Trying to avoid complaining, here is my input: why complain if you do not have a solution or offer a solution. Here is my observation and possiblt solution.
The story presented today (April 21, 2006), regarding the legal issue of the constitutional choices that are not applied to men when it comes to a woman’s pregnancy are most certainly interesting. I see this from many perspectives. When I was 18 years old, I am 42 now, I made the choice to NOT become a father. I made this choice not because I do not like children, or feel I would make a bad father. I made this choice because I saw in our society too many people getting involved in telling the parent how they are or are not to discipline or train their children. I had no desire to be put in jail for spanking a child, or for what religion I choose to bring my child up in. I did not want to deal with the possibility of being hauled into court because some idiotic over-enthusiastic teacher though I abused my child if the child fell off his/her swing or sliding board. If fact I often baby-sit for my wife’s cousins and other people.
Having said that, I have contended for at least 20 years, that should not be held to child support in the event a woman becomes pregnant. There are many men who upon finding out their partner became pregnant would want the child and want to raise the child, however men have no choice in any aspect of the child once the child is conceived.
Regardless of whether the man wants the child of not, the woman hold the complete choice on terminating the pregnancy or not. Many women, not most, will crank out kids receive child support, and state assistance for the quantity of children they produce.
I am not by any means saying the child should become a second thought; however, by forcing one parent to cough up cash when they have no choice in the disposition of the child is irresponsible to the child itself. Of what benefit is it to the child to grow up knowing the father hates the child, or resents the child just to force the father to pay some monthly amount for child support.
If both people are putting the child first, the scenario should probably unfold like this, and there would be many variations I am sure.
Scenario 1
- Woman becomes pregnant.
- Woman opposes abortion and Woman chooses to carry the baby to the full term.
- Woman has 3 choices at that point.
- Ask Man for support and to stay involved in the child’s life
i. Man can accept or not, if the man chooses not to pay and be involved he must sign and relinquish all parental rights.
- Raise the child as a single parent bearing full responsibility for the raising of the child.
- Place the child up for adoption.
In this scenario the child is still the focal point and is the primary focus for who will be the parent(s) in the child’s life.
Scenario 2
- Woman becomes pregnant.
- Woman decides she wants to abort the child.
- Man decides he wants the child.
- Man must pay all medical care for the woman during the course of the pregnancy
- Can choose at the time of birth to become part of the child’s life and pay child support, or relinquish all parental rights to the father.
- Man can place the child up for adoption.
In this scenario again the woman and the man who do bear responsibility for the life that was brought into the world still are placing the welfare of the child first, by determining the best course of action to see to it the child has parents and has parents who can raise the child.
Scenario 3
- Neither Potential Parents want the child so a mutual decision is made to abort the child, and both must pay 50% of the costs associated by default, or a sum negotiated between the two people.
I personally am strongly opposed to abortion at any cost, however under our current legal structure abortion is available.
I also realize that these are only 3 scenarios of the multitude that could occur; however, one thing to consider, which may seem a reach, but, still is important to consider in how our laws work.
If a woman is raped, and a child is produced. I have yet to hear of a single case where the convicted rapist was forced to pay child support. Why is that? In that case the woman made the choice to carry the child and takes on the sole responsibility to either raise the child or put the child up for adoption. Most likely the woman does not want the rapist being part of the child’s and her life which is obvious. I have not seen where the courts order the convicted rapist to pay child support after they get out of prison.
Regards,
(Original Air Date: 04/21/06) Being a parent is hard enough, but what happens when Mom and Dad can't agree on how many kids to have, how to raise 'em and how to get ‘em to sleep? Sometimes, it can lead to an all-out baby war! Matt's baby battle ended up in front of a judge and made headlines. He was ordered to pay child support for the baby he had with his ex-girlfriend, but he says he shouldn't have to cough up the money because she told him she wasn't able to get pregnant, and he told her he didn't want to be a father. He, his attorney, and the director of the National Center for Men discuss the lawsuit they filed, known as “Roe v. Wade for Men,” arguing that men should have a constitutional right to avoid fatherhood. Next, Dan says even though he and his wife, Lisa, already have four children, he wants just one more. Lisa has been pregnant on and off for 11 years and says she's closed for baby business. Will Dr. Phil help Dan see Lisa's point that four is enough? Then, a frustrated husband is camping out on the roof of his house and living in a tent. He refuses to go back to his bedroom until his wife moves their kids out of their bed and starts paying more attention to him. Can Dr. Phil get him to come down the ladder? Plus, a sleep expert has a simple method for getting your child to sleep through the night. See the plan in action! Share advice and talk about the show here.
