Posted: Apr 08, 2014 6:48 pm
mrjonno wrote:scott1328 wrote:I agree that a father should be able to opt out of fatherhood, in exactly the same way a woman can opt out of motherhood.
If the father walking away caused the woman to spontaneously abort and not dump the tax payer (rarely the woman as she won't be able to work) with paying the costs of the baby I might agree.
However as biology doesn't tend to work that way we need to deal with reality here
I am talking about post-delivery. And in the US at least, there is a disparity against the father, if the mother decides to keep the baby, he is saddled with child support. If a woman decides to give up the baby to the state, she is not saddled with child support. (although she could be if the father decides to keep the baby.)
I believe there should be a fixed period of time post-partum where either parent may opt out of parenthood with no strings attach. The child would go to the willing parent, or if none are willing, to the state. (for the father, this fixed period of time would extend from the moment his paternity is acknowledged or established).
And yes, this would be expensive to the state. All the more reason to offer free and easy birth control/abortions to avoid the problem.
Aggripina wrote:I'm not getting into this fight again. Been there. I'm just going to say that if men don't want to be responsible for having sex when they don't want anymore kids, they should have a vasectomy, then they don't have to worry about the babies they don't want to support. And that's all I'm going to say about this derail.
And the woman should have had her tubes tied. Is that really where you want to go?