I believe that this reasoning has already been rejected by the courts. The man has no say in the death and can still be made to pay for the kid. After birth is both parents responsibility tto the child. So guys are screwed.
That's why I said it would have to be someone rich. This would have to get to the Supreme Court for sanity to prevail.
Stop and thing about it for a second. Some rich guy has a 23 year old kid that is running with a bad crowd. He wants to stop it, but the law says, “sorry, he's over 21 so you have no rights.”
Later the kid and his friends commit a robbery and people are hurt. Since the kid has no money, one of the victims sues the rich parents. Of course it is going to be thrown out because a basic foundation principal of our system of laws has always been: if you have no rights, you have no responsibility. Can you imagine the chaos if this were not true? Sell a house and you are responsible for what the next owner does with it?
Yet that is EXACTLY what the convoluted reasoning that has been applied to abortion enforces. And I still say, get it to the highest court and they will have no choice but to overturn it.