it was a very interesting subject and sympathized with Spring's POV.

It was good to hear everyone's opinions when stated in a non-combative way. And if I tend to take things rather personally I'm sure it has much to do with my personal OW/OC nightmare, so I never meant to offend anyone. If I did, I apologize.

Thanks for the debate. It was nice to start a thread that got people's attention....even if it sucked for me once or twice.

I have to get back to work though, my boss is going to have my @ss if he catches me here....

Thanks.

This in the end, is about the mindset of the WS.

They don't think.

They do not stop before "the deed" and say...

"Hmmm....might I get myself pregnant if I sleep with this man...this man other than my H? Is he using a condom, did I take my pill faithfully? Maybe I should make him wear a condom JUST IN CASE?" (WW or OW)

or

"Hmmm....might I get this woman pregnant if I sleep with her? Is she on the pill? Does she take her pill faithfully? Have we discussed this issue? Should I wear a condom? Maybe I should just wear a condom JUST IN CASE...and maybe I should just look at my condom to make sure it's not poked full o holes. Maybe I should wear this JUST IN CASE?"

But this doesn't happen time and again.

Why?

Well, the stuuuuupid rationale is that "IT DESTROYS THE MOMENT." How's about destroying some families b/c you don't think?

I can blame the OW/now W for getting preggers deliberately. And yes, she took full advantage of the fact my then WH does not like to wear a hat, because of his narcissism and wanting to "feel everything". So that's ultimately my XWH idiot's fault isn't it? But THE OW WOULD NOT HAVE HAD THE CHANCE TO DELIBERATELY PUT HER SCHEME INTO EFFECT HAD MY XH USED HIS BRAIN..

FOR ONCE...

lmao!

I 100% agree with you here.

What is more important in my mind , is NOT parental "rights", but parental "responsibilities".

It irrks me when adults whine about their "rights" while seeming to be blind deaf and dumb about their more important responsibilities.

And this is also true, in my mind, about women's claim for "reproductive rights".

I would much prefer they voice their concern for "responsible reproduction" than their "right" to terminate an unborn child.

let's be real.

Rights? ... yes we have "rights" to our reproductive organs ... and we must also own up to our responsibility as well.

I agree Pep. While raising my 3 boys, I explained to them often that if they choose to have sex with a young lady, they may also be assuming the responsibility of paying child support for 18 years. So far, no unplanned pregnancies.

Yes, Believer.

Somewhere along the line ... "reproductive rights" has become "my rights to enjoy consequence-free sexuality".

I don't think this is a "right" of anyone.