This might surprise you -

[kyburg]

But if a guy wants to opt out of child support, before the child is born?

As long as ending the pregnancy is an option, no questions asked -

Sure.

As long as this decision is made before the child is born - and can be made before the child is born.

No, state and local governments. You can't go back to someone who inadvertantly acted as sperm donor and you want to recoup your losses when she showed up for assistance, five years or more later. You can refuse services - until she can't take care of the child and then remove the child and terminate her parental rights, too. You could, you know.

Boy, that'll show 'em. But no, it's not a matter of handing over the kid to the second parent once the first one's been tagged as incompetent.

(I'm of two minds about having to notify the second parent when the first one didn't, once a child is in care. I could ask the DCFS social worker about how they approach that now. Something tells me they don't just find a DNA match and snap, the job's over.)

You may want to have children.

I'm telling you. It's not your right to have children, in spite of being able to provide for them or not.

If you won't think about someone other than yourself in matters like this - I don't want you make decisions for someone who won't even be visible to society until school age.

Children are not a necessity in today's world - they are a luxury that has to be measured in their impact. That's harsh, but that's also true.

But mind you. You can't have one without the other.

You want to make it possible for men to opt-out?

You have to make it possible for women to opt-out as well.

Ultimately, you're dealing with an equation that has no room for the unborn - and when people are considering these steps, there never will be room.

Deal with the reasons a woman needs an abortion, folks. Making it illegal won't do a dick thing about it otherwise.

I don't think it's fair to make men responsible for pregnancies they didn't want.

And it's not fair to make women responsible for pregnancies they didn't want, either.

Comments

[murphymom.livejournal.com]

Well said. (stands and applauds)

[vertamae.livejournal.com]

Are you honestly saying it's not fair for people engaging in consensual sex to be expected to use BIRTH CONTROL if they don't want children?

[yasha-chan.livejournal.com]

Birth control doesn't always work 100% of the time, nor is it available. I don't know any poor people that can afford $5-$7 a box when paying for rent in a stretch. And also, sometimes people try to "oops" their partner, I've heard of men and women poking holes in condoms and crap like that.

It'd be nice if people didn't have (unprotected) sex when they couldn't afford children or didn't want them, but sadly that's not the way the world works.

[vertamae.livejournal.com]

I think that's a cop out. No one who is not raped is 'having' to have sex. And if children are not desired there is birth control. I think there are very few people in this world who do not know that sex is how babies are made. That's the way the real world works.

[yasha-chan.livejournal.com]

I can tell you right now that in the "real world" a lot of (admittedly younger) people do NOT know how the body works, or how to prevent pregnancy. My own sex education in a public, California school was very vague, birth control was certainly not covered and I graduated high school in 2000.

In the United States, it's a social stigma that the female partner should be responsible for birth control. It's not "manly" to wear a condom, it "feels better" to "go raw" and a "bitch that doesn't let you is just a bitch". Also, birth control pills are only about 80%ish effective, condoms aren't 100% either. Even men who have had a vasectomy have randomly had their body heal and begin producing sperm again.

To put it bluntly, shit happens. Yes, it'd be wonderful if 100% of people were responsible 100% of the time. It'd be great if people weren't ignorant of how to care for their bodies. It'd be wonderful if even more people weren't brainwashed to think that sex and birth control was morally wrong. I'm not holding out for this though, because it will never happen.

[moropus.livejournal.com]

A girl I know has just informed me that there is an idea going around here right now that you can't get pregnant if you have sex standing up because gravity will make the sperm fall right back out. She also told me kids are using sandwich bags and similar items as condoms. Thanks to GWB and his 'stay a virgin' plan, ideas like this are being hatched. There is no Planned Parenthood in this Bible Belt town.

She wanted to know if I thought any of these ideas would work because she's afraid to talk to her parents and afraid of what they would do if she got pregnant. At least she asked somebody for education.

[lysana.livejournal.com]

Those ideas existed when I was in school and predate my birth by decades. They're merely lingering, not being invented. That said, they're still far too true and painful to think about.

[figmo.livejournal.com]

Alas, birth control is not 100% effective. That is how the real world works. I have a friend who got pregnant at age 49 while on The Pill.

It happens. People can be responsible and unwanted pregnancies can happen.

[the-siobhan.livejournal.com]

Yep.

I got pregnant twice on the pill. I was a pill baby, so was my sister, and there was another sibling miscarried while my mother had an IUD. I have two nephews, one conceived while my sister was on the pill, the other while she was using a diaphragm. A friend recently got pregnant while on the pill and using a condom - the condom broke and the test came back positive.

"Birth control" is a misnomer. It should be called "birth improving your odds".

[dandelion-diva.livejournal.com]

Yup. I was a birth control baby (foam, which is why my mother turned to me one day and said "Don't use foam!". No context or anything...I'm sure she thought there was, but I was in the middle of nowhere without a map. She told me the full story soon after.), and a friend of mine was not only a birth control baby (the pill) but so was his sibling (condom).

"Birth control" is like "safe sex". Not completely accurate.

Gessi

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

Pardon me for sematics here, but technically abortion IS birth control. It is not, however, a contraceptive.

There are also people out there who want contraception to be made illegal because they claim THAT is immoral as well. Some pharacists are apparently refusing to fill birth control prescriptions sith the same argument. What will you do about them?

C.

[vertamae.livejournal.com]

Agreed, abortion is birth control, but in the extreme. I just think that birth control is the ultimate responsibility of both partners. Being sexually active requires responsibility. I have met women who have had multiple abortions, simply because they were irresponsible. To me, this should not be acceptable. What should be the alternative? Not banning abortion, certainly, but we need to take responsibility for our actions.

I think if a pharmacy won't fill a prescription of BC pills, find one who will, or visit a Planned Parenthood office, or seek out another method, or abstain. What will I do about them? I? I am not a lawmaker, just a concerned citizen, and a woman, and a person who has had a LOT of sex in her life, and a woman who has never been pregnant, nor had an abortion.

I am pro-choice, and pro-contraception. And I believe there is no one in this country having consensual sex who is seriously unable to take responsibility for the consequences of his or her actions.

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

What if people don't know about the alteratives? Abstinence Only education is the NORM these days, thanks to GWB. There are also those radical Christian groups who also do not believe in birth control, saying that will lead to more kids having sex. Therefore, education is being denied them as well. And if you do not know about contraception but engage in sex, what other alternative is there?

I have heard of examples where teenagers had sex, the girl got pregnant and resorted to things like deliberately being thrown down stairs, or having her boyfriend hit her in the abdomen to attempt to cause an abortion. And this was within the last 5 years.

Also keep in mind that the ONLY 100% effective type of contraception is abstinence. Contraception DOES fail. There are also examples of women being in abusive relationships and being brainwashed by the men in their lives to have sex with them without any sort of birth control. Don't think that can happen? One of my best friends from high school was from a fundamentalist Christian family and had a boyfriend who was mentally and emotionally abusive who also refused to use birth control. it can and does.

I am also pro-choice and pro-contraception, but I also see that abortion IS necessary to remain legal. I am also of the view that if a woman wants an abortion badly enough, she will get one, legal or not. And if abortion is made *illegal*, there will be back alley abortions which will result in the death of the woman as well as the embryo/fetus.

C.

[yasha-chan.livejournal.com]

Thank you for saying these things. It means a lot, especially coming from someone who *wants* kids. Even people I know who were very pro-choice and such tend to make a 180 after the kids are born. "ONOES THINK ABOUT THE BABIES".

I think we are more than anyone else. Those babies become people and THEN who's there for them? Who protects them and sees someone gets to love them and properly take care of them?

Forcing kids on people who don't want them is bad for the unhappy parents and worse for the unwanted child. Then there's the corrolation between abortions being banned/unobtainable and the rise of violent crime. I wonder why >.>

[bluemoonpnw.livejournal.com]

"I don't think it's fair to make men responsible for pregnancies they didn't want.
And it's not fair to make women responsible for pregnancies they didn't want, either."

Many hoots and much applause.
From someone who did NOT know how babies were made when she made the first one, but DID successfully use birthcontrol after she found out. It's no accident that there's a decade between my sons.

[vertamae.livejournal.com]

Just out of curiosity, how old were you when you were sexually active, but didn't how how babies were made, thus resulting in your first pregnancy?

[bluemoonpnw.livejournal.com]

Just past sixteen. Almost exactly 9 months after my first menses.
It was a different world and sex didn't exist in the one I grew up in. I had a rough idea, but didn't really understand the hows and whys.

There were no sex ed classes and nobody gave me any information, and it really wasn't available then unless you knew where and how to find it.
I didn't.

[vertamae.livejournal.com]

Wow, that's pretty intense. I got my first period at age 11, and I'd already been reading books on sex and Playboy magazines since age 9 or 10. I had sex education right about the same time both in school and at home, so I guess I should consider myself lucky. But, though I had my first intercourse at age 14, I didn't use any form of birth control until age 17, so it's just by luck that I never became pregnant. Except... there was a miscarriage at age 20. But I hadn't even known I was pregnant.

We all live and learn, I know that. But I still think we need to take responsibility when we create life.

[bluemoonpnw.livejournal.com]

I was raised by parents that were born in 1910 & 12. I think mom thought she'd give me "the talk" when I got married. I was raised out in the desert and didn't have friends, at least nobody that would risk telling me stuff. There was no sex ed. During my pregnancy I had NO advice or help from anybody except some (limited) from my doctor. My mom had never been pregnant, and none of my cousins or aunts would tell me anything.
I did find out some basics about half-way through my first trimester, (I had no idea I was pregnant at the time) and stopped having sex when I realized that I WAS risking pregnancy.
I did take responsibility when I found that I was pregnant. He's in his thirties, lives in LA and is doing well. He was a happy and well behaved child, and he did get the education he needed to be safe and not have unplanned children, in fact out of the dozen friends he hung out with most from Jr High through HS, he's one of two that didn't have kids or have to have abortions to avoid it during their teens.

[terredancer.livejournal.com]

I applaud this post, and loudly (and agree).

But this, and all the comments have got me to thinking.

Thinking about the stories I've heard, and the people I've known who thought they could do it. Who wanted children, who were against abortion, who wanted to please their partner, whatever. But when it came down to the being pregnant, every time it made them more and more suicidal until it came down to either them or the unborn child.

Some died. Some chose abortion and are still around to tell the tale.

Although, with the way things are headed, I'm wondering if at some point, both choices will at some point be essentially the same.

[http://users.livejournal.com/little_e_/]

I agree that there should be an opt-out for men, but I firmly believe that it should be *before* the woman is pregnant. Intentions are hard to prove after the fact.

*nods*

[turandot.livejournal.com]

I agree.

It's pretty simple: if a man has sex without bothering to make sure his partner is on the same wavelenght in the case of an unwanted pregnancy, he is tacitly agreeing to respect the woman's judgment on the matter. If she chooses to have a child as a result, then basically he can't opt of taking care of the child financially when he never expressed his reluctance before having sex. Ditto if she chooses not to have the child, despite how he feels about children.

The time to speak up on what to do in case of an unwanted pregnancy is always before having sex. For both partners, but especially for the man, since he's not biologically capable of carrying a fetus, but only of preventing conception. So have the conversation, and if you don't like the answer your partner gives you, there's always opting out of intercourse, and/or going for masturbation. Sorry, but that's how most people work it out.

Re: *nods*

[http://users.livejournal.com/little_e_/]

To be more specific...

I think there ought to be a contract people can sign, which basically says that in the event that a pregnancy should not occur, the male will have nothing to do with it, (no child support, no visitation, etc.) and the female will not attempt to change that state of affairs. Both parties must sign it for it to be valid, and it is the only way to prove that the male did not intend for a pregnancy to occur.

The female is under no obligation to sign, and can decide at that point whether to fuck the guy anyway or not.

Under various circumstances a similar contract could be signed after the pregnancy occurs, but again, only with the female's consent, and it's going to be a damn lot harder to get consent at that point if she isn't planning on aborting.

Basically, I don't like the idea of people putting pressure on women to have abortions (or not.)

Re: *nods*

[turandot.livejournal.com]

(my apologies if you get two notices with the same comment - I was browsing on my husband's computer, and forgot he was logged in =P)

You shouldn't need a contract. Christ, all it would take is one hour of talking before having sex, during which the following milestones are hit:

1. birth control: whose responsibility, and what exactly does it entail? Who pays (if insurance does not cover it)?
2. if birth control fails: what do both parties want to do next? Who pays for what?

If there is no verbal agreement, then both parties just walk away. "...But I've always wondered what it would be like to fuck [insert specifications and/or name here]". No. You just don't do it.

And another thing: even if you initially agree on things, you routinely have the same exact talk, especially when one of you changes his/her mind vis a vis - having to be the one who's taking care of contraception, or being ready and willing to have children. While at that point it's probably not easy to walk away from another person, you would at least be invested enough in them to be willing to compromise a little. And if no compromise is coming? Well, what better reason to walk away from a relationship and/or marriage than figuring out both parties are not growing and changing at the same rate, and reaching an amicable split? It's what adults should be grown enough to do.

Re: *nods*

[http://users.livejournal.com/little_e_/]

The problem is when parties change their minds. Guy says, "I don't want kids," girl says, "I don't, either," they use BC, girl gets pregnant anyway, girl decides to keep kid, girl sues for child support, guy says, "But I *told* you I didn't want kids," judge says, "I don't care, you have to pay for it."

Obviously a compromise *ought* to be enough, but if you really and truly do not want kids and really want to prove it and don't want to end up paying child support, I think there ought to be a way to legally prove it which a judge will respect in court. (Currently, such contracts do not hold up in court, to my understanding.)

Re: *nods*

[(Anonymous)]

The problem is when parties change their minds. Guy says, "I don't want kids," girl says, "I don't, either," they use BC, girl gets pregnant anyway, girl decides to keep kid, girl sues for child support, guy says, "But I *told* you I didn't want kids," judge says, "I don't care, you have to pay for it."

Oh boy, how that is a familiar story.

(Currently, such contracts do not hold up in court, to my understanding.)

Correct. Ultimately, it comes down to what's in the best interests of the state. The state doesn't want to pay the tab for an unwanted pregnancy (in terms of welfare for mother keeping the child, or adoption agency when mother doesn't want to keep the child), so the state seeks out the father to support the child instead.

Re: *nods*

[http://users.livejournal.com/little_e_/]

Which of course works out *great* when the guy ends up deadbeat, so the kid doesn't get help from either end...

Re: *nods*

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

Which seems to be the default setting, even if the kids are born inside marriage.

Guy, you don't want kids - and you say so - that's just being honest. If she doesn't think she can manage alone, she can opt-out as well.

Kid? You rolled a one when it came to parents. Take it to God. You'd be doing that anyway, once you were born.

[grammom.livejournal.com]

No one has mentioned that if men really don't want toenger children, they can get a vasectomy--at least it's easier for them than it is for a woman to get a tubal ligation. The ultimate birth control for both sides.

I am pro-choice and pro-abortion. I have three daughters and while I would not wish them the agony of abortion, I do want them to have the right to have one. There are still horror stories of women who were raped and were forced to carry the child to term. If she has to keep the child, what kind of life is that for her or the child? All because some guy is so bent on proving he's a man!!! Or he's trying to prove how powerful he is.

After a spending a long time on earth this lifetime, I am still amazed at how people give up their own power to politicians, religious leaders or any other authority figure so they don't have to think and be responsible for their own actions. I'll stop there--discussing it any further makes me froth and gibber in anger and frustration. I say, the whole world should grow up and stop whining! Take control of your own life!

I take my hat off to kyburg--puts her life where her mouth is.

Okay. That's cleared the air around me--I just wish people would be responsible for their actions, so the rest of us wouldn't have to pick up the pieces and clean up after them.

Grammom

[the-siobhan.livejournal.com]

I'd be surprised if it's any easier for a man to get a vasectomy at 22 than it is for a woman.

And that's assuming that he already knows he never wants kids. (As opposed to not wanting them yet.)

[the-siobhan.livejournal.com]

That first sentance should read "for a woman to get a tubal".

[penguido.livejournal.com]

Vin, up until a few years ago, never ever ever wanted kids. He said as much, to anyone that would listen, afriad to pass on his dyslexia and his problems with alcohol and a dozen other health problems that run in his family. Before me, he was egaged for a few months, when he was 20 and she was 19. Vin and his ex got pregnant - the week they broke up. Found out a week later. She went back to NJ (he was already here in CA) and they planned on adoption (she wanted an abortion but he couldn't tell her 100% that he'd be ok with it, and she wanted a chance of working things out). He filled out all of the necessary paperwork, she met with prospective parents, and had it set up that upon birth their daughter went to a foster home.

Except.

A month later she changed her mind and went and picked the baby up. Without asking Vin's permission, or even telling him about it. He got a "Santa picture" three months later, is how he found out that she kept the child.

And he has to pay child support. She took him to court, for a child he'd given up.

It's worked out now, and he's gotten to know his daughter, and we both adore her. We pay, more than we can really afford, to do our part to support her. We make every effort to be in her life, do the best we can from across the country. I love her, too. I'm not saying that I'm not glad we have her now.

But. At the time it seemed awfully unfair.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

It was completely unfair. And it's this kind of decision making process I'd support - if she decided to keep the child, and didn't inform him?

It's on her. Entirely.

No, I don't think that was fair at all.

[riverheart.livejournal.com]

The one thing I have to say here is that he doesn't get to change his mind after the child is conceived.

I had not one but two abortions when I was with Bob. The first was due to a failure of properly-used birth control (pill and condoms), six months before we married. At the time, he said he wanted children, but not right then, that it was too soon. We were engaged at that point but not yet married. So I had an abortion at 28.

At 38, after years of trying, I got pregnant. I was ecstatic. He was horrified. He decided then, after almost a decade of trying deliberately to get me pregnant, that he didn't want children after all, and that I had to have an abortion. It is a good thing I was permitted to have a clinical abortion rather than having it hit out of me. Let's just leave it at that. Had I done as my heart wanted so much to do, I'd have a seven year old child and there is not a day that goes by that I don't regret that I gave in. You know how much we want kids. Damn it, I could have had one. Charles and I could be raising that child right now.

But having been through this, I have to say that when a man and a woman decide they want children, work to conceive them, and finally do, the man doesn't get to change his flippin' mind about wanting kids after the kid is conceived.

[dandelion-diva.livejournal.com]

I could not agree more. Well said.

Gessi