Should men have to pay for babies they wanted aborted? Just some food for thought?

Question

Ok so there are a lot of people out there who are against abortion, which is understandle. It all depends on your veiws of the life forming inside the womb and a womans right to choose. So I was thinking, when an unexpected pregnancy comes about and the woman wants to keep the baby but the man wants her to abort it, should he still have to pay child support and whatnot. If the male really did not want anything to do with the pregnancy and the baby, why should he pay.

Please don't jump all over me for asking this. I was just pondering it, and would like to know what other people think.

Answer 1

Yes he should. He was a part of the process that makes the baby, so he is financially responsible for the baby, even if he didn't want it. It is not the man that decides to have an abortion or not, it is the woman, and no one else.

If he is responsible enough to have sex, he should be responsible enough to pay the consequences.

Answer 2

Are you suggesting that a man should just be able to say "I don't want it." and not pay a cent to the kid? That's got to be wrong. Abortions are not free, so even if he doesn't want the kid, he should pay that much money towards it.

I feel that if a couple have sex before they have talked about how they might deal with children, they are doing something wrong. You don't just walk into a car dealership and drive off in a lexus without talking about financing. Well, maybe some people do, but they tend to wind up in prison pretty quickly.

If a man honestly thinks that by not wanting a child, he can keep from having a child, if he uses protection, and if he pays for an abortion when it's still possible to get one, and if he can proove in court that he's done all this, then maybe he shouldn't have to pay for child support.

But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that sex can cause children. Maybe he could get a break on the payments in proportion to how hard he tried to keep her from getting pregnant. That might be a little fairer, and would certainly help to promote the use of contraceptives.

Here's a question: Why is it always the man who pays child support, and the woman who keeps the baby? Is that fair? I know a lot of guys that want kids more than their girls.

Answer 3

If the male wanted nothing to do with the baby or the pregnancy, he should never have had sex with the woman... If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

On the other hand, a man SHOULD have a say in the decision to abort IF he wants to keep the child. If the mother never wants to care for it (90% of abortions are for reasons of convenience), the man should still have the option to care for the child himself, provided he is a fit parent. Otherwise, there is always adoption.

To summarize: if a man impregnates a woman, he is also responsible for the child, whether he wishes to be or not. The woman should not have to endure the consequences of her actions while the man gets off scott free.

Answer 4

Well, I see the child as the greater treasure and the man has already lost more than he will ever know. but if a woman can give her baby more by going after the *** holes money, then go for it. The man that wants to kill his child is a looser of not only the treasures of life, but of his money too. Thats what happens to a looser. if he did not want a child, then he should have thought about it before he use the power to create one! If you do not know how to use something, then don't use it! Like a gun in the hands of a child is the power of sex! once you kill someone, it is too late to say I'm sorry!

Answer 5

Why should he pay? You tell me what's cheaper: $3.99 on a box of condoms, or $300. -+ on a painful abortion?

Besides, it takes two to tango. He created half the problem, he should pay at least half the procedure, albeit most would argue that's not worth the mental/ physical anguish caused to the woman as a result...but before he coughs up the dough, it's only fair a DNA test proves that he is truly the father of the child. Both parties should eat this charge.

Sounds complicated, maybe people should stick to 3 methods of birth control if they can't handle any of this.

Answer 6

If she also wants to abort and he wants to pay, then that's fine. But a woman should never be forced into pregnancy or abortion against her will.

If she wants to keep it or abort it, the choice is completely hers. Women have rights in the US. She is the one that has it in her body and has to labor in creating it.

Women are people too. Women are full human beings. Women have the right to life, liberty, and property. Although, these rights are new to women in the last 90 years. Women gained the right to vote in 1920 and women gained the right to their body in 1972.

Answer 7

Yes on ther other hand a man should be able to stop a woman from aborting his child if she does not want it and he does. He should be granted custody of the child and the woman should have to pay towards its support. The only expection about this (abortion decision) should be if the pregnacy poses a severe threat to the womans life & health

Answer 8

Once a child is born, it is entitled to the support of BOTH parents, wanted or not. The abortion laws are quite fair, imo... The person taking all the risks gets to make all the decisions regarding aborting or not aborting.
That being said, I find it incredibly foolish for a woman to bear ANY chld she herself cannot provide sole support for...

Answer 9

The answer is 'YES' but, abortion on demand should not be legal or at least should be coupled with mandatory sterilization for the both of them! Abortion is a 'mistake' that should only be aloud once and men who do not own up to their responsibilities should have to PAY!

Answer 10

First of all, I'm against abortion, unless carrying the baby is putting baby and mother in life danger..

In my opinion, if the woman wants to keep it, and he doesnt, it should be HER decision, not his.. But if both decide to abort it, then yes, I think he should pay for part of it..