MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Financial abortion-a male right to choose?

Filed under: General — Scrap_The_CSA @ 4:12 pm Wed 7th July 2010

Interesting article that is well worth a read.

What if a father could choose not to accept financial responsibility for a child before the child was born?

Should create some interesting discussion!



If it were law,a financial abortion would allow a man — one who has specifically said to his partner before intercourse that he doesn’t want to be a father — to void all monetary responsibility for any pregnancy. Without question, the woman could carry the child to term, but she and the law could then never come looking for the dad for child support. It sounds harsh — so much so that Goldscheider admits it will probably never be more than a dream theory — but proponents believe that such a policy could very well make a huge dent in the nation’s scourge of absentee fathers, especially in the African-American community.


  1. What a great idea. As long as the man could later on choose to reconsider and then pay child support from then on (no back payments) then why not?

    Comment by Scott B — Wed 7th July 2010 @ 4:24 pm

  2. Yeah well, it is already a woman’s body, a woman’s choice whether to engage in sexual activity and whether to become pregnant, whether to have the child, or whether to murder it whilst still unborn. A man, outside of abstinence, vasectomy or consensual condom use has no right or say whatsoever, even after a child is born. Suddenly he becomes biologically responsible for the making of the child, all by himself it seems, and fiscally responsible for raising it. When women also claim the responsibilities that are inherent in the rights they claim, instead of farming them out to their sex partners, this idea will gain some mainstream traction. Now, where is my TUI Billboard.

    Comment by glenn — Wed 7th July 2010 @ 4:42 pm

  3. lol yeah right indeed! Men have a say or have rights? NEVER!

    Comment by Scott B — Wed 7th July 2010 @ 4:50 pm

  4. Male abortion is not a new concept.

    Male abortion rights

    The term male abortion was first coined by Melanie McCulley, a South Carolina attorney, in her 1998 article, “The Male Abortion: The Putative Father’s Right to Terminate His Interests in and Obligations to the Unborn Child,” which was published in The Journal of Law and Policy.[1]

    The concept begins with the premise that when an unmarried woman becomes pregnant, she has the option of abortion, adoption, or parenthood; and argues, in the context of legally recognized gender equality, that in the earliest stages of pregnancy the putative (alleged) father should have the same human rights to relinquish all future parental rights and financial responsibility — leaving the informed mother with the same three options.

    Comment by Phoenix — Wed 7th July 2010 @ 4:58 pm

  5. even married women have the same option to make a choice to whether she wants to have kids or not … not so in case of a married man ….

    Comment by karan jiharr — Wed 7th July 2010 @ 7:54 pm

  6. It is best to just accept that being a man, everything is our fault…. If men adopt that notion, life will be easier……

    I am certain the light at the end of the tunnel is a long long way away re a Male Abortion type rights so to speak, however, I so wish it would happen…..

    Comment by Whafe — Wed 7th July 2010 @ 10:23 pm

  7. I’m not suggesting that this is a new idea – the difference is that it is being advocated by a feminist sociologist.

    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Wed 7th July 2010 @ 10:43 pm

  8. Yes, but note the differences in what she is trying to advocate. It’s not the same thing as what was advocated by the attorney in 1998.

    This feminist is trying to say that the agreement should be made BEFORE the woman gets pregnant, actually before she even has sex. Like any woman is going to sign a legal agreement before she has sex, saying that if she gets pregnant the father has not rights or responsibilities. What a joke. And given todays environment a written legal agreement is what would be needed.

    Seems to me that what was suggested by the lawyer makes much more sense.

    Comment by Phoenix — Thu 8th July 2010 @ 1:43 pm

  9. Yeah but that “agreement” wouldn’t be worth the paper it is written on in the current family… er womens court!

    Comment by Scott B — Fri 9th July 2010 @ 12:45 pm

  10. Phoneix,

    Ideas evolve and are debated and change.

    The fact that this approach is being debated more and more and that feminists are acknowledging this is an option shows that the paradigm is shifting.



    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Fri 9th July 2010 @ 1:17 pm

  11. The answer is to make single father by surrogacy a legal and easily obtained service. As it is it is cheaper then a marriage ceremony. HOwever it requires a trip to India. We may as well make is easy for men to this this in country.
    Imagine if women were going to India for abortions. Suddenly it would be legal here. So if men single men are going to India to have babies it may as well be legel and cheaply available here.
    Then men can have a baby ot 2 and get a vescetomy.
    So if it was ll about men taking responsibilites for their sexual choices why do we make these options so difficult and expensive?

    Comment by Dave — Sun 11th July 2010 @ 8:52 pm

  12. There is a good economic reason why men should have greater reproductive rights – and it applies to other areas of concern to men, like child support, matrimonial property and the onerous load placed on men to carry burdensome costs associated with maintaining households in which they can no longer live.

    It’s well known that scientists and engineers become less creative as soon as they marry and have children. There’s also plenty of anecdotal evidence that men with children are less likely to take risks – they’ll stay in low-paying but steady jobs rather than risk attempting new ventures if there is heavy pressure on them to provide.

    The effect of this is that a very large percentage of men who would respond to economic uncertainty with innovation have been taken out of the ranks of the creative. When economic turmoil is thrust upon us – as it is now – it is the risk-takers who lead us out. The fewer we have, the slower and less robust will be the positive response. We all suffer.

    This is actually a version of the ‘productivity of the slave’ argument, and has been around a long time (the American South of the 19th century was remarked to have been economically more sluggish and less efficient than the North, even though it had access to much lower labour costs. Through pregnancy traps, paternity fraud, inequitable divorce settlements and child support law, many men today are little more than slaves, unable to exercise the same personal autonomy as men in more dynamic parts of the world).

    Comment by rc — Fri 16th July 2010 @ 2:02 pm

  13. I am sure that the light at the end of the tunnel is a train.

    Comment by Darryl X — Fri 16th July 2010 @ 11:15 pm

  14. Not much of a discussion here. I don’t think anyone disagrees that without any reproductive rights and encumbered with complete financial responsibility (and most will argue a lot more than complete financial responsibility, as in the US, the average child support order exceeds cost of raising a child by a multiple of two), men are slaves, with no incentive for contributing their labor to civilization. So, civilization collapses. In addition to men being slaves, children are used as hostages for ransom and denied access to their fathers. That is child trafficking. Any woman who would want to bring a child into this world and impose those kinds of circumstances upon it and the father (and others), using the child as a commodity to be bought and sold, suffers debilitating cognitive deficiencies. I cringe when I think about how my ex-wife has done that to our children without remorse or shame. The current system TRAFFICKS CHILDREN and condems men to SLAVERY.

    Comment by Darryl X — Fri 16th July 2010 @ 11:36 pm

  15. Hate Men Feminists, are wanting, consent forms.
    Or similar, for sex, and likely.
    Eventually everything, before and after sex.
    Yet this topic, silence.

    Men have no right, to consent.
    Clearly, or the courts, fulled with offenders.

    I have recently had a friend, get pregnant.
    To a guy, in a relatively short relationship.
    Accidentally, of course.
    So he was surprised, with the news.

    Definitely not a gold digger situation.
    And she is a nice person.
    So we had a good conversation.
    And I hope things work out well for her.

    It may have been predatory.
    In that her body clock, for baby making.
    Was running out of time.
    The not as bright working male, a suitable donor.

    In seeing endless examples.
    Young females, who just want to be mums.
    Mid thirties females, with limited options.
    And dependency for a career, females.

    No consent forms required.
    Heterosexual, or faking being Heterosexual.
    Sex just for conception.
    Child Support, without contracts, of participation.

    Simply, slavery.

    A counter argument, is they new the risk.
    What risk then are men.
    And how is the risk, managed.
    Certainly, the courts are full.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Tue 6th July 2021 @ 6:16 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar