Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Although the father can't and shouldn't force the mother to have an abortion or go through a pregnancy, he should be allowed to force her to put a child up for adoption if she insists on not having an abortion if the state is going to mandate he be financially responsible for a decision he had no say in. .
This is the absolute worst idea I have ever heard of on the CD forum. I can't believe you advocate forced adoption on a mother just because the father doesn't want to pay for a child he helped create.
Surely you can brainstorm a bit and come up with a better solution than my ideas and what currently exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
You've basically outlined a situation where any mother making ends meet with a low wage job, or somebody in college, would be forced to have the child adopted out if they can't prove they can support it on their own income. That's absurd.
I'm not advocating this. I'm hoping it helps people realize men don't have equal rights at almost every phase. Many people posted in this thread that men do have equal rights and that's not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
I certainly don't think it's fair to treat men with inequality. But that is not the answer.
I'm glad some people are acknowledging there is serious inequality. Something needs to change with the current system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359
Only married fathers or those in a relationship that is similar to being married should have the same rights a mother has. There are simply too many situations of 'disappearing fathers" and fathers who won't work and support their children. Women get stuck with parenting by virtue of their biology. The system should haven't to babysit unmarried fathers. If they want parental rights, its appropriate that they should have to affirmatively step forward, acknowledge their children and--at a minimum--pay regular monetary support. I would construe the failure to pay such support as abandonment of their child. The only exception would be a truly disabled father.
I think a lot of the fathers disappear because of the inequality of the system. Goodness, even most fathers who raised their children while married end up with visitation every other weekend. That's totally unfair.
Although it's a complicated issue, I think the laws could be more equal when possible. Just like there is mandated mediation for child support, custody, and visitation, there should be mandated pregnancy mediation for unmarried parents. It would save the government a ton of money by cutting down on future court cases. It would eliminate much of the drama that babies are born into also.
Although the father can't and shouldn't force the mother to have an abortion or go through a pregnancy, he should be allowed to force her to put a child up for adoption if she insists on not having an abortion if the state is going to mandate he be financially responsible for a decision he had no say in. If the mother wants to keep the baby, she should show the court she can financially support the baby on her own income instead of the father being mandated to pay child support. Alternately, the father should be allowed to take the baby and raise it on his own if she doesn't want the child but is willing to go through the pregnancy as long as he proves he can financially provide for the child. Of course, there will be couples who both want the child and are eager to financially support the child, and they're welcome to make their agreement official during the mediation before the child is even born.
There are a lot of different ways to go about this if legislators thought outside of the box. It's a cop out to say a father had his chance when he had sex. That means that men don't have equal rights even in bed before conception. They were both irresponsible and made a mistake, it's not fair for the father to not have equal rights in the decision of what to do about the pregnancy. People who think it's fair for society to treat men with inequality, from before the child is conceived until after the baby is born, aren't thinking outside of existing laws and aren't even entertaining there is a possibility that there could be a better way.
Do you really want birth rights legislated? Mandated pregnancy mediation? We live in a country were women can work for companies that don't have to pay for birth control, but still pay for Viagra and vasectomies.
Oh H**l no to the forced adoption. I can't believe you even typed that. Are you aware of the current scandal in Ireland, where the unmarried women were housed by the Catholic church and given no say in what happened to their babies?
I'm as liberal as they come, but the last place I want any government control is in my bedroom, or the birthing room. If the unwed mother doesn't want to raise the baby, the father can already petition the court for custody.
Although it's a complicated issue, I think the laws could be more equal when possible. Just like there is mandated mediation for child support, custody, and visitation, there should be mandated pregnancy mediation for unmarried parents. It would save the government a ton of money by cutting down on future court cases. It would eliminate much of the drama that babies are born into also.
Although the father can't and shouldn't force the mother to have an abortion or go through a pregnancy, he should be allowed to force her to put a child up for adoption if she insists on not having an abortion if the state is going to mandate he be financially responsible for a decision he had no say in. If the mother wants to keep the baby, she should show the court she can financially support the baby on her own income instead of the father being mandated to pay child support. Alternately, the father should be allowed to take the baby and raise it on his own if she doesn't want the child but is willing to go through the pregnancy as long as he proves he can financially provide for the child. Of course, there will be couples who both want the child and are eager to financially support the child, and they're welcome to make their agreement official during the mediation before the child is even born.
There are a lot of different ways to go about this if legislators thought outside of the box. It's a cop out to say a father had his chance when he had sex. That means that men don't have equal rights even in bed before conception. They were both irresponsible and made a mistake, it's not fair for the father to not have equal rights in the decision of what to do about the pregnancy. People who think it's fair for society to treat men with inequality, from before the child is conceived until after the baby is born, aren't thinking outside of existing laws and aren't even entertaining there is a possibility that there could be a better way.
He most definitely had a say in it when he had unprotected sex or failed to get himself a vasectomy and the followup test to make sure it worked.
Since there seem to be several posters who feel strongly about the rights (or lack thereof) of (unmarried) fathers, I thought maybe a separate thread was in order so that Jersey's thread doesn't continue to get hijacked.
What say you? Do unmarried fathers have rights? Should they? Or should they be encouraged to "just walk away" because the mother is ready to move on? Clearly there are cases (ie abuse) when it is best to terminate rights and times when some fathers just abandon their kids no matter how much the mother encourages their participation....but when the father is willing and able to be a part of the child's life...then what?
Where I think it's complicated is if an unmarried father can become a major factor in a woman's life by keeping her from relocating to another state -- even returning to her own family. If he's providing at least half the financial support, then I think he may have equal rights, but if he's failing to provide support and the woman could relocate either to a higher paying job or back to her family where she will have more backup such as child care by relatives, then he shouldn't be able to block her from relocating.
And is the father spending time with the kids during his visitation time or turning them over to his newest girlfriend to watch over? There are so many variables, it really gets complicated.
I'm as liberal as they come, but the last place I want any government control is in my bedroom, or the birthing room.
That's the last place I want them too. I experienced it. My baby went into fetal distress and the doctor was postponing the emergency C-section to find the father to sign permission. Can you imagine letting a baby stay in fetal distress for a moment longer over something like that?
I'm purposely being shocking in hopes people will at least think about how unfair the system is to men. This thread is about father's rights, and the reality is they don't have equal rights. Too many people seem to be okay with that. I realize it's a complicated issue, but there has to be a better way.
He most definitely had a say in it when he had unprotected sex or failed to get himself a vasectomy and the followup test to make sure it worked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
Where I think it's complicated is if an unmarried father can become a major factor in a woman's life by keeping her from relocating to another state -- even returning to her own family. If he's providing at least half the financial support, then I think he may have equal rights, but if he's failing to provide support and the woman could relocate either to a higher paying job or back to her family where she will have more backup such as child care by relatives, then he shouldn't be able to block her from relocating.
Like you said above, isn't this a choice the mother made when she had unprotected sex or failed to get her tubes cut, tied, clamped, AND burned?
Like you said above, isn't this a choice the mother made when she had unprotected sex or failed to get her tubes cut, tied, clamped, AND burned?
Seriously! Think about your double standards!
Maybe she was drunk when it happened and she never intended to have the man be her ball-and-chain for the rest of her life.
As long as she is providing financial support -- or is equally required to do so, how is it a double standard? Same thing -- if she doesn't want to have to work to support her child then yes, she should have had a tubal ligation or at least used some reliable birth control.
It shouldn't be thought of in terms of father's rights (or mother's rights) but the child's rights - children have a right to both parents, in terms of financial support and being raised by, and spending time with, both parents so unless there are safety issues (such as abuse) the child shouldn't be kept away from the non-custodial parent.
That is a thought that I took a long time to reach when I was going through the custody battle with my child. Her father didn't stick to the (verbal) visitation agreement so I "kidnapped" her back from him and refused him access until court. That was wrong of me and resulted in much more stress to our child (I was not the only one behaving badly, we both messed up badly and took a long time to learn that lesson) but now I definitely think all parents going through custody disagreements should stop thinking about their own rights and think about what the child(ren)'s rights are and what is best for them.
Maybe she was drunk when it happened and she never intended to have the man be her ball-and-chain for the rest of her life.
You're basically saying that getting drunk and making a mistake is okay for a woman but not a man.
When men and women have sex, they should both be held equally accountable for their actions. Not being able to relocate is a consequence of getting pregnant, like child support is a consequence. Just as a man knows he will be paying child support if he gets someone pregnant while he's drunk, a woman knows she will be a man's ball-and-chain and not be able to relocate for the rest of her life if she gets pregnant when she's drunk.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
