How come men don't get reproductive rights but are held financially responsible?

Question

Not enough room in the question line, sorry. But I recently read an article in maxim discussing how a man will have to pay for a child once his name is on the birth certificate even if he provides DNA evidence to prove he's not the father (happens more than you think, especially to soldiers sent overseas) yet we get absolutely no say in the birth of the child? Isn't it a a little unfair to not allow the father to keep a baby that is rightfully his but legally require him to pay for the child if it isn't? I just want some good and well thought out answers please, don't be rude or ignorant whatever your viewpoint.

Answer 1

I wrote about this in my ethics class, last semester. It goes beyond just the putting down of a man's name onto a birth certificate. There have been court cases where 12 year boys have been raped by older women, and they still were forced to pay for the child support. One guy, in Louisiana, was raped while passed out. (I didn't believe it at first, either, but there is actually sworn testimony by the girl's friends on how she bragged about having sex with him while he was out cold. There was also Doctor testimony, as well.)

There have also been cases where guys are taking women to court over the right to not pay child support for an unwanted child. To me, that is just wrong. It makes the guy no worse than a woman who has an abortion just because she doesn't want the inconvenience of raising a child. It comes down to personal responsibility on the part of both the man and the woman. I am forever hearing women tell men who complain about a woman's right to choose, "The guy should learn to keep it in his pants." Well, shouldn't women learn to keep their legs closed?

Bottom line -- IF YOU HAVE SEX AND PRODUCE THE START OF LIFE, TAKE CARE OF THAT LIFE!!!

Answer 2

I feel bad for you. You're getting so many awful answers and some good one's from people who seem to be well educated in law. As far as the whole mandatory payment goes, even though DNA evidance has proven that the man is not the father I would only imagine this happening after the child has been born and been raised for a certain amount of time by the father, but still it doesn't sound practical to me. If that truly is happening it doesn't sound legal just as someone else has posted on their answer. Some of these people shouldn't be even posting answers speaking of condoms and keeping it in your pants and keeping legs closed, that is just wrong. I am currently in a situation where I am trying to get child support, not necessarily because I want him to pay and pay pay pay! No, the fact is that when two people get together and they have a baby together, it's not just the womans fault and it's not just the man's fault either, it was an equal responsibility shared and since the mother if she has sole custody is paying the majority of the expenses it is only fair that the man have a certain amount of payments also.
Ok, the child is not his in this situation you're speaking of, yet they are making him pay child support, I don't know why that is happening but if he is listed as the father and being treated like the father and if the baby is rightfully his according to what they are saying the "father" should be able to have rights too. It is said that if the father is on the birth certificate you have rights to visitation Unless the man (or women) is seen unfit, if they are seen unfit and are not in the best interest of the child I don't think it will matter what the rules are, the law in this sense is supposed to make the best decision for the child. Hope I helped some. You might want to do some more research on this, various websites should have plenty of material.

Answer 3

I would be interested in knowing how it is possible that a man would have to pay child support even if the DNA evidence proves the child is not his, my suspicion is that this is not true. I'd like to make the point that there are a LOT of men out there who are NOT paying child support the way they should be, AND that men DO have reproductive rights... they can wear a condom or get a vasectomy. Either way, do not punish the child, the child is not to blame for being born.

Answer 4

Rule 1:

Don't pay a dime without a DNA test if you have ANY doubt. A woman can put anyone's name on a certificate she wants. The problem in Maxim is that he started paying.

In many states the name ISN'T enough, but once he pays even one payment he's "assumed responsibility." After that, he's the father. Period.

Answer 5

Interesting question...if you're worried about it. Wearing a condom solves the whole thing before it even starts. No wonder AIDS is killing so many stupid people. Perhaps Mother Nature has a plan.
If somebody is reckless enough to get into a situation like you describe, and ignorant enough to start paying support without scientific proof of obligation, then they should be required to be financially responsible. This shouldn't be an issue to be seriously discussed, unless by completely irresponsible and daft men.

Answer 6

Sheila, don't be a b*tch.
Cheith, there are plenty of men out there who are paying child support to the state even though they have custody of their children. There was an article in Men's Health about it a year and a half ago, I believe. And a woman has the right to keep her legs closed also.

Answer 7

Because it used to be that women cared for the children and did not work and relied on the husband for the financial support entirely. It was just the custom 30+ years ago.

Today women and men share the responsibilities equally but women don't want things to change with things like child support and alimony.

Answer 8

Each party has different rights at different times.

Both have the same rights pre-pregnancy. So, it's not accurate to say that men don't have any reproductive rights.

Both have the same obligations post-pregnancy. However, under the law if the person is not biologically the parent, and does not voluntarily accept financial responsibility, they cannot legally be forced to accept responsibility. It may happen, but it's not legal.

So, pre-pregnancy and post-birth, there is no difference between the genders.

During the pregnancy, neither has any rights to say what happens to the fetus. Not directly. But the woman has the right to determine if she continues providing life support out of her body to the unborn. Since the man is not (then) providing anything, there is nothing for him to withdraw. That's why he has no say -- he has no involvement in the process.

Answer 9

Well I wouldn't pay for a child is not mine, that's for sure; I would better spend my money on a good lawyer and suing any bi#$# who dare to file such false statement.

Answer 10

wow coragrap or whatever his name is is a flaming liberal . i mean come on you really need to have a fair understanding of abortion before you go and make those crazy statments.
yes sir the woman terminates the pregnancy stop trying to play dirty lawyer dancing games.