Re: Abortion

"Child" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> "Daniel T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > That works both ways doesn't it. Why can a woman get an abortion and you
> > don't say "she should have used better precautions" but the man is
> > forced to pay a 18 year burden based on a decision the woman makes
> > without having to consult him at all? And then you say "he should have
> > used better precautions"...
> >
> > The fact is, if either of them don't want the child, then they both
> > should have used better precautions. But they didn't, so now what?
> 
> I think its the responsibility of both parties to discuss what would happen
> if they would have a pregnancy BEFORE having sex.
> 
> And yes, if the woman doesn't want a child, she needs to take precautions.
> And if the man doesn't want a child then HE needs to take precautions.

Agreed. Every one agrees that people who don't want to have children 
should be very careful. What we are talking about is what to do when, 
despite precaution, a child is born.


> > IMO if only one of the parents is willing to bear the burden, then the
> > fetus should be brought to term and the willing parent should get full
> > custody, while the other parent should be shut out of the child's life.
> > No support, no visitation, nothing. I could see having the father give
> > the mother some sort of birthing fee for her efforts though.
> 
> Poor kids.

Again, I agree. A child who has a parent that isn't interested in 
raising him is "poor" in many ways.