I thought this was interesting. Too bad "all individuals "really means all women. I did send these people an e-mail and ask about men's reproductive freedom and choices.<P>***The Programme of Action, adopted at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), was the first major international conference to define the term reproductive rights and affirm the link between existing human rights treaty provisions and reproductive rights. Governments endorsed the following statement at ICPD:<P><BR>"Reproductive rights embrace certain human rights that are already recognized in national laws, international laws and international human rights documents, and other consensus documents. These rights rest on the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. It also includes their right to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence, as expressed in human rights documents."<P>In collaboration with nationally based organizations, CRLP advocates for the full realization of reproductive rights as human rights at the national, regional, and international levels.<P><BR>Jtigger<BR> <P><BR>

Dear Jtigger,<P>The laws are medieval and are designed to ensure that the government at both the federal and the state levels have minimal liability when it comes to support of children. Women have been given the right to make the decision on whether to keep their child, without any reference to the man who provided the sperm. This does not concern the government though, because if for any reason she is in financial need, they merely intend to find the responsible man and burden him with CS payments that will ensure poverty for him and his family for a good chunk of their lives.<P>No one in the legislature has seen fit to change these archaic views of women as being victimized by men (especially married men). And, in fact, many statutes that could have given us leverage in the past, has been struck down by various methods. I must admit though, there has not been sufficient noise from people like us who are suffereing.<P>Society is all too happy to look at the needs of the "child" - both financial and emotional. However, no one seems to look at the needs of the spouse and the needs of the children from the marriage -- financial and emotional. Those are considered things the man "should have thought of" before he bedded the OW. And, how he deals with them is considered HIS problem, not the problem of the court.<P>I saw a show some time ago -- i think it was Sally Jessy Raphael -- and women who had affairs with married men came on to take paternity tests. As they read the results of the tests, the husband and wife were sitting next to the OW with the OC. In the cases where the husband was the bio father, all attention immediately turned to what his intentions were toward the child -- would he support the child, visit the child, be a "father" to the child. Meanwhile, the wife was sitting there looking as though she has suffered a major stroke and she was being totally ignored. That illustrated perfectly how we are treated under the law. They consider us to be "bystanders" as if none of this affects our lives and, in most issues, they have not even given us a voice. We are left feeling that an attempt has been made to murder us, the perpetrator fell down while trying to escape, and everyone is focusing attention on whether or not SHE is okay, while ignoring the knife still protruding from our backs. <P>What God has joined together maybe no man can put asunder, but the legal system is doing a damned good job of trying.<P>love<BR>- heavenly

Heavenly, As usual all I can say is bravo. So well put. You have touched on things that I all too often think about, discuss with my h and friends, but have never been able to say as clearly and precisely. There are so many sites out there in the wonderful world of the web that try and illustrate how a mans rights are ignored and how unjustly they are being treated. The legal system does not favor them in the least, even a legal right as everyone said my h had, to see the oc. This cost us close to 2,ooo.oo so far. We just finally won somethimg, and it took over a year and a half. And to think, he thought it was his legal right and would not even need a lawyer, how could anyone deny him of something that was on the law books as a right he had. We never even got a lawyer until the ow did, and that was because she had fought it so long on her own and finally got scared and wanted help, and her stupidity because I refuse to believe any attorny would even think he could have won. How could he , you can not terminate parental rights in NJ except in cases of adoption, so I was told. So once our lawyer got involved and he told all other concerned parties that my h would not be considered a check book with legs, I loved that statement. With that I knew we had picked the right man. He won all the fights we could not over the years and months and he did it all from the comfort of his own office. It is a sad society when people can not even agree on anything on their own for the sake of children, only when tons of money is spent, and lawyers are hired do people then open their eyes. OUr lawyer is who got the ow to back down, and finally my h got alittle something for all the pain we have suffered and $ he has been dishing out. Gabi1116

Heavenlybody,<BR>I've never heard it said (as my little one would say ) more better.<P>Jtigger<p>[This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited March 23, 2001).]

heavenly,<BR>Exactly what you said is how I feel everytime one of them dam letters come from the foc, so helpless and so angry that even when you are doing what the law says you are to do the ow is able to use the courts to harrass and they are more than happy to help. with love flowerseed