Forced Paternity - ''Roe v Wade'' For Men

Cathleen

Summer breeze...
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Posts
31,006
I know it's been a topic for a few months now but hadn't seen it discussed here. I've seen a lot of air time on the issue recently. Care to weigh in, share some thoughts, ramifications etc.?


March 9, 2006

Dads: No cash for unwanted children

In lawsuit, activists argue if women have right to decide fate of fetus, fathers can decline financial role.

David Shepardson and Eric Lacy / The Detroit News

A national men's rights group plans to file a federal lawsuit this morning in U.S. District Court in Detroit, claiming that fathers have the legal right to opt out of the financial responsibilities of supporting a child they didn't want -- in a claim they dub "Roe v. Wade for Men."

A Troy lawyer for the New York-based National Center for Men said he will file a long-shot lawsuit on behalf of 25-year-old Matt Dubay of Saginaw that seeks an order declaring the Michigan Paternity Act unconstitutional. Dubay recently was ordered to pay support for his 8-month-old daughter.

In 2004, Dubay, a computer technician, began dating a woman who worked in cell phone sales. He said she told him she couldn't get pregnant -- because she was using contraception and had physical conditions that prevented her from getting pregnant.

After three months, they stopped dating -- but soon afterward, she told him she was pregnant.

"It's just not fair. She has options in this. As a man, I have no options and am forced to live with her choices," Dubay said Wednesday night. "I was up front. I was clear that I didn't want to be a father and she reassured me that she was incapable of getting pregnant."

After learning of the pregnancy, they discussed adoption.

"I was trying to talk reason, to try and have a two-way conversation. She considered an adoption but then quickly stopped listening," Dubay said.

So he researched the issue and found the National Center for Men in New York, which agreed to take his case.

"The whole issue is, she made the decision based knowing that I wasn't going to be there for the child in any part and she said she could raise the child on her own," Dubay said.

Troy lawyer Jeffrey A. Cojocar, who is filing the lawsuit for the National Center for Men, acknowledged it will be an uphill battle.

"No one is denying this is going to be difficult. But we want the law applied equally between sexes. They each should have a say about a child's future," Cojocar said.

Women's organizations oppose the lawsuit because it leaves the child and mother to fend for themselves.

"This is ridiculous," said Leslie Sorkhe, director of operations for the Association for Children for Enforcement of Support. "This is about the child, a child that needs the emotional as well as the financial support of both parents. The child is entitled to his or her equal protection under the law."

Renee Beeker of Milford, legislative vice president for National Organization for Women's Michigan chapter, says the lawsuit implies that the burden of pregnancy prevention is solely on the woman.

"In the event of an unintended pregnancy, the needs of the child must be met," Beeker said.

The National Center for Men and its president don't want to be able to force women to have abortions or give up a child for adoption. They want to be able to go into court before a child is born and renounce parenting responsibilities -- and 18 years of child support.

"More than three decades ago, Roe v. Wade gave women control of their reproductive lives but nothing in the law changed for men. Women now have control of their lives after an unplanned conception," said Mel Feit, the group's director. "But men are routinely forced to give up control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as the price of intimacy."

Cojocar admits that courts across the United States have routinely thrown out lawsuits by fathers who claimed women committed fraud by lying about taking precautions to avoid getting pregnant. Those courts have typically found a greater state interest in ensuring that minor children are supported. This claim is different in that it cites the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.

But, the men's group says it should be more than biology.

"We will argue that, at a time of reproductive freedom for women, fatherhood must be more than a matter of DNA," Feit said. "A man must choose to be a father in the same way that a woman chooses to be a mother."

Saginaw County Circuit Judge Patrick McGraw recently ordered Dubay to pay $475 a month -- plus half of all health care expenses for the baby girl, Cojocar said.

He sold his dream car, a 1998 Trans Am, and took in a roommate to stretch his budget so he can begin to make child support payments next month. He has seen his daughter once -- when he took a DNA test to establish paternity.

The child's mother didn't return calls seeking comment.

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, who has made collecting unpaid child support a top issue, said fathers must support their children, regardless of the circumstances of the births.

"If the subject is child support, our focus should be on children, not on squabbles between the parents," Cox said. His office has collected more than $23 million in child support, his office will announce today.

Michigan parents owe more than $7 billion in unpaid child support -- part of the $100 billion owed nationwide by parents who fail to support their children.

Legal experts say a ruling allowing men to opt out of support could open a Pandora's box, forcing the state to pick up the difference to support children of single parents.

The planned suit names the girl's mother, who is 20, and the Saginaw County prosecutor as defendants.

You can reach David Shepardson at (313) 222-2028 or dshepardson@detnews.com.


src
 
Scalywag said:
It is WAY to late for me to attempt to respond to this.
Me too Scaly. Maybe tomorrow I'll have a few coherent thoughts - maybe.
 
hahaha

Okay....Here we go.

I feel that if a man feels all fine and dandy getting his dick wet and poking some hole with it, he is well aware that the end result may make a baby. Knowing this, he is held accountable for that child whether mom decides to abort, or keep it.

It is supposed to deter people from jumping into things...one must own up to his/her actions and accept responsability....

Just because he doesn't want the child and wanted an abortion, does not give him the right to waive all financial obligation for that child. If you don't want the possability of a baby boys...keep yer peckers in yer pants
 
ladyadonia30 said:
Okay....Here we go.

I feel that if a man feels all fine and dandy getting his dick wet and poking some hole with it, he is well aware that the end result may make a baby. Knowing this, he is held accountable for that child whether mom decides to abort, or keep it.

It is supposed to deter people from jumping into things...one must own up to his/her actions and accept responsability....

Just because he doesn't want the child and wanted an abortion, does not give him the right to waive all financial obligation for that child. If you don't want the possability of a baby boys...keep yer peckers in yer pants

Couldn't agree more. And women shouldn't spread their legs either if they don't want to be a mother.

With birth control not being 100% effective, partners may consider writing & signing a contract before hitting the sheets that in the event of an unplanned pregnancy mother shall not seek child support and father waives all rights, etc.
 
as others said, i think anyone who has sex should at least be aware of the possibility of that it could result in a child. not wanting to say that you only should have sex when you want a child, but you should have thought through of what you would do in such a case. and my experience is that a lot of guys are all too eager to not use a condom. but the better prevention is the one you yourself can control, not just trusting what someone tells you - especially if it is someone you don't know that well...

i suppose there'd still be cases where someone tricks someone else, but as others said, it is also about the child. it's not the child's fault, for example, if the mother lied to the guy.

what i think about father's rights though is, that in such a case, the father should still have as much right to see the child as the mother. i know of quite a few cases where the mother moved away so he can't see the child, and just wants him to pay child support, and i can see that this is unfair - not only to the father, but also to the child... i am not quite sure though what could be done in such a case, you can't force someone to stay in the same city.
 
Munachi said:
as others said, i think anyone who has sex should at least be aware of the possibility of that it could result in a child. not wanting to say that you only should have sex when you want a child, but you should have thought through of what you would do in such a case. and my experience is that a lot of guys are all too eager to not use a condom. but the better prevention is the one you yourself can control, not just trusting what someone tells you - especially if it is someone you don't know that well...

i suppose there'd still be cases where someone tricks someone else, but as others said, it is also about the child. it's not the child's fault, for example, if the mother lied to the guy.

what i think about father's rights though is, that in such a case, the father should still have as much right to see the child as the mother. i know of quite a few cases where the mother moved away so he can't see the child, and just wants him to pay child support, and i can see that this is unfair - not only to the father, but also to the child... i am not quite sure though what could be done in such a case, you can't force someone to stay in the same city.

You're right, they can't force someone to stay in the same city or state. Often though the moving custodial parent must have a good reason for moving: usually economical/job-related, quality of life, family assistance, etc. are good reasons. The non-custodial parent usually will receive longer periods of time for summer & long holiday visitations. Of course, I'm talking for my state. I do not know what other states' provide.
 
I posted in this thread on the GLBT board some time ago. Here's what I said in that thread (sorry for the length):

Eilan said:
The National Center for Men could have picked a better poster child for their father's rights cause than Matt Dubay. What about the men who want to play an active role in their kids' lives, the ones who pay child support but don't get to see their kids? The ones who are trying to be responsible? The fact that they've chosen to champion the cause of someone like Dubay is a slap in the face to every father who's been shut out of his child's life by the child's mother.

Sounds to me like the National Center for Men is run by male versions of the kooks at NOW. The bra-burning man-haters don't come close to representing all of the women who consider themselves feminists; I'd like to think that there are reasonable people involved with the so-called Men's Rights Movement as well.

There are women out there who trick/trap men into getting them pregnant, and that's a truly dispicable thing to do. However, I don't think Dubay's case is one of those. He claims that he told this woman that he didn't want to have a child with her--before she got pregnant, if I recall. If he felt that strongly about not becoming a parent, then what was he doing to make sure that she didn't get pregnant? Both men and women are responsible for preventing unwanted pregnancies.

Unfortunately, the child's the one who loses out.

Eilan said:
Men do get a say in unplanned pregnancies. It's called not putting your future into the hands of someone with whom you don't want to be connected for the next 18 or so years. It's called putting on a condom.

Pot, kettle, anyone? I know your comment wasn't addressed to me, but your anti-woman bias is pretty obvious, and not just in this thread.

You seem to be contradicting what you said earlier about men getting a say in unplanned pregnancies. If it takes two to tango, then shouldn't both people accept responsibility for their role in preventing unplanned pregnancies?

Both parties involved are entitled to some choices. They can choose their partners more wisely. They can choose to use BC. (And that's not foolproof. Face it--pregnancy is just one of many risks of choosing to have sex.) They can choose to think with their brains instead of with their genitals.

Like I said in my previous post, the National Center for Men's priorities seem to be as fucked up as their radical feminist counterparts. They need to be focusing on supporting/representing REAL men, the ones who are more deserving of custody than the mother of their children but have to deal with court systems that are often biased toward the woman. The ones who pay support for children they never get to see. NOT whiny little boys like Matt Dubay who's just looking to get out of having to part with $500 a month because he chose not to be responsible. If he were trapped by his ex, he might have a case, but I don't think that's the case here.

FWIW, Samuelx, I'm not a regular on this board, but I lurk sometimes. I've read a lot of your posts, and you strike me as someone who's always looking for something to be offended by. People who go around looking for things to offend them generally aren't going to be disappointed.

Good luck with that. You're gonna need it.
 
At first I'm thinking no way, no guy should be able to get out of child support. Then I thought about it a little more, there actually are guys who do pay support who shouldn't.

Namely the father of a lesbian couples baby. There are two of them after all, they aren't needing child support from him, some of those guys don't see their child either, but the courts make them pay child support in some cases. A few states have laws in place saying the father of an unwed child must pay child support. Of course since there is no lesbian marriage and they have no rights, their child is an unwed child. Well there used to be states that forced fathers to pay support no matter what, I don't know if there still are.

However, in the case of the guy they are filing the suit for, no way in hell he should be able to get out of child support. I find it a little amusing that the bit shown by Cathleen mentions that before a child is born a man should be able to file for a no support ruling on the child. His daughter is 8 months old, how is that going to help him. :cool:

Truthfully, I think the whole idea is a laugh and should be thrown out of court before it gets to court. Simply because why should a child who was just born have to have no father because he doesn't like the mother that much, or he didn't want to have kids.

If the little chicken shit was that scared about having a baby, what the hell is he doing having sex in the first place, what the hell is he doing having sex with no condom on. I mean holy shit, if that goes through and becomes law, every single new father in the states will be filing that the instant she goes 'I'm late.'

I mean sure you didn't want her to get pregnant, but why the hell are you relying on someone else to watch out for you?
 
In the case in the article, the mother shouldn't have lied about not being able to get pregnant and using contraception. It's entrapment, and unfair to everyone.

Of course I don't know about anyone else, but I don't have sex with people I don't know well and trust completely. Sex has too many possible consequences like diseases and pregnancy for me to do otherwise. I also ask about their views on an unintended pregnancy beforehand. Even so, I assume there's a risk of something going wrong or them being really good liars; it comes with the territory.

If Dubay had thought with his brain for a moment, he would have realized "I'm using contraception and can't get pregnant because of a physical problem" doesn't make sense. If he had known her very well, he would have had more info to make a good decision on. He could have avoided selling his dreamy TransAm by not choosing a partner willy-nilly and ensuring several reliable forms of birth and STI control were used.

As for the gay/lesbian couple issue, anyone in their right mind would either take legal measures to prevent problems or refuse to get involved in that kind of situation. Sperm and egg donors aren't liable for child support (in standard situations), so couples have that option.
 
agree very much with what eilan says...

the thing is, that in my experience, there are still a lot of men who try all possible to not have to use a condom. i've had quite a few one night stands or more casual relationships, where the use of a condom was a matter of discussion. even a guy who was too drunk to get hard and claimed that was because of the condom.

and, while there are women who try to trick men into getting them pregnant, there are also quite a few cases where the pregnancy is a result of just bad luck or of stupidity on both sides - and i would guess that in a majority of these cases it's the woman who ends up having more consequences because very widely society still expects the woman to be the one who raises the child, which can mean the end of studies, carreer, etc.

i know that's not directly connected to the topic - but it's just to say that if a law would allow men to opt out of child support, many of these women, some of whom might not want an abortion for various reasons, would end up with even less help to raise their child - and the children would end up growing up in a difficult financial situation, and without a father - and in the end, this should most be about the child, right?
 
If you play, you'd better be prepared to pay, as far as I'm concerned.

It's not a big secret how babies are made. Nor is it a big secret how STI's are spread. If you don't use a condom, you're just asking for one kind of consequence or another. If you can't handle the consequences, then don't have sex without a condom, or don't have sex, period.

Our society is so full of all these people who take absolutely NO responsibility for their behavior and/or are really just too stupid to live. :confused:
 
Munachi said:
i know that's not directly connected to the topic - but it's just to say that if a law would allow men to opt out of child support, many of these women, some of whom might not want an abortion for various reasons, would end up with even less help to raise their child - and the children would end up growing up in a difficult financial situation, and without a father - and in the end, this should most be about the child, right?

Some of those women might end up having to get an abortion because they can't afford the child on their own, too. Are we really ready for forced abortions in our society? Is that the direction we want to go?
 
Munachi said:
and in the end, this should most be about the child, right?
Absolutely. Once there's a third person whose needs must be considered, it's a completely different story.

SweetErika said:
If Dubay had thought with his brain for a moment, he would have realized "I'm using contraception and can't get pregnant because of a physical problem" doesn't make sense.
This is anecdotal evidence, so take it for what it's worth, but I know of at least one woman who has been told that, because of various physical/reproductive problems, she would have a difficult, if not impossible, time getting pregnant. It's possible that she genuinely believed that she couldn't get pregnant.

Child support isn't just an arbitrary amount that's set by a judge; it's determined by a formula that's established by the state (at least that's how it works in Ohio), that takes into account income, health insurance coverage, etc. My ex, for example, gets a small break on the amount of child support that he has to pay because he's required to provide health insurance for our kids. Dubay's paying $475 a month plus half of the child's health care expenses sounds pretty reasonable to me--hell, it's WAY more than I get for two children. If his income decreases, he can always request that his support order be reviewed.
 
I don't think Dubay has any case at all. He is an adult and no one forced him to have sex. While I can't know what he knows it's safe to say he knows sex can lead to pregnancy.

I think it must be quite a conversation to have before sex.

Male: Are you using protection?

Female: Are you?

Male: I asked first? (hahahahaha) Well if you get pregnant I opt out of being a father. But let's get it on.

Yeah that would happen while all hot and heavy.

If you want orgasms you also have to accept all the possibilities that come with them.
 
Cathleen said:
I don't think Dubay has any case at all. He is an adult and no one forced him to have sex. While I can't know what he knows it's safe to say he knows sex can lead to pregnancy.
You'd think he knows that, wouldn't you? Maybe he's that Lit guy who thought his girlfriend couldn't get pregnant if she peed out all the cum after sex. :rolleyes:
 
Eilan said:
You'd think he knows that, wouldn't you? Maybe he's that Lit guy who thought his girlfriend couldn't get pregnant if she peed out all the cum after sex. :rolleyes:

Ahahahhaha! I remember that...she jiggled a little on the pot just to make sure it all came out... :D
 
There's a contingent of this Men's Rights movement that would make a woman feel like a money-grubbing whore for asking a man for a little bit of money to support their mutual child.

It's not like the average woman who receives child support is getting enough money to live like a queen and blowing that money on manicures or whatever she might want to buy for herself. The $475 a month that Matt Dubay pays MIGHT pay the rent on a two-bedroom apartment where I live.
 
Eilan said:
The $475 a month that Matt Dubay pays MIGHT pay the rent on a two-bedroom apartment where I live.

OMG, that wouldn't even come close to paying for studio here. Hell, that barely gets you a cardboard box on Lower Wacker Drive.
 
Eilan said:
You'd think he knows that, wouldn't you? Maybe he's that Lit guy who thought his girlfriend couldn't get pregnant if she peed out all the cum after sex. :rolleyes:
Now you tell me! I'll remember that next time, if there is a next time.;)

I heard an interview with him where he said he hadn't seen the child. I can't imagine that but I also can't imagine once seeing the little one he'd still have the fight in him.

These beautiful children are gifts to us.
 
Cathleen said:
I heard an interview with him where he said he hadn't seen the child. I can't imagine that but I also can't imagine once seeing the little one he'd still have the fight in him.
If I had a son who was behaving like this toward a grandchild of mine, I'd be ashamed of him, and I'd wonder where I fucked up. :(
 
My ex-husband had the "I can't get pregnant" card played on him. Sometimes, like previously mentioned, we HAVE been told that we can't get pregnant or carry to term. On the other hand, there are indeed people who are looking to "trap" -- trap a husband, trap an income, something.

Still, he went knowingly without a condom. It's all gambling, really, and he lost.

It's all a matter of odds. If you get someone pregnant, IMO, you've really lost the right to expect to walk away with no ties. HOWEVER, if you're financially responsible for your child, I think it's absolutely horrendous to be kept away from that child, unless there's strong suspicion (and not the irrational imagination of a "trapper") or proof that you're a danger to the child.
 
While he should have keep his penis under wraps, she should be ready to offer joint custody if she wants child support.

I hate watching a woman go after a man for child support and then deny them the right to see the child that they're helping support.
Its messed up.

In this case though- if he didn't want to be a daddy, he should have wrapped up or gotten snipped. End story.

And $475- that's a low amount, when you consider the costs of raising, feeding, cloathing and caring for a child. And housing- out here the jump from a 1 bedroom to a 2 bedroom apartment can run from $200 to $400+ easily.
 
Vixandra said:
While he should have keep his penis under wraps, she should be ready to offer joint custody if she wants child support.
I don't think either parent should pay child support if there's a joint-custody agreement.
 
Back
Top