This is not personal for me...you are the one who thinks that women are out to trap you into becoming a father.
The LAWs as they are presently written, support women regardless of the condition in which the woman finds herself to be pregnant. The husband, without regard to whom the father is, or without regard to his desires to procreate is FORCED to comply with 'the best interests of the child'.
What do you mean the laws as they are presently written? It has always been that way- men who get married are presumed to have agreed to have children with their wives. The marital presumption is a common law rule- we didn't have DNA tests back in the 19th century, remember?
The fact that he may have taken an active role in preventing the pregnancy from occuring have no legal weight. The fact that he may not be the father of the children is inconsequential to the court.
Name a time in history when men could get out of paternity within marriage by claiming that they were "tricked". How would they prove it anyway, since no form of birth control is 100%?
There are cases where a wife obtains frozen sperm that her husband had put away before his vasectomy. Now, before serving her husband with divorce papers; she obtains the frozen sperm and impregnates herself. Thus, she has secured 25% of her husband's income for the next 18 years. The husband has NO ROLE in this.
How many times has this happened, once? If you don't want any more children, you don't freeze your sperm and you certainly don't let someone else have access to it.
Now, what part of this do you not understand?
The part where you think that every woman is some conniving b.... just dying to have your baby by any means neccessary. And that even then a man would be completely blind to her true personality prior to marriage.
No, I simply stated that the laws on the books are patentily unfair. And that is at least a contributing factor why many men are refusing to get married.
How would they prove it anyway, since no form of birth control is 100%?
You are side-stepping the point. Lies, deceit and deception are weapons that have, are and will continue to be used against men. The laws are not concerned with these in the least. If roles were reversed, say if a husband fathered a child out of wedlock with a mistress; the reversal would find the jilted wife paying 25% of her income to the mistress's child; regardless of whether her marriage ended in divorce or not.
How many times has this happened, once?
How many times it occured is not the issue. The fact that it occurred is the issue. Whenever a system is in place that allows one party to deceive and defraud another party, without redress; the system is broken. Whether the system abuses one person, or a hundred million; the system remains broken.