Father's Rights? Men Want Right To Turn Down Fatherhood

The Indy Channel ^ | March 9, 2006 | AP

[Tax-chick]

Oh, not this shi'ite again.

[Abathar]

Yep, just too stupid to pass up I guess...

[Zenith]

This is a real "Super Barf" !

[RichInOC]

We men already have that option. It's called "not banging her in the first place". Works every time it's tried, and you don't need to go through a court battle to do it.

[Old_Mil]

"There's such a spectrum of choice that women have -- it's her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions," said Mel Feit, director of the men's center. "I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly."

Silence, slave, or you will be flogged for your disobedience.

[zerosix]

If men need more control over this issue then my suggestion to all of them so that they won't be the big financial losers in this one - keep your zipper up or stay home alone!

[Paloma_55]

"Unintended pregnancy"??

I threw a rock into the air... I did not intend it to break a window and therefore, I should not have to pay to fix the window.

[Tribune7]

The Jerry Springer generation has grown up.

[righttackle44]

"Feit doesn't advocate an unlimited fatherhood opt-out; he proposes a brief period in which a man, after learning of an unintended pregnancy, could decline parental responsibilities if the relationship was one in which neither partner had desired a child."

He got this from Joey Tribbiani, right?
Not QUITE up to Joey's best thinking, but it's real
close.

[Kozak]

Men always have an opportunity to avoid fatherhood. it's called a zipper, and if they keep it closed it's 100% effective.

[borisbob69]

I agree with the intent of this action: to shed some light on the inequities of the existing situation. The thing that makes me crazy are rulings in several cases I've read about involving men paying child support and then discovering, through DNA testing, that the children are not theirs and the courts ruling that the payments must continue until the child reaches 18.

Talk about getting screwed twice by the same woman...once with consent and then once by the courts without even a kiss!

[Tax-chick]

The attitude, "I deserve the legal right to be as evil and irresponsible as any woman!" doesn't impress me. "Stupid" doesn't even begin to describe it ... it's demonic.

[mlc9852]

Don't you know common sense has no place in this discussion???

[mlc9852]

You equate breaking a window with creating a life?

[papertyger]

Yup, the know-nothings will howl about men keeping their pants on, but this issue is popping up with a frequency that indicates a trend.

They sat still for mothers killing unborn. They'll sit still for legalized bastardy.

[Old_Mil]

We men already have that option. It's called "not banging her in the first place". Works every time it's tried, and you don't need to go through a court battle to do it.

Courts have ordered men to pay child support in cases where married women have had affairs and gotten pregnant with other men. Courts have ordered men to pay child support to single mothers with single mothers who they have started dating and have never married. Unfortunately given the currently legal system, it's not nearly as simple as you might imagine.

The goal of the current family law system is to extort as much money as possible from men, and give it to women.

[Explodo]

You tell me why men should have some kind of right after the act has been accomplished?

I understand the 'Keep your Zipper up" crap...I just don't think it's realistic. BTW, wouldn;t a "Pill for Men" be useful in establishing male reproductive rights?

[papertyger]

The attitude, "I deserve the legal right to be as evil and irresponsible as any woman!" doesn't impress me.

TS.

[Paloma_55]

Only from the standpoint of the approach that suggests someone is not responsible for their actions because of their claimed intent.

Obviously, killing a human being is a billion times more serious.