‘Preglimony’ Would Make Men Financially Responsible for Pregnancies or Abortions

[Egomaniacal1]

I love the last line... “Both partners had a role in the conception; it’s only fair that they should both take responsibility for its economic consequences,” Motro says.

Its obvious this nikka ain't never paid a cent of child support in his life...wait hol' up...*goes google search of Shari Motro*...OHHHHH Professor Motro is a FEMALE!! Should have fukking known

This shyt ain't nothing but pre or extended child support and I love how has she has further reduced men to nothing more than walking income streams to pay for bills all under the guise of equality. GTFOH

Until a discussion about child support can occur which includes a legally defined set of rules for FATHERS RIGHTS, then child support will always be unequal.

 

[Killer Instinct]

 

[kevm3]

But it's a child right? So why shouldn't a man have a say over what happens to his own child then? It's his child just as much as the woman's. Just because she carries it around for 9 months doesn't change that fact, so why should she have sole responsibility to decide whether the child lives or not? Using that 'the process is unequal' logic, I can easily say that since men pay most of the expenses in a marriage and women typically 'marry up', why should women have equal say?

How about another proposal. How about let's make parental testing MANDATORY for all births. If the male or males tested are found not to be the father, she pays the fees for those tests. It's all about ensuring the best for the child, so let's make sure that the child will always know who his or her actual father is.

 

[itsyoung!!]

if this goes through then a bill should be signed the same day saying all pregnancies will require a dna test

after living with someone who managed a club and going there every weekend and promoting there a few times, I dont trust any female as far as pregnancy goes..

 

[kevm3]

lol at all the emotions in this thread. If you're a responsible guy this bit of news doesn't matter in the slightest.

Or maybe if SHE was a responsible woman and doesn't have kids outside of wedlock, this wouldn't matter in the slightest... so why implement something unnecessary if it's all about both parties being responsible?

 

[itsyoung!!]

But it's a child right? So why shouldn't a man have a say over what happens to his own child then? It's his child just as much as the woman's. Just because she carries it around for 9 months doesn't change that fact, so why should she have sole responsibility to decide whether the child lives or not? Using that 'the process is unequal' logic, I can easily say that since men pay most of the expenses in a marriage and women typically 'marry up', why should women have equal say?

How about another proposal. How about let's make parental testing MANDATORY for all births. If the male or males tested are found not to be the father, she pays the fees for those tests. It's all about ensuring the best for the child, so let's make sure that the child will always know who his or her actual father is.

was just postin the same thing

 

[kevm3]

lol man you know if that was a stipulation for this nonsense to pass, it'd be something "too unfair" and something that's not in "the best interests of the kid."

You know what else we need to do to ensure things are in the best interests of the kid? Make receiving child support payments come with accountability. The receiver of child support needs to fill out a form every month and provide a form of proof that those funds were used in a manner that went towards actually supporting the child since we need the government to get more involved in accountability for the best interests of the child... and any amount not spent on the child should be sent back to the payer of the support.

 

[MikelArteta]

Celibacy

 

[Sharp]

A woman would be hardpressed to give up her rights to solely make decisions regarding the child or fetus. This proposal is not geered in that direction. It is merely designed to garner financial support from the father during the pregnancy phase. Just because you pay doesn't mean that you will be involved physically or that she will let you be involved physically.

Visitation and Child Support are two different things that are independent of each other, or in this case Being Involved In The Pregnancy Physically and Financing The Pregnancy are two different things that are independent of each other. I can't see that changing. We can be optimistic though

 

[DrunkenNovice]

How about another proposal. How about let's make parental testing MANDATORY for all births. If the male or males tested are found not to be the father, she pays the fees for those tests. It's all about ensuring the best for the child, so let's make sure that the child will always know who his or her actual father is.

Either everybody went to bed, or you shut the thread down with this one.

I was talking to a woman (White) about this same thing and her stance was that "its not fair because the woman could have made an honest mistake (on thinking one person was the father). Thats just taking more money away from a soon to be single mother"

When I asked how the male should be compensated or made whole if he paid out for a child that turned out not to be his. She said he should either get nothing for not establishing paternity before hand, or the state should compensate him.

A mandatory paternity test can solve a lot of these issues, but its like " I gotta get a paternity test for children I'm having with my WIFE".

 

[DaChampIsHere]

For guys who claim to have all this knowledge about picking the right women and being a man, you all seem pretty scared about things that should never concern you. I don't know if it's because of fear of the female or what but it seems odd.

I think it's great that they will mandate DNA testing beforehand, saving a lot of men time and drama. But after that, men also have to realize that you don't have control over another person's body. A woman's burden is pregnancy and harsh labor, a man's burden is not having jurisdiction over her body. We all know this when we lay down, so why get mad about it when consequence time comes around.

There's no reason a man should be saying he forced to take care of his seed. Imagine if your father felt he was forced to take care of you. I'm not seeing how this feeling is supported unless you grew up that way.

 

[-G$-]

Imagine if your father felt he was forced to take care of you. I'm not seeing how this feeling is supported unless you grew up that way.

 

[innocentdevil]

How about another proposal. How about let's make parental testing MANDATORY for all births. If the male or males tested are found not to be the father, she pays the fees for those tests. It's all about ensuring the best for the child, so let's make sure that the child will always know who his or her actual father is.

It really should be mandatory.

 

[DrunkenNovice]

I think it's great that they will mandate DNA testing beforehand, saving a lot of men time and drama. But after that, men also have to realize that you don't have control over another person's body. A woman's burden is pregnancy and harsh labor, a man's burden is not having jurisdiction over her body. We all know this when we lay down, so why get mad about it when consequence time comes around.

I think this is going to be up for discussion because, when the paternity of a child is established you get fathers rights.

With fathers rights you can deny the mother from moving, or taking the child without your approval. Which is, in a way, limiting her physically.

I can see pre-natal fathers rights legislation being written.

Bible thumping man....but woman wants an abortion. Will he have to pay?

 

[DaChampIsHere]

I think this is going to be up for discussion because, when the paternity of a child is established you get fathers rights.
With fathers rights you can deny the mother from moving, or taking the child without your approval. Which is, in a way, limiting her physically.
I can see pre-natal fathers rights legislation being written.
Bible thumping man....but woman wants an abortion. Will he have to pay?

I think people are getting hung up on the use of the term "child". What if it's just called a fetus, then what?

Even so, I don't think a man should be given the right to endanger a woman's health because wants to pay for an abortion. Something there just seems a little unethical and off. Just because you have rights to a child or fetus doesn't mean you have rights over another person's body.