Court Rejects "Roe V Wade For Men"

[yolland]

Originally posted by MadelynIris
Although the courts sure do a lot of mandating of marriage and family counseling. I'd say the courts are probably the the #1 referrer.

I don't understand...you would prefer that the court require him to marry this woman? It was a brief relationship, he's not in love with her (which especially given the circumstances, one can hardly blame him for), and he's made clear that he has NO interest in personal involvement with his daughter.

[MadelynIris]

18 years of financial commitment is nothing compared to that

I'm offended that even though that a parent, even though might contribute 18 years of financial, emotional, and labor to raising a child, that somehow, it will never equal the hardship or risk of childbirth.

How very sad.

[MadelynIris]

I don't understand...you would prefer that the court require him to marry this woman? It was a brief relationship, he's not in love with her (which especially given the circumstances, one can hardly blame him for), and he's made clear that he has NO interest in personal involvement with his daughter

Yolland, no. Not saying that. It was just a response to BVS saying the courts are a legal system, not a marriage counselor.

[BVS]

Originally posted by MadelynIris
Right -- you can demand financial support, but nothing else. Hurray for the courts!

Well honestly, how do you expect a court to demand love or emotional support?

Even in a household that has both parents living in the household, been married for 20 years and have the nice picket fence doesn't always have this...

So I'm really not sure what you are getting at.

[BVS]

Originally posted by MadelynIris


Although the courts sure do a lot of mandating of marriage and family counseling. I'd say the courts are probably the the #1 referrer.

How so?

[indra]

Originally posted by MadelynIris


I'm offended that even though that a parent, even though might contribute 18 years of financial, emotional, and labor to raising a child, that somehow, it will never equal the hardship or risk of childbirth.

How very sad.

I seriously doubt this guy, if he does not want the child, will do anything more than he is required, which is strictly financial. And in the vast majority of cases, a mother doesn't just pop the baby out and leave, but spends those 18 years rearing that child as well -- in most cases does much more of the "hands on" care than even an involved father.

In this particular case the woman is scum. But the guy was damned stupid too. He gambled and lost.

[MadelynIris]

How so?

Judges will usually mandate counseling, a variety of counseling, as one of the many tools to reach some kind of agreement. This is fairly common in our society.

[MadelynIris]

but spends those 18 years rearing that child as well -- in most cases does much more of the "hands on" care than even an involved father

Indra, you keep digging deeper. As an involved father, and representing involved fathers everywhere, I can honestly say, our contibution to our children's lives is equally important as their mother's.

Thank you very much.

[BVS]

Originally posted by MadelynIris


Judges will usually mandate counseling, a variety of counseling, as one of the many tools to reach some kind of agreement. This is fairly common in our society.

Are the courts doing the counseling?

I just don't understand your complaint with the courts, how much do you want them to intervene in your relationships?

[MadelynIris]

I have no complaint with the courts. No, the courts mandate the counseling, judges don't do it themselves.

I was just responding to your statement:

The courts are a legal system not a moral guidance or marriage counselor

When in fact, they mandate a lot of 'moral and marriage' counseling.

[BVS]

Originally posted by MadelynIris
I have no complaint with the courts. No, the courts mandate the counseling, judges don't do it themselves.

I was just responding to your statement:



When in fact, they mandate a lot of 'moral and marriage' counseling.

Then what was this whole line about?

Right -- you can demand financial support, but nothing else. Hurray for the courts!

[corianderstem]

Naturally some people will focus on the woman's supposed infertility and assume she was lying.

Maybe she was lying about being infertile, but you know what? Maybe doctors told her she would never have kids ... and then hey, guess what! You're pregnant! It's not unheard of.

But no, apparently she's some scheming bitch trying to trap her boyfriend into marriage or child support.

[MadelynIris]

Snarkiness! Wooohooo! Hooray for the courts!

[BVS]

Um, yeah, I got that it was snarkiness...

But you are completely avoiding my question.

"Right -- you can demand financial support, but nothing else."

What else are you expecting the court to do? This is what I've been trying to get you to admit or explain ever since your first comment in this thread.

[MadelynIris]

Admit? Admit the frustration that all anyone can do (courts), to get someone to live up to their obligation to support and raise their own offspring, is force someone to send a check once a month?

Ok, I admit it. I'm frustrated that is all we can expect from anyone. It's sad, and frustrating. Hurray for our society!

[BVS]

Originally posted by MadelynIris
Admit? Admit the frustration that all anyone can do (courts), to get someone to live up to their obligation to support and raise their own offspring, is force someone to send a check once a month?

Ok, I admit it. I'm frustrated that is all we can expect from anyone. It's sad, and frustrating. Hurray for our society!

Ok, finally we're getting somewhere. Yes this is a society issue and not one of the courts. I'm really not sure why people look to the courts to solve such grievances, and that's what I was getting you to try and admit.

Look you can't force someone to be a good father, but legally you can force someone that took part in bringing this child to this world in helping with putting food in it's mouth. Period. That's it. Do not look to the courts to do anything else in this case.

[maycocksean]

It sounds to me like this guy doesn't have much of a case, but to be honest, I'm don't find most the posts decrying him to be that convincing. . .I don't know what it is. . .I'm trying to put my finger on it.

Does a woman have a choice as to whether she can become a parent, but a man has no choice (other than to use protection and hope it works) about it?

Is this not a legitmate question (even if this particularly guy's lawsuit was nonsense)?

I think that the arguments that this guy should have used a condom or abstained from sex all together would have been condemned had they been directed at a woman. . .

[BVS]

Originally posted by maycocksean


Does a woman have a choice as to whether she can become a parent, but a man has no choice (other than to use protection and hope it works) about it?

No, they both have choices. They have the choice to have sex, which may lead to parenthood. And they have a choice to use birth control that isn't 100% effective. This is why education is crucial. Education would show that there is no way to 100% effectively avoid pregnancy except not having sex...

Originally posted by maycocksean

I think that the arguments that this guy should have used a condom or abstained from sex all together would have been condemned had they been directed at a woman. . .

No a woman would meet the same argument. A woman should know that any sex may have the chance of pregnancy as well. No matter how you are careful you are with your cycle, condoms, or if he's been "fixed". These things fail. Period.

[BonosSaint]

I can sympathize with the man and the point that a woman has a remedy to an unwanted pregnancy without further consequence (assuming all goes well). And some men get hit with a ton of child support. However, in my job, I see what kind of child support is often being paid--often $100 or $200 a month (and that might be for several children)--a couple of good dinners, less than a pack a day of cigarettes, a really cheap auto loan. Since child support is generally based on the noncustodial parent's income and the court doesn't appear to be inclined to break that parent financially, the offended noncustodial appears to be hit more with an offended psyche than an unbearable financial burden.

To complicate matters, I believe in many states, the husband is the presumed father (whether or not he is the biological father--say if his wife has an affair) and bears the financial responsibility for child support.

[Vincent Vega]

Originally posted by BonosSaint


To complicate matters, I believe in many states, the husband is the presumed father (whether or not he is the biological father--say if his wife has an affair) and bears the financial responsibility for child support.

It's the same here in Germany, so you have to do a parenthood testing if you are suspicious about it.