UK Abortion Act is not working as intended

[jefferiah]

Where did I put men only on my post? It seems to me that people who protest about abortions do not care about the babies, they only want to punish the mothers.

Though you may not agree with them, people who are pro-life (both male and female) usually have this position because they believe the fetus constitutes a living thing which ought to have a right to live, not because they want to punish mothers.

The argument that M. Dancer is not adopting is weak. Apply that same logic to someone who is arguing about the death of children in an unjust nation. I am sure you do not support such things. But have you adopted any of those children.

[Guest American Woman]

The way I see it the woman has two sets of choices while the man has only one choice.

Her first choice is whether or not to have sex.

His first (and only) choice is whether or not to have sex.

While she makes her second choice (abort or continue pregnancy), he blows in the wind with no control over her decision.

He cannot force her to have the child nor can he force her to abort. Yet she CAN force him to be a father if she decides to keep the child.

No, she cannot force him to be a father. Not in the true sense. What's your definition of a father? Someone who begrudgingly gives money for 18 years? That's sure not my definition. If he were being forced to be a father, he would be forced to have a hand in raising the child. He would have to share the responsiblity of being a parent. Forking over money doesn't begin to do that.

Like I said. If a woman gets pregnant and doesn't believe in abortions, she has the responsibility of raising the child alone. She shares the financial burden with the 'father' and raises the child alone. So the man does have two choices. He can decide to have to have sex and he can decide to help raise the child or not.

Yes, we women have the burden of aborting or carrying the child. Yes, women have the ultimate choice. Where does the man's choice come in? Why does he have to "blow in the wind" not knowing whether or not he will be a father?

The man's choice comes in when he makes the choice to have sex with a woman he doesn't even know well enough to discuss what would happen if they create a child. He doesn't have to wonder whether or not he will be a 'father' if he acts responsibly in the first place. It's not a necessity to go out having one night stands.

Either he has the power to decide if the child is born or not, or he doesn't. Cannot have it both ways. IMO men are left at the whim of the woman's decision.

He doesn't have the power because he's not carrying the child. He does have the power to not create a child. He also has the power not to be involved in the child's life. So no, he's not left at the whim of the woman's decision-- any more than a woman left raising a child on her own is left at the whim of the man who chooses not to be a real father-- a man who has nothing to do with the child beyond financially.

Once the child is born, it's ultimately about the child and what the child deserves. And the child deserves the financial help of the man who helped create him/her. They deserve so much more; they deserve a real father, but men aren't being forced to actually be a dad. They can choose to walk away.

[Drea]

AW, I meant father as in biological father, not as in "dad". My son has a "father" but he is certainly not his "dad".

Like I said a woman gets two choices -- the man only gets a choice only once. The choice whether or not to have sex. The woman has the power because she and she alone chooses whether or not this man will need to be responsible or not.

Hubby and I had to drop the topic (it got really heated around the kitchen table today!) -- he was arguing that the man should take responsibility because he chose to have sex. What he is not understanding is that the woman ALSO chose to have sex. BUT she has a second choice and he does not. She can choose to carry the child or abort. He just blows in the wind, waiting for her to make the decision.

IMO, If a woman does not believe in abortion, she should be extra diligent when having sex by utilizing more than one form of birth control.

Women have many choices (can be used together) to prevent pregancy.

1. Abstinance

2. condoms

3. vaginal condoms

4. the sponge

5. IUD

6. the pill

7. the birth control shot

8. birth control patch

9. sterilization.

Men have three choices

1. abstinance

2. condom

3. sterilization.

So who again has more control over whether or not there will be a pregnancy? The woman of course.

Who has control over whether or not the pregnancy goes to term and produces a baby? The woman of course.

So there are the men blowing in the wind at the whim of a woman's decision.

Edited December 2, 2007 by Drea

[Guest American Woman]

AW, I meant father as in biological father, not as in "dad". If a man is financially responsible, he is the father.

And as I already pointed out, that's where the man's second choice comes in. He has the choice of whether or not to be a dad. He has that power, and if he choses to walk away, the woman is left to raise the child on her own.

Both partners have played a part in creating the child when a pregnancy goes to term. At this point it's about the child. The child who had no choices. Your husband is right. Both the man and the woman chose to have sex; both knowing the possible consequences.

[Drea]

And as I already pointed out, that's where the man's second choice comes in. He has the choice of whether or not to be a dad. He has that power, and if he choses to walk away, the woman is left to raise the child on her own.

But he cannot "walk away". He is financially responsible whether or not he chooses to be a "dad" to the child. He does not have a say in whether the child is born or not. That decision is the woman's alone.

Both partners have played a part in creating the child when a pregnancy goes to term. At this point it's about the child. The child who had no choices. Your husband is right. Both the man and the woman chose to have sex; both knowing the possible consequences.

But she has the second choice and he does not. If she chooses to have the child that is HER issue, she could choose not to and not have to raise the child. OR she could give it up for adoption. OR she could give it to the "father". She is not forced to abort, give birth or give it up. HE, however, IS forced to pay financially even if he does not want to. Forced by that second decision that he has absolutely no control over.

[Guest American Woman]

The woman who gives up the child for adoption because she doesn't believe in abortion but doesn't want it is forced to go through the pregnancy and birth. A man who doesn't want a child is forced into no such thing.

By the very fact of nature, nothing is going to be completely "fair" in all ways to both the man and the woman. You keep refusing to acknowledge it, but walking away from being a dad IS a second choice. The woman can also walk away-- but first she must carry the child and give birth to the child and see the child. The man has to do none of those things. Is that fair?

Again, the financial support is about the child. An innocent child. The man knows his choices going into it. If he still chooses to have sex, then he has to accept the consequences. This is true of all of us. The man has certain choices, the woman has certain choices. We all have to live within those choices-- which are dictated by other choices we make.

I'd never have sex with a man who could walk away from his child. By the same token, a man could be a bit more selective regarding who he has sex with. So that's another choice he has. That's within his power.

Edited December 2, 2007 by American Woman

[Riverwind]

Again, the financial support is about the child. An innocent child.

A child that only exists because of choices made by the mother. The fact that some women have a problem with abortion does not justify given the woman the power to force a father to pay for a child that he does not want.

[Guest American Woman]

A child that only exists because of choices made by the mother. The fact that some women have a problem with abortion does not justify given the woman the power to force a father to pay for a child that he does not want.

It's not about the woman or her decision. It's about the child's existance. It's about the child. A child that the man, by his choices, helped create. So no, it doesn't exist only by the choices made by the mother. The man made the choice to have sex with the woman. The child wouldn't exist had he not made that choice.

Edited December 2, 2007 by American Woman

[Peter F]

ScottSA:

Why is it horrid to "force a woman to give birth," but quite alright to force a man to pay for it? Why is it enlightened to celebrate a woman's choice, but decry a man's choice as "selfish and irresponsible?"

It's horrid to force a woman to give birth because its horrid to force a woman to be and remain pregnant.

It's quite allright to force a man to pay for it because the man isn't paying for the womans pregnancy; he is paying for the support of a live human being.

It's enlightened to celebrate a womans choice because we acknowledge that women whole human beings with full control of thier own bodies - just like men.

We decry a mans choice to not be a father as "selfish and irresponsible" because he is denying support to a single woman and her child, just so's his bank account can get fatter - That is selfish and irresponsible.

[Drea]

The woman who gives up the child for adoption because she doesn't believe in abortion but doesn't want it is forced to go through the pregnancy and birth. A man who doesn't want a child is forced into no such thing.

Therefore she should be diligent in being on birthcontrol and using it properly. This is also why she and she alone can decide what to do with the pregnancy. She CHOOSES to go through 9 1/2 months of pregnancy. SHE chooses whether or not the man becomes a father.

By the very fact of nature, nothing is going to be completely "fair" in all ways to both the man and the woman. You keep refusing to acknowledge it, but walking away from being a dad IS a second choice. The woman can also walk away-- but first she must carry the child and give birth to the child and see the child. The man has to do none of those things. Is that fair?

Once again, she is the one who has to go through the pregnancy so she should be careful. There are tons of birthcontrol choices (that first decision to have sex) for women but few for men.

Once again, the man cannot "walk away". He is forced to pay child support for a child he didn't want. On the same token he may lose a baby he wants as it is HER decision to keep it or not.

Again, the financial support is about the child. An innocent child. The man knows his choices going into it. If he still chooses to have sex, then he has to accept the consequences. This is true of all of us. The man has certain choices, the woman has certain choices. We all have to live within those choices-- which are dictated by other choices we make.

The innocent child is brought into the world by a not-so-innocent woman who made the CHOICE to have sex and then made the CHOICE to allow the pregnancy to go to term. The man only has the choice in the beginning (and then there are precious few birthcontrol choices for men).

I'd never have sex with a man who could walk away from his child. By the same token, a man could be a bit more selective regarding who he has sex with. So that's another choice he has. That's within his power.

And the woman has no control over who she sleeps with? No control over her sexuality? Come on now, AW women are not passive parties, they want sex that doesn't result in pregnancy too.

Once again, there are very few methods of birth control available to men and many (I forgot too add the rhythm method used by women for millenia) for women.

/She could've just shut her damn legs no? /sarcasm, sorry.

[Riverwind]

A child that the man, by his choices, helped create.

A false argument. It was the man's choices that created the fetus. However, abortion is always an option. If the woman refuses to make that choice then the child is her responsibility - not the fathers.

The attitude that the interest of the child trumps all other concerns has created a perverse system that results in many injustices:

- a woman inseminated herself after oral sex and successfully demanded child support;

- women are allowed to collect support from multiple fathers for the same child because they lived with her at some point;

- men and woman are denied the right determine the rules for their own relationships;

Edited December 2, 2007 by Riverwind

[Peter F]

A false argument. It was the man's choices that created the fetus. However, abortion is always an option. If the woman refuses to make that choice then the child is her responsibility - not the fathers.

The attitude that the interest of the child trumps all other concerns has created a perverse system that results in many injustices:

- a woman inseminated herself after oral sex and successfully demanded child support;

- women are allowed to collect support from multiple fathers for the same child because they lived with her at some point;

- men and woman are denied the right determine the rules for their own relationships;

I'm wondering under what conditions you would consider child support payments from a non-present biological father to be fair and just.

[Guest American Woman]

A false argument. It was the man's choices that created the fetus. However, abortion is always an option. If the woman refuses to make that choice then the child is her responsibility - not the fathers.

No, abortion isn't "always" an option, not for all women. One has to respect that some women could NOT choose to have an abortion just as some would. It's about choice, not forcing a woman into having an abortion or completely raising the child on her own, without even any financial support.

So yes, it was the man's choice to create the fetus, and sometimes a fetus becomes a child. So it was the man's choice to create the fetus that resulted in the child. Therefore, it was his choice that created the child. I swear it's as if some people don't believe in personal accountability. Sex sometimes creates a child. Therefore, be careful who you have sex with. Take personal responsiblity. There are a number of things a man can do to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.

The attitude that the interest of the child trumps all other concerns has created a perverse system that results in many injustices:

- a woman inseminated herself after oral sex and successfully demanded child support;

One bizarre case doesn't exactly give argument against men supporting the children they help create.

- women are allowed to collect support from multiple fathers for the same child because they lived with her at some point;

Have these men not heard of paternity tests? I've never heard of women being allowed to collect support from more than one man for one child, but if that has happened, a paternity test would take care of that.

- men and woman are denied the right determine the rules for their own relationships;

How so? I don't understand that one.

[M.Dancer]

A false argument. It was the man's choices that created the fetus.

I was once involved with a woman who wanted a child and wated to get married. I found out she had stopped taking the pill. She had got me to stop weqaring condoms and we were active for about a month before I found out. I was lucky.

If woman have control over their fertility, you can't blame the man if they get conned.

[Drea]

I'm wondering under what conditions you would consider child support payments from a non-present biological father to be fair and just.

When the couple has been/is in a relationship. I am all for child support for children born as a result of a relationship.

One night stands -- while both parties decide to have sex, the decision to keep or abort lies soley with the woman. And the man just waits by the sidelines to find out

a. if he is going to be part of the child's life,

b. if there is going to be a child at all, and

c. how much he will have to pay for the next 20 years...

[Guest American Woman]

ScottSA:

It's horrid to force a woman to give birth because its horrid to force a woman to be and remain pregnant.

It's quite allright to force a man to pay for it because the man isn't paying for the womans pregnancy; he is paying for the support of a live human being.

It's enlightened to celebrate a womans choice because we acknowledge that women whole human beings with full control of thier own bodies - just like men.

We decry a mans choice to not be a father as "selfish and irresponsible" because he is denying support to a single woman and her child, just so's his bank account can get fatter - That is selfish and irresponsible.

Well said. I don't understand how anyone could see denying an innocent child financial support as "fair."

[Riverwind]

I'm wondering under what conditions you would consider child support payments from a non-present biological father to be fair and just.

Any time a man chooses to be a father and the relationship broke down then he should be expected to support the children. The only problem I have when the court tries to force men to support for children that they never wanted in the first place. I would also include cases where the women has decieved a man into believing a child was his when it was really someone elses. Edited December 2, 2007 by Riverwind

[capricorn]

If the woman refuses to make that choice then the child is her responsibility - not the fathers.

On the surface this sounds fair but is it really? The state takes a different view. In order to prevent women and their offspring from becoming dependent on the state, i.e. welfare, fathers are held responsible for child support regardless of the relationship between the couple.

"One reason the state is reluctant to grant men the same rights it grants women is welfare. A single mother can easily become dependent on the state. The state's only remedy is to go after the father, so the states routinely round up dads and put them in jail."

http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/Making...ce_05JAN06.aspx

The article goes on to explore the injustices that you mention.

As a society, are we prepared to release men from their financial responsibilities in order to level the playing field for reproductive rights of men and women? My opinion is no we should not. I am quite happy with the system of child support as it is, provided paternity has been definitely established.

[Guest American Woman]

When the couple has been/is in a relationship. I am all for child support for children born as a result of a relationship.

One night stands -- while both parties decide to have sex, the decision to keep or abort lies soley with the woman. And the man just waits by the sidelines to find out

a. if he is going to be part of the child's life,

b. if there is going to be a child at all, and

c. how much he will have to pay for the next 20 years...

So children who are born as a result of a relationship are more deserving than those born as a result of a one night stand. Unbelievable.

[Riverwind]

Well said. I don't understand how anyone could see denying an innocent child financial support as "fair."

There are lots of kids in need of financial support. Why don't find a few a donate 50% of your paycheck to them. After all, it is is only "fair" since they are innnocent kids. Edited December 2, 2007 by Riverwind

[Drea]

Yes the child is innocent.

And lord knows we all want to look after innocent babies and make sure they are financially and emotionally safe.

But it's the woman who makes the choice. If she is against abortion or adoption, she should be diligent. Like I've said women have myriad birth control options. Men have very few.

I've seen MDancer's example in action many many times. I know many fathers who did not want kids but were "tricked" by women who did.

[Guest American Woman]

There are lots of kids in need of financial support. Why don't find a few a donate 50% of your paycheck to them. After all, it is is only "fair" since they are innnocent kids.

I didn't bring those children into the world. I'm not responsible for their being here. They aren't in this world as a result of my decisions, as a result of my desire for an orgasm. I wouldn't have sex if I didn't plan on taking responsibility for my actions. I woudn't take the chance of having more children than I care to/am able to support. It's called personal responsiblity. Unfortunately, not everyone feels they have to be responsible for their decisions/actions-- which is why we need laws forcing them to be responsible.

[Guest American Woman]

...it's the woman who makes the choice. If she is against abortion or adoption, she should be diligent.

And men who don't want to support a child should also be diligent. And yes, it's the woman who makes the choice, so why should the child suffer??

Like I've said women have myriad birth control options. Men have very few.

You only need to use one choice.

I've seen MDancer's example in action many many times. I know many fathers who did not want kids but were "tricked" by women who did.

How does one trick a man into having sex? I don't know any men stupid enough to be tricked into having intercourse.

[Riverwind]

I woudn't take the chance of having more children than I care to/am able to support. It's called personal responsiblity. Unfortunately, not everyone feels they have to be responsible for their decisions/actions-- which is why we need laws forcing them to be responsible.

I agree. But the problem here is created by women who choose to carry a baby to term even though the father wants nothing to do with the child. IMV - telling a woman that the state will force the father to pay support simple encourages her to make irresponsible decisions. The people who have the power to choose are the people that should bear the responsibility. In this situation it is the woman who has 100% control over whether the baby is born or not. Edited December 2, 2007 by Riverwind

[Riverwind]

How does one trick a man into having sex? I don't know any men stupid enough to be tricked into having intercourse.

Tell the man that she is taking the pill when she really isn't. Poking holes in condoms before use. Having oral sex and grab a turkey baster. I am sure there are others... Edited December 2, 2007 by Riverwind