This is not a meme !

That's not how it should be, right?

This post was the core of my argument on an abortion post. @guest_ how convenient?

@under_fire There are a lot of proposed scenarios that people thing would be more fair. How do you think it should work?

I don't supposed a case by case review is on the table? I think that, like the issue with the abortion, the issue of requiring the father to pay is individual

Fair but as a government you have to establish a general policy.

Yes. Sadly the law could be greatly improved in theory by individualization. In practice however that’s fraught with peril. Asides that level of discretion over individual cases allowing not only a strong possibility for corruption: from personal involvement or bribes etc (since each case can be judged by its specifics, two seemingly identical cases with completely different verdicts wouldn’t be out of the ordinary and a judge could just excise it on interpretation of details..)

There is also a huge issue of jurisdiction. Depending on things like where the mother and father live, let’s say mom moves out of state from dad- which court gets to try the case? And since individual judges have such wide discretion- the rulings would likely be strongly influenced based upon where they were tried and the exact judge and how they choose to interpret facts.

But perhaps one of the largest road blocks is logistical. The justice system is already overtaxed in this country. Prisoners sentenced to death might wait decades to get an appeal trial. Trials and appeals take time and resources. They cost tax dollars and they also cost individuals money. The income of father and mother would strongly influence the quality and scope of legal aid they received, and the time spent on legal matters would potentially take them away from their jobs and lives- and they may not be able to earn an income or even stay employed.

Combining the wait times, the actual hearing times, any appeals and the waits for those, jurisdictional battles etc- before a case could even be heard or settled it could either be too late for an abortion or the baby might already be born- and that takes us back to an issue of choice over the body- that a court could issue a mother a “stay” in which she is legally bound to carry a child she doesn’t want.

So while in principal case by case hearings seem like a good idea in reality they carry their own practical road blocks and moral quandaries. That’s not even considering a father not wanting a child and a theoretical legal precedent to allow the government to force the abortion of a child- not the possible “slippery slope” that creates to expand the list of reasons such a forced abortion could be ordered. For instance it would be practical and arguably justifiable to force abort with incarcerated women. It also opens a door for rapists to sue their victims into carry a child- it gets sticky real fast.

And ultimately the man power just isn’t there. Usually well meaning measures to paste over sticky issues don’t tend to serve anyone well. You don’t actually have parental rights until a baby is born. If we set a precedent that a “father” had rights the moment an egg is fertilized- why can’t a mother start collecting child support at that very moment too? There can’t be parental rights before a baby is born. What are you the parent of if there is nothing to parent?

While it is possible to do a paternity test on a fetus it is dangerous to the child. Before DNA testing people just eyeballed the baby to see if it looked like the parents and maybe checked blood type. So even in modern times a father of legal recovers can’t be established until a baby is born anyway. So you aren’t the father until there is a baby there.

Think about that. Actually think about it. Jane gets pregnant. Jane wants an abortion. John says he is the dad. Jane says he isn’t. We either can’t prove it- or might kill the baby or cause it harm to prove it. We more or less have to wait for it to be born. So we order Jane on court to carry the baby. Jane has the kid- John isn’t the father. Even IF we condoned aborting an already norm and healthy baby- Jane has already suffered the pain. Expense, and bodily changes of pregnancy along with any impact to her work and life. So how do we clean that mess up?

Right. Again, I would like to emphasize that my view leans more towards post-birth. But yes, I agree.

Before the baby is born we have a 99.999999% FACTUAL knowledge of who the mother is. The father.... we have no factual knowledge other than two people saying they did or didn’t sleep together in a certain period, wether they admit to sleeping with anyone else, and hopefully they both agree they slept together because if they don’t... do we trust the mother of the “father”?

Definitely mother. Obviously.

well, even then couldn't the mother simply claim to have slept with that person? and dna tests on a fetus are very difficult and expensive?

This is also an important thing to keep in mind when choosing sexual partners, on both side. I'm not being puritanical or anything, just pragmatic. Birth control doesn't always work, so even if you are safe, there is ALWAYS a chance that it you insert Part A into Part B you can end up with a pregnancy. (And for those oh so mature individuals who immediately counter "not if you do anal", I got news for you, ANY TIME semen is near the vaginal tract, it can potentially make its way to target, same reason pulling out doesn't work.)

Haha the way you said this was just hilarious!

@under_fire- paternity tests on a fetus are dangerous and more expensive. The fetus could be damaged or aborted just by trying to test. That’s why whenever possible they wait to test the baby. If the mother lies about the father and demands child support, the father can request a paternity test of the baby and if it isn’t his- he’s off the hook. You aren’t required to pay child support on a fetus so it isn’t a concern unless a baby is born. The father of a baby is usually established and is not legally named as father until a baby is actually born. Even without abortion the fetus might not survive to child birth- so theres no reason to legally do anything like issue a birth certificate or social security number or give parental rights until a baby is born because a baby may not be born just because a woman is pregnant.

Likewise- there are no laws that stop a mother from eating like shit or riding rollercoasters or bare knuckle kick boxing right up until pregnancy. Even taking a trip to work or the store in a car or bus is dangerous to a fetus which could be miscarried by a simple and statistically considerable auto accident. So lows banning mothers from any activity potentially dangerous to a fetus aren’t just antitcal to personal freedom, but would basically require pregnant women to be bed ridden and homestuck until delivery.

There are also no laws about the birthing and prenatal care. So a mother doesn’t have to see a doctor at all, or even deliver in a hospital. She can choose a wet nurse or a home delivery if she wants- all of which greatly increases the risks of infant mortality. So to say that a father gets a say in abortion opens all these doors. That a father- who might not even be a person close to or in a relationship with the mother, gets to decide when and how often she goes to the doctor and which doctor, where and how she delivers, what she eats, if and how she exercises, what she can do for work and in her spare time while pregnant, what types and how often she’s allowed to have sexual intercourse or masturbation, what types of medicine, supplements, or other substances she takes, etc. if we as a society decide that a “father” to a fetus can dictate a mothers behavior as it comes to the well being of a fetus- we open these doors.

Also keep in mind who is the “father?” As discussed- proving paternity before delivery of a baby is difficult and risky. So what do we do f multiple men claim to and could be the father and all have different ideas on what should happen? What do we do if we just take the word of a guy he is the father and then he isn’t- but he’s had say in this pregnancy and there’s no way to undo that influence anymore? And then do we say that any man claiming to be the father is legally obligated and financially liable as if he were the father since he had all the powers of a father and we can’t undo that? Like if the mime wanted to abort and the “father” didn’t and the baby was born- does he get to just walk away and say “well, good luck with the baby...”

Then we don’t even have a case of a “father” not getting a say, we have a complete non person sticking a mother with a pregnancy and life long care of a child she didn’t want that wasn’t even his. That’s worse isn’t it? And what if some vengeful ex finds out his girl is pregnant and says he could be the father? Even if we order the risky test to prove it- the fetus might be lost just to find out he’s not the father- but to him it doesn’t matter. He knew he wasn’t but this gives him a legal way- or any man a legal way, which for any reason they can cause a woman frustration and potentially abort her child. Don’t think someone should have a baby? Roll the dice and maybe you “get lucky” and it is lost during. The test. Racist and want to try and stop “those people” from having a baby? Claim to be the father.

What level of proof would we require to prove you did or didn’t have sec with someone? Will we all need to tape every encounter as proof, or pull tape kits after sex so we have a record of partners at the lab? It gets ridiculous very fast.

Nd here’s where it comes to theology. In the end- parenting is between you and the other person right? If you share custody and the other parent puts your kid in ballet and you don’t want them in ballet- what are you going to do about it if it’s on their time with the kid? If the other parent feeds them meat and you’re raising them in a vegan house, the other parent takes them to church and you’re an atheist, the other parent lets them have soda or watch movies you don’t approve of or stay up later- what should the government do about that? Can the government say that the other parent can’t let them walk to school alone because you think that’s dangerous? They can’t let them ride mini bikes at the track?

You and the other person as parents have to work your shit out. That’s why you should try to have a kid with someone you know shares your values and respects your wishes and is compatible. When you have sex- a kid is a risk. Don’t put your genitals on someone you can’t trust. If it’s a surprise to you when they abort a fetus then you probably didn’t know them well enough to have sex, did you believe them when they said they had no STD’s too?

Because what is your legal resource there? If you get aids from someone- what do you do about that? Even if your country or area actually criminalizes that- you still have aids. So in the end- the government can’t tell you where to stick your genitals and make it risk free for you. Just like driving a car or jumping out of a plane or drinking with your mates, there’s risks and potential consequences and it’s on YOU to be smart and to think about things and make your own decisions. You can’t turn around after you did something dumb and say that because you don’t like how things went when you knew they could go that way, that someone else has to accommodate your bullshit.