Rights of the father.

i totally agree.
Both should be using protection however the pill isn't 100% effective but if a condom doesn't split then surely there's no chance of getting pregnant

Yes the women is the one who will get pregnant but ultimately the act of bring about a child ( at least in the traditional sense ) requires his action. Doesn't it make far more sense for it to be both their responsibility.

That isn't the reality though is it. All women are capable of earning a living, if they choose to have a child knowing that the father will not support them financially that's their decision.

The pill is more effective then the condom. The problem is condoms do split, when used perfectly, condoms are 98% effective but typically they are only 85% effective. The pill is 99% effective.



I completely agree it should should be an equal responsibility thing ideally. But in the end it's going to be the woman who's going to get pregnant. In a one-night-stand type scenario where they may never meet again, it's the woman who looses out in the case of an unwanted pregnancy. Makes more sense to protect yourself then to rely on a stranger to.

Honestly though, I think most sexual couples (is that even a real phrase?) can be trusted to decide for themselves what's gonna work best for them. There's not one size fits all solution with this (especially not with condoms heh heh). If they aren't prepared for the possible risks of sex, they shouldn't be having it.

Father should and can walk away if they don't want anything to do with the kid.
But the father should be taken responsibility, should have put a condom on.

Why is it the fathers responsibility to use protection? The woman's the one who at risk of getting pregnant, why shouldn't she take responsibility?

1) Man is at risk of having a child he doesn't want
2) Man is at risk of contracting any of a number of unpleasant STIs if he doesn't routinely use condoms with new partners.

That isn't the reality though is it. All women are capable of earning a living, if they choose to have a child knowing that the father will not support them financially that's their decision. Women get pregnant, contraception is their responsibility, that can include insisting that the man wears a condom, but the buck stops with women when they decide what contraception they're going to use as they're the ones who get pregnant.

Contrary to popular belief, I personally can't see how contraception is anybody responsibility apart from that of the person who gets pregnant. It's their body, their responsibility. Of course there are things men can do here, but as I see it it is the responsibility of the woman to say what contraception she'd like the man to be using if they're to have sex (if he lies and has sex without a condom for example then that's a different issue).

What isn't the reality? The Tax payer is going to foot the bill if all Child support stops or Children will end up having sub-standard care.

And it is also the Father's decision to have sexual intercourse or not bother with contraception in the knowledge that Pregnancy is a possibility.

Of course a women could insist on him wearing a condemn but why shouldn't he blew responsibility for not making such a decision himself. Why if she fails to require a condom should she be the sole responsible for supporting the potential child, he has after all engaged in the action that produces the chi,d knowing that such an event would be a possibility.

You say ideally they both bear responsibility so why not in the real world. After all he should be in a position to think, hey unprotected sex she could get pregnant or transfer of disease I'm gonna a wear a condemn even if she hasn't asked me to. Isn't his lack of action him being neglegent as well as her.

Instead of slinging blame back and forth you show some maturity and just put something on bloody end of it despite what she says.

Because the real world isn't ideal. Are you going to force him to think like that? Believe it or not, there are selfish people out there. The point is you can't rely on a stranger for your own protection, your safety is your responsibility.

If someone's acting like a dick and refusing to use contraception, don't have sex with them. It's that simple.

Because it's the womans body, she's the one who gets pregnant, she's the one who is responsible for taking necessary precautions. Sex isn't something that just happens to women. They are active participants in it, they know the risks, and if they hypothetically knew that the man they're sleeping with will not be there to financially support her and her child if she does get pregnant, then THAT is the risk SHE takes when she has sex.

And what about sperm jacking and women that lie about being on the pill?

I agree with this. I would say that there is an exception in the event of a man lying about the fact he's using a condom, etc.

That bit there isn't necessarily the reality. It's going to be true in some cases, but it's certainly not going to be true in all the cases.

Also that second argument is lousy (for some reasons that I've expanded upon above), but also because that's not the standard we hold women to is it? If it were the abortion debate would have been settled overnight.

And what about sperm jacking and women that lie about being on the pill?

But the reverse can be applied, he knows she might get pregnant, he knows a child may result and the he may be expected to provide financial aid.

So it seems the thread about the women who was tricked into aborting her pregnancy as devolved into a debate about what rights the father should or shouldn't have when it comes to children.

And by rights I mean should the father have involvement ( legally ) on whether the baby is kept or not
Should the father have a right to walk away without consequence to his actions.
Should the mother have a right to obligate the father to pay child support.
Forgot to mention this first time round but people have brought it up, should the father be obligated to have emotional/practical involvement in the child's life separate of financial support,
Basically potential legal obligations of the father.

I myself am undecided on the issue . My present thinking is over idealistic and could never be used for a real legal system.