Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post

SomeRandomGuy · 02-04-2009, 05:50 PM

I think that a man should be held responsible for helping support any baby that he is proven to have fathered except for in a few situations:

He can prove that he wanted the pregnancy aborted - In my mind this would require some sort of document to be drafted, basically stating that the man wants the pregnancy aborted and the woman refused. Ideally it should be signed by both parties and notarized (although I can see situations where a woman might refuse to sign). If such a document existed, it would seem to me sufficient proof that the woman made the decision not to abort on her own, and should be responsible for supporting the child.
There was trickery involved at the time of conception - Anytime a pregnancy is a result of trickery on the part of the woman I do not feel that the man should be held responsible. By trickery I mean that she told him she was on birth control and wasn't, sabotaged a condom so it would break, etc. This would likely be very hard to prove, however.

One issue I see with the first case is when the woman has religious or moral objections to abortion. There could also be a problem if the woman believed the man wanted a baby, until the pregnancy occurred, then he asked her to get an abortion. For these reasons, I think that Angela's idea of an up-front contract makes most sense. If everyone who had sex had documented whether or not they wanted children, the birth control plan, etc. things would be simpler. Not only could this help solve disputes regarding child support, but it would also force people to think about the consequences of unprotected sex before the act. If before having unprotected sex with a woman I had to sign a contract stating that if a pregnancy resulted I would pay for half of any required medical care as well as half of the cost of raising the child you can be sure I would instead take the time to go find a condom.

02-04-2009, 05:50 PM	#12 (permalink)
SomeRandomGuy Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: KY Posts: 824	I think that a man should be held responsible for helping support any baby that he is proven to have fathered except for in a few situations: He can prove that he wanted the pregnancy aborted - In my mind this would require some sort of document to be drafted, basically stating that the man wants the pregnancy aborted and the woman refused. Ideally it should be signed by both parties and notarized (although I can see situations where a woman might refuse to sign). If such a document existed, it would seem to me sufficient proof that the woman made the decision not to abort on her own, and should be responsible for supporting the child. There was trickery involved at the time of conception - Anytime a pregnancy is a result of trickery on the part of the woman I do not feel that the man should be held responsible. By trickery I mean that she told him she was on birth control and wasn't, sabotaged a condom so it would break, etc. This would likely be very hard to prove, however. One issue I see with the first case is when the woman has religious or moral objections to abortion. There could also be a problem if the woman believed the man wanted a baby, until the pregnancy occurred, then he asked her to get an abortion. For these reasons, I think that Angela's idea of an up-front contract makes most sense. If everyone who had sex had documented whether or not they wanted children, the birth control plan, etc. things would be simpler. Not only could this help solve disputes regarding child support, but it would also force people to think about the consequences of unprotected sex before the act. If before having unprotected sex with a woman I had to sign a contract stating that if a pregnancy resulted I would pay for half of any required medical care as well as half of the cost of raising the child you can be sure I would instead take the time to go find a condom.