[This post reproduces a comment written by La Luba, left here on a previous thread. –Amp]
As a practical matter, most women are not going to choose either abortion or adoption, even if they know or suspect that they will receive no child support. My decision to carry my child to term and raise her was unrelated to financial concerns. Look. I’m a working class woman. I already have very little control over most financial concerns. Beyond being a saver, not a spender, I do the best I can with what little I have. Every time I see one of those articles about how much it costs to raise a child, I kick back and laugh. I already know I won’t be bankrolling my girl’s “Harvard education”. If she goes there (or a similar school) it will be on scholarship. I already know I won’t be buying her a car when she turns sixteen; she’ll be walking, biking, or riding the bus like I did at her age.
In other words, I already knew that in the event of birth control failure, I would be a mother, because the alternatives were unthinkable to me. And like my parents, and their parents, and so forth…..I would just do it. Period. There are more women who will follow this route than the others, statistically.
The “choice 4 men” crowd seems to think that no one ever has a conversation before having sex. The biodad of my daughter knew long before any sexual activity was taking place that in the event of birth control failure I would be raising a child, not obtaining an abortion or seeking adoption. He also knew I was using birth control, because he could watch me putting it in! He also had the option of using a condom, which he chose not to do. He never felt at the time that I had somehow “duped” him into fatherhood; but after I ended the relationship because of his newfound meth habit and refusal to enter rehab, he tells all and sundry that he was “duped” into fatherhood (this, despite no effort to obtain child support). Go figure. Many of the divorced women I know were told the same thing by their exes after two, three or more children that were produced in the context of a married relationship. “You just had those kids to get child support!!” None of those women were stay-at-home moms. The “duped” claim seems to be standard operating procedure at the end of a relationship, completely unrelated to actual circumstance.
I don’t see how a “contract” could be enforced. The conversations most people have before sex are not usually witnessed by anyone, and frankly most of the men who are inclined to abandon a pregnant woman and/or any child are not going to admit that beforehand. They’d never get laid, and they know that. Many women who really thought they would consider abortion or adoption find that they really can’t after pregnancy. Breach of contract? No. The bonding process starts before birth, and this process varies amongst women. It’s partly a physical process. Just like pregnancy takes place inside a woman’s body, the bonding process does too.
I still think the safest assumption is that sex between unsterilized men and women can result in pregnancy, even if birth control is being used properly. And that if a child is born, unless both parents agree to give that child up for adoption, both parents should contribute to that child’s well being. Choice 4 Men simply wants the right to strong-arm women into having abortions (or adoptions), either by a presigned contract or by financial fear. Kinda reminds me of Playboy championing abortion rights; hint: they aren’t doing it because they believe in feminism. Hell, “Choice 4 Men” isn’t even advocating responsibility for paying for an abortion.
Very sensible – a voice of reason! In my political science class last year, I was not only the oldest student at over 55 but also probably the same age as the professor. We talked about tricky subjects like abortion and I heard some of the usual right wing claptrap. Then there’s the left wing claptrap. The bottom line is – that women don’t just jump into bed and say -“Oh, well – I can always have an abortion” or “Oh, gee – forgot your condom – well, I can always have an abortion.” As a mother I know that the decision to have an abortion or not is a life changing decision and is not one that most women take lightly. If any man thinks that we need to be protected from ourselves, they need to talk to their own wives and daughters. Somehow, though, I don’t think they do. Or, their own wives and daughters just don’t think that much.
Why thank you Larraine!
I just don’t see any recognition from the “Choice 4 Men” crowd that these decisions are difficult, permanent, and life-changing. And absolutely no recognition that these decisions involve the bodies of women, not just our bank statements. No matter what her decision, a woman’s body will give her a daily reminder for the rest of her life, of the full impact of her decision.
There is also no recognition that women must take physical and medical concerns into reproductive considerations. You’ll find a lot of cavalier references to the “morning after” pill and abortion on the various “choice 4 men” websites, and no acknowledgement that not everyone can or should be using the morning after pill, or other forms of birth control.
Or any clue about what abortion entails. One wonders why men who curl into a ball at the thought of a vasectomy think it’s no big deal to have one’s internal organs vacuumed.
As for the contract issue, it has been heard and dismissed in the past.
This site: http://www.divorcesource.com/research/dl/paternity/99jan1.shtml
has a number of relevant and interesting cases. Espeically the ones about stealing sperm.
Once a child exists, the court does not care about any contract, but looks to the best interests of the child, which would tend to include child support.
When I was pregnant I spoke with the state’s premier adoption lawyers (the ones who have written all this state’s laws regarding adoption procedures) about my options and they stated that well over half of the women and girls they talk to about abortion and adoption end up giving birth to and keeping their babies.
I explored the adoption option until my son was one week old and just couldn’t do it. Now I know I wouldn’t have it any other way. By the time he was born, the bonding experience that you mention was well under way and hasn’t stopped. Go Biology.
These “men’s rights” (AS IF!) groups bug me. Men always have the option of keeping it in their pants. Compared to the physical and psychological cost of pregnancy to women, child support payments are a bargain.
Thanks for posting that link, Cara. I already knew about the article, but I couldn’t remember where I had read it. I was going to post it here. It’s an excellent article that dismantles all the usual Choice4Men arguments about “paternity fraud.”
Oops, I accidently posted a trackback to Hugo’s blog. Barry, would you please remove my previous comment. Sorry. ;)
I meant to post this – I wrote a post about Choice4Men on my blog. It’s here.
Unfortunately, I’m just in the position of discovering how unpleasant “Oh, you can always have an abortion” sounds from someone who allegedly loves me and has my best interests at heart. He actually turned round and told me “Now you know you can get pregnant, abort this one and try again in a few years’ time when it’s more convenient.” Just like that, as if expecting me to go through that upheaval for his convenience was standard operating procedure.
When it comes to pregnancy, an alarming number of men don’t have, or want, a clue.
Ooh, I’m actually going to do a huge paper on men’s choice under the law, so I’m gathering these links. I do wonder what the shot/pill for men will do, since women still bear the physical, emotional, and most (if not all of) the financial burden. And Barry, as someone who works in a women’s clinic (*ahem*) I have seen a few people who HAVE been sterilized come in with unplanned pregnancies.
I agree about the conversations that happen before sex, and I’d like to note that any man who does not wish to conceive a child and be responsible for that child’s care need only abstain from having vaginal intercourse.
That seems fair enough, don’t you think?
I don’t think you can paint all those who support an idea of choice for men as people who completely disregard the biological and emotional implications of pregnancy in women. Many do — myself included.
To me the issue of pregnancy and the biological fact of the woman carrying the child to term are irrelevant to an argument of choice for men, since it is a basic difference that no amount of debate or wishing will make disappear. Up until the baby’s born, it’s the woman’s choice and hers alone. I support that.
However, I see it as a wholly different question once the child is born and among us. From the opposite side of the debate — that against choice for men — I have yet to hear anything that even resembles a degree of equality between men and women, fathers and mothers. In the end what I hear is a fair amount of anecdotal stories about terrible fathers, the emotional pain of women (with an utter disregard of the emotional pain of men) and a view of paternal responsibility that begins and ends with money and a paternal right that begins and ends with the right to keep “it” in one’s pants.
The reality of it is that “it” wasn’t kept in the pants, there was a willing receiver of “it”, and that there is now a living child that is among us needing care and that that child perhaps has rights that extend beyond financial concerns. If we were truly concerned with equality we would be concerned with the cvil rights of the child and how those are inextricably linked to the rights and responsibilities of BOTH parents.
I think that a big part of what’s missing here is an acknowledgement of the immense constellation of legal obligations and penalties the father faces with regard to things that happen to regular responsible people all the time. Obligations and penalties that the mother in these cases simply doesn’t face — things like the Bradley Amendment among others.
I’m a married man and have one daughter. The basic difference legally between me and that other guy is that my responsibilities to her are not defined by a specific amount of money each month that’s been set by some judge who knows neither of us. Sure I provide for all of her needs and most of her reasonable wants, but that in the end is the most minute part of what real parental responsibility is and is certainly the least reliable in the long run. I mean, I started her college fund when she was 1 1/2 just in case I don’t always make good money!
Sorry to have to say it, but the arguments counter to choice for men that I hear around here simply seem to reaffirm the belief that women don’t want equal partners in parenting. They want really good assistants.
Up until the baby’s born, it’s the woman’s choice and hers alone.
Actually, no, it’s not. There is no right to have an abortion “up until the baby’s born.”
women don’t want equal partners in parenting. They want really good assistants.
Is that how your wife feels about your daughter? Don’t extrapolate your marital issues to the rest of us, please.
I suspect if more men wanted to be equal partners in parenting, more women would let them. Of course there will always be women who see it as their role and ‘gatekeep’–just as there will always be men who think it’s *their* job to be breadwinner and refuse to cooperate with their wife working outside the home.
But painting all women as not really wanting equal partners is an awful handy excuse. “Gosh, I’d just love to be changing half the diapers and taking a sick toddler on an emergency grocery-store run, but you know, my wife doesn’t really want me to be an equal partner.”
I think unmarried women who have children should be 100% responsible for raising and caring for the child. If she wants the father to contribute, and if the father wants to contribute (and they should both want that), they should marry. But if either doesn’t want to marry, then the woman should be on her own. She knew when she had sex that she wasn’t married.
Mythago-
You took nearly everything I said out of context and then made a personal slur. Nice debating tactics.
Alright let me rephrase that: since you got me technically that I can’t know what every woman wants from the father of her children and there are many who seek equal partnership I’ll say it like this–
I haven’t heard a single argument from the women against choice for men that sounds anything like equality. Most of the arguments these folks put forth say they want men to be responsible parents in terms of finances and then want them to stay at arm’s length involving pretty much anything else.
Emily, it does seem fair enough, unfortuantely it will not get you off the hook, should your partner decide to use your sperm anyway.
Where is a birth control pill/drug for men when you need one…
You seem to have the same attitude as most lawmakers and judges… which is exactly why fathers don’t have the rights they deserve.
Btw, your argument works both ways. Don’t BOTH parties usually realize it when they are not married to each other? Or is it okay, in your view, for only men to have sex outside of marriage? (Be careful with that one… if you say YES, then unmarried men have no choice but to have sex with other men…)
Nice debating tactics.
Did you not get that you were insulting every woman with children here when you said that women don’t really want equal partners but helpers–in effect calling us liars (since we *say* we want equal partners but, y’know…)?
Did you forget that your wife is a woman? When you say you are married and then make comments about what women want, presumably you are saying something about your wife not really wanting a partner. You insulted her, dude, not me.
I haven’t heard a single argument from the women against choice for men that sounds anything like equality.
It’s hard to hear things when you wouldn’t listen if they were said.
I think there is some truth to that. The fact that some fathers are bad should have nothing to do with the rights of individual fathers. And we, as feminists, never accept the argument that “well, you made the choice when you agreed to have sex!” when it is applied to women. True, only women can become pregnant. Craichead sounds like he supports our rights there. But there’s a lot more to it than just the pregnancy.
Furthermore, I think the focus on fathers as merely financial providers is misguided. That of course is not the fault of feminists! Society as a whole tends to view dads as breadwinners and moms and nurturers. It is that mentality that keeps men broke and women in the kitchen. The last thing we need are laws that reinforce this misguided attitude.
And we, as feminists, never accept the argument that “well, you made the choice when you agreed to have sex!”? when it is applied to women.
You, as a feminist, need to get your arguments straight.
The “you should kept it zipped” argument is applied to women as an excuse for forbidding them from having abortions. It’s not about responsibility; it’s about punishing women for having sex. It’s the logical equivalent of saying that if you break your leg skiing, you can’t have a cast because you took the risk of a broken leg.
But heterosexual sex DOES have a risk of pregnancy. And a woman who is not willing to prepare for that eventuality isn’t really mature enough to be having sex.
I agree it’s about punishing women for having sex, but I disagree that it’s only used for the abortion argument. Some conservatives are very willing to persecute unwed mothers who didn’t choose abortion. Take a look at Lubbuck’s comments.
But what if we took away a mother’s right to give her baby up for adoption? Or what if we allowed her to give the child up, but forced her to pay child support? Would we say, “well, she should have thought of that before she had sex”? I don’t think so.
Believe me, the choice for men argument is a tough one for me. But I cannot find away to disagree with it and still be consistent with my other values.
In most states, mothers don’t have a unilateral right to give up a baby for adoption; if they want to give their baby up for adoption and the father wants to keep the baby, then there is no adoption.
So what you’re calling “a mother’s right” is actually a right shared by both parents.
If the mother doesn’t want the kid, and the father does, then the mother damned well should have to pay child support. And yes, she should have thought of that before having sex (or, if abortion is an available choice to her, before choosing to bear a child).
I’m sorry that men can’t abort, but have you considered that men also gain huge advantages by not being able to be pregnant? Yes, men and women’s situation in regard to childbearing isn’t identical; only women can get pregnant (with all the problems that entails), and only women can have abortions. Women have a choice men do not, but women also pay large costs that men do not. Why is that so unfair – and why does relieving men of a burden, while not doing anything at all for women, make things fairer?
You’re creating a special right for men – a right to unilaterally abandon a born, living child, and have no responsibliity for it at all – that you’re not creating for women. Women don’t get to have a born child and unilaterally decide that they don’t want any responsibility for it. How is that fair?
But what if we took away a mother’s right to give her baby up for adoption? Or what if we allowed her to give the child up, but forced her to pay child support?
As Amp already pointed out, we have taken away the mother’s “right” to give her baby up for adoption. A few states allow unmarried mothers to do so in limited circumstances–otherwise, sorry, but the woman doesn’t have that right. You’re also pointing to a burden men don’t have–if a child is adopted, its biological parents do not pay child support.
I really don’t understand why you’re basing support for Choice for Men by arguing that women have rights they don’t, in fact, possess.
I’m not afraid to admit my ignorance on that one. I was under the impression a mother could give a baby up for adoption when there is no father named on the birth certificate. My bad if I am wrong.
True. But I think a father who has little or no visitation rights, but is paying child support, has basically “given a child up” while still paying support. That’s one opinion I’m strong about here, and that is that custody is almost always awarded to women (and that’s largely due to gender stereotypes).
Okay, that’s consistent and I will sit on that for a while. Like I said last week, I’m not completely set in my ways on this. I just hadn’t heard an argument that was convincing enough.
Yes! That’s exactly why this issue isn’t easy for me. I empathize with being knocked up, and also with feeling like I have no control over my own destiny.
I was under the impression a mother could give a baby up for adoption when there is no father named on the birth certificate.
Remember “Baby Jessica”?
But I think a father who has little or no visitation rights, but is paying child support, has basically “given a child up”? while still paying support.
The solution to that problem is fixing unfair custody awards–not granting men rights women don’t possess. And no, limited visitation is not “giving up” a child. Legal custody and physical custody are different issues, and neither is like adoption.
Late to the party, but I just wanted to clarify something:
I’m a first mom (please don’t say “birth mother”, it is so insulting.) The “adoption option” was unthinkable to me, too. However, I was never given a choice. I was forced by my parents and the church. We live in a society that punishes women for having premarital sex, slut shames, and punishes poverty – and it is not more evident anywhere than in our blase, casual attitude towards adoption. I am a firm believer that adoption is a “necessary” evil *created* by a patriarchal society. That said, can we call something a necessary evil when we have created the need? I think not.
For my part, I refuse to repeat the “Adoption Myth” that wreaked absolute havoc on my mental and emotional health for so long. Yanno, “adoption is a wonderful thing for families that can’t concieve and want to share their loving homes with children who are otherwise unwanted and unloved!” Or, “of course you love your baby and want what’s best for it, that’s why you should choose adoption!”
(See the problem with the Myth? It totally contradicts itself.)
My views aren’t popular, but they are 100% true. Too bad more first mothers who will speak to me privately voicing the same feelings aren’t strong enough to withstand the criticism I get every time the “Adoption Myth” comes up. But I speak up as a victim of the Adoption Myth as much as I do when I see Rape Culture rear its ugly head.
Besides, they’re rooted in the same patriarchal, sexist thinking, anyway.
/TL;DR