Should a man be required to support a child he did not want?
 

Say two people hook up at some random event. They are not in love. They do not have a relationship. Maybe the guy doesn't even know the chick's last name. But the condom breaks and she gets knocked up.

Should he be required to pay for an abortion?

Should he be required to pay for half an abortion?

Should he be required to support the proceeds of a broken condom with a stranger for the rest of his life or at least 18 years and nine months?

What if the chick put pinholes in the condom because she knew the guy had some money, but the kid is definitely his genetics?

Is there a point at which the man stops being responsible for a choice someone else makes or does he lose the right to make further choices when he agrees to have sexual intercourse?

it's his kid, and it's his responsibility. Bottom line. All the rest is just so much bullshit once the child is born.

isn't there a waiting list for couples wanting to adopt newborns?

most dont do that, the kid is stuck suffering along with them. Sucks for the kid.

I would bet if most of them used a condom, then this situation wouldnt be a problem.

thats only 100% true for white newborns...its not the same for all babies :2 cents:

This is funny, reminds me of a conversation I had with this male mover and shaker in the pro life movement. I was challenging why anyone should care what he thinks since it is not his body.

His response, "I can't make a girl have an abortion."

I asked him if he would like another shot a response and he declined.

OMFG. A pro-life dude said that???

yep. I asked him, "you know, I am going to probably tell people that was your reasoning. Are you sure you don't want to try again?"

He thought it was valid reasoning. I got the impression he was a couple sandwiches short of a picnic.

Sorry, Right-To-life

if you dont wanna be responsible keep it in your pants

I'd say he loses the right to make further decisions. When you sleep with someone you have to know there's always a risk of pregnancy, and after the seed is planted it IS the womans right to choose. I think some people need to be a little more picky when it comes to who they breed with. You could be starting a 18 year long relations with a crazy and have to pay her child support each and every month. Hell, even marriage isn't that big of commitment. :2 cents:

Tip for guys, always use YOUR OWN CONDOM. And yes, 50% is fair, its not her fault either if its a mistake....

When you decide to fuck for whatever reason or no matter how wasted you may be, there always is some risk associated with it and you assume such risks. A child is just one potential outcome out of many. Same thing goes if you rip your condom, tear your foreskin, and catch yourself some life changing std.

Not always fair, yet that is life.

Should he be required to pay for an abortion?
not required

Should he be required to pay for half an abortion?
sure

Should he be required to support the proceeds of a broken condom with a stranger for the rest of his life or at least 18 years and nine months?
nope if it is her choice to keep it

What if the chick put pinholes in the condom because she knew the guy had some money, but the kid is definitely his genetics?
nope if it is her choice to keep it

if not , ...

... shouldn't be surprised if the kid shows up someday and beats your ass ;)

He must pay 100% for the abortion and must make the offer in a formal contract.

She says no, she gets zero support (past the price of an abortion at current market price).

She has the choice. Period.:2 cents:

What if the male wants the child and will take full responsibility for it? Would it be right then to make it so that she has to give birth to it assuming she doesn't want to?

First if I dont even know here name, odds are she doesnt know mine, that would make it very difficult to track me down to get anything from me.

Second, if I did knock up a chick and she said "If you dont pay for the abortion I am going to have the baby" we would be on the way to the abortion clinic before she finished the sentence.

Third, if you could prove she intentionally compromised the condom a court would probably not make you pay support, but good luck proving that.


That said, I'm scared to have sex now..... ;)

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Better yet, have her sign a pre-nup aforehand. Maybe the idea catches on and they start having dedicated bars, and tattoo parlours start offering the pre-nup forehead treatment.

It takes two to make a mistake.

This message endorsed by The Masturbation Foundation.

You are a grown-up person. You are responsible for what you do. Even if you meant otherwise.

A baby is made by two persons, so, even if you call it "a mistake", he/she's your son and you're responsible for him/her.

Resuming: be cautious and you won't find yourself in an undesirable situation. You can't bring this world a child and forget about your responsability of taking care of him. :disgust

Normally, I would say man should always be half responsible for their babies, whether they wanted it or not BUT...

It's also true SOME woman are gold diggers and will do what it takes to trap any guy with money, including pregnancy without consent... In this case, since it's not the baby's fault, the man will end up paying for that woman and baby for the rest of his life... But is it fair?

The system as it is now works more for woman... But again, woman will reply that some man don't take their responsibilities, some man don't pay their child support, etc...so the system is not in favor of the woman' side..etc...

One thing is for sure, this question is interesting but the real important outcome is still the baby himself. Remember babies come to this world and never asked for anything but to be loved and be taken care of...

everyone have to pay for the mistake
s

Anytime you choose to have sex there is risk involved. Both parties should be prepared to face those those inherent risks when they make the decision to get naked together. It never ceases to amaze me how cavalier people can be about sex given the hefty responsibility that comes along with it.

It is always the woman's right to choose in regards to abortion because it is her body paying the price. If the man wants her to have an abortion and she agrees, it would be fair for the man to pay the entire fee because she is going to have some physical and emotional shit to deal with afterwards. However, it would also be fair for them to split the cost, whatever they feel most comfortable with and probably heavily dependent on their unique situation.

If she keeps the child, he should absolutely be on the hook to help financially support that child. He can, of course, make the decision to not be a physical presence in the kid's life and that is his right. If she decides to birth the child and give it up for adoption, he should have the right to keep the child if he so desires and she should then be on the hook to provide financial support. Otherwise, they can make the mutual decision to put the baby up for adoption.

Finally, any man or woman who is very well off financially should be extra careful who they climb into bed with. Or they should expect to potentially find their bank account a little lighter as a repercussion.

Takes two to tango..you're just as responsible for the consequences

Everything has consequences... you have to be ready to take care of mistakes that you make.

It occurs to me that if "to be loved and taken care of" is nothing that's pretty convenient, cause nobody would ever need anything more.

It's your penis, so you are responsible for the actions of it and yourself. If you don't wanna pay then don't play. Best advice is to play safe. Use bring your own condoms, and realize that even that is not 100% safe. A real man knows that sometimes you need to man up and take responsibility for your actions, no matter how much you wish the situation was different.

exactly. only the woman can choose to have a baby and raise it. the man can't.

Like in the old west. People shall answer for whatever comes out of their guns.

the laws should be changed so that he can sign away all rights to custody at birth and also therefore waive all financial responsibility as well, giving the choice of adoption or not to the woman, she has all the choice, and if the child is unwanted it is better off to be adopted to a family that wants kids :2 cents:

DIG420.....
is right:thumbsup
Kream 3x

the courts would say as long it's the man's dna in that child, he has to pay, regardless of how it happened....

No to the 1st four..

I think it should be based on if the girl will allow the guy to visit the kid. Anytime a girl cuts a guy off from the kid, the money should be cut off.

And if the girl happens to get remarried. The support amount should drop to only cover food and cloths costs.

I personally would never want a baby with someone I wasn't 100% in love with but...

I think if a woman doesn't want to have an abortion even though a guy offers to pay for it and she chooses to keep a baby against the mans will, he should not have to pay to help raise the baby.

I think a lot of women have wanted a baby their whole lives so they keep it even though it is illogical and a strain. Just because a woman wants a baby for her own personal reasons doesn't mean some poor sucker should be stuck giving up a portion of his pay for 18 years.

Even people who are prolife have choices - give the baby up for adoption.

if he is your child you must help him :)

I think that if you aren't prepared to accept the possible consequences of having sex that you shouldn't be having sex.

Maybe we should have come equipped with flashing warning signs in our pubic regions. :D Flashing yelloworange lights, with one of those loud, whooping, emergency type sirens, and a robotic voice intoning over and over again...

DANGER! SEX MAY CAUSE CHILDREN! PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK!

really untrue

my parents have adopted 4 kids total now

oldest: black +white
second oldest: mexican white
third oldest : white
newest (born may 28th ) mexican

yes, but this discussion is about how the laws should be written which would adjust "the possible consequences"

if a child is put up for adoption and is adopted by a family that wants a child, that seems like a good solution

You stick your dingdong in her donut hole and you're 50% responsible for whatever comes of the event.

If you don't want the risk, don't fuck random people.

50/50. Enough said.

Sorry, but I don't get how you write laws that would adjust the possible consequences of pregnancy.

Laws cannot be written that will make std's go away.

Laws cannot be written that will stop pregnancy from happening.

I suppose laws could be written that would further promote the notion that people can do whatever they want with no thought to the outcome. Our country needs some more of those.

To me, it's pretty simple. If men don't want to risk the chance of knocking up a gold digging whore, then don't sleep with one. If women don't want to risk the chance of having some loser 'babydaddy' then don't sleep with losers.

Granted, that is not a fail safe method, but it would work most of the time.

But, to answer the question posed, I believe people remain responsible...period...once they have decided to fuck someone. :)

that is what this thread is all about, laws that are written.... the government can write whatever law they want and it hugely affects the consequences, whether they are right or wrong :2 cents:

Out of context Fluffygrrl

I added this part only to remind everyone that the real issue once the baby is born shouldn't be the parents or who pays what, but the baby's need and happiness...

In the end, even if it's not a spectacular revelation, the truth lies in Quagmire words of wisdom...

You stick your dingdong in her donut hole and you're 50% responsible for whatever comes of the event.

If you don't want the risk, don't fuck random people.

Every man shall be responsible for every little swimmer.

They dont even care if it's DNA in some cases. There've been cases where the man proves he's not the father after some time, but he's been paying for years already and they wont let him out of the "obligation".

I dont know why paternity testing is not standard procedure with all births, JUST BECAUSE it would never hurt, and in some cases could be very beneficial for the child and parents. Such as medical history.

On the original question, if there is no crime involved and this is 100% accidental, then it's just too bad. Shoulda pulled out sooner even with a condom.

And what about that baby? The courts should just say "tough shit kid" because your father feels it infringes on his rights if he's made to support you? It's not about the rights of the father or mother, it's about the best interest of the child once it gets here.

From the court's standpoint, support from both parents is the best way to ensure the child's needs are met and the public doesn't end up supporting that baby. If you don't want the possibility of having to pay for a child, then get fixed or don't have sex (male and female).

Yes, whether it's unintentional and accidental, once a baby is formed, there goes the responsibility that the father should bear! :2 cents:

I think the answer is lots of anal sex, its tighter and no babies. lol