Abortion For Men

I personally always did until I got into the relationship I'm in for the past few years- I'm responsible for the contraception it doesn't bother me and both of us accept there's always a risk and are ready to deal with the consequences. But what happens when not in a relationship the condom the girls carry is too small/ too big? I've had instances where the guy wanted to chance it anyways with the too big condom. my point is lads have more of an idea of what fits (given that its theres) so would they not carry their own properly fitted condoms? Or is it too much effort?

LiveIsLife wrote: »

So do you believe in abortion? Because there's a simple way for a woman to avoid getting pregnant too

Accidents happen and sometimes people make bad choices. Imagine how much the sexual landscape would change if men had a chance to have no responsibility at all for their offspring. An unplanned pregnancy is a huge deal for a woman no matter what she does, the idea that women who choose adoption or abortion just move on from it is a myth, you don't forget, its not easy and it affects you forever even if you are totally confident you make the right choice.

I trust my partner and I feel secure in the knowledge that if I got pregnant we would face it together but how can I be totally sure of that especially if he can just absolve himself from it. This wouldn't just affect the one night stands or the casual daters, long term partners can just walk away too sometimes after a planned pregnancy when the reality gets too much for them. One of my cousins ended up a lone parent 8 yrs into her marriage because her husband couldn't cope with a disabled child. Should she have closed her legs too?

GarIT wrote: »

But being the mother you have the control, you can choose adoption. If you choose to be the father you have no say in what happens and risk being landed with the financial burden.

For mothers the financial burden is your decision, for fathers the financial burden is somebody else's decision.

Also the number of males in receipt of lone parents in Ireland where the mother is not deceased is almost zero.

I think that if a man wants the right to force a woman to undergo an abortion he should, at the same time, under go a medical procedure he doesn't want either.

You have a horrifically simplistic understanding of the impact on women of a pregnancy so I will list them out. It is not just a case of supporting children for 23 years.

1) women who have children take a major lifetime earnings hit. Fathers tend not to.
2) women who have children tend to be under provided for pension wise as even one child has an impact on their working life earnings
3) women who have children see their career ambitions negatively impacted
4) women who have children run health risks linked to pregnancy, and linked to abortion
5) the burden of care of children falls mostly on mother.

Lone parents' allowance doesn't even come half close to sorting this out for most women.

You're whinging and howling about having to support a child for 23 years and moaning about how you can't make a decision on the matter and that because the woman has the choice blah blah blah.

However, you're not likely to have to take the time off, your pension isn't going to get hit, no one is going to say to you "ah well you've kids now, you don't want those promotions or you're not so interested" and you're not going to be the one dealing with the health ramifications of either an abortion or pregnancy.

The impact on a woman is a metric tonne load more than 23 years child support, and much of it foisted on her by society which tends to reward men more than women, so yeah, when it comes to what to do about a pregnancy, maybe she should have the greater say in the matter.

diveout wrote: »

Yep.

One of my best friends is raising a child alone, a planned child ...because his father changed his mind midway through the pregnancy.

It's insane to suggest that men and fathers can move away consequence free from siring children. Spray and run like dogs.

And then you have relationship breakdown, say a couple have been together a while and had some kids, things go south...what then? Can he just start over with a new partner, distance himself from his old family, stop paying for them?

And if not, why not? Why should it be the single guys who get all the benefits.

diveout wrote: »

If men are given carte blanche the option to walk away from a child and pregnancy consequence free than surely you can see the outputs of a law like that?

It certainly would cost the state a fair bit but thats how the social welfare system already works. I don't believe in all that protection the family sh!te.

magicbastarder wrote: »

So the alternative is that women should be 'forced' to have an abortion to avoid the same fate. Can you see why women are at a disadvantage here?

Adoption. Women aren't forced to do anything.

Women have the choice to do what they want, men should have the choice to not go along with the mothers decision rather than being forced to participate.

Calina wrote: »

I think that if a man wants the right to force a woman to undergo an abortion he should, at the same time, under go a medical procedure he doesn't want either.

You have a horrifically simplistic understanding of the impact on women of a pregnancy so I will list them out. It is not just a case of supporting children for 23 years.

1) women who have children take a major lifetime earnings hit. Fathers tend not to.
2) women who have children tend to be under provided for pension wise as even one child has an impact on their working life earnings
3) women who have children see their career ambitions negatively impacted
4) women who have children run health risks linked to pregnancy, and linked to abortion
5) the burden of care of children falls mostly on mother.

Lone parents' allowance doesn't even come half close to sorting this out for most women.

You're whinging and howling about having to support a child for 23 years and moaning about how you can't make a decision on the matter and that because the woman has the choice blah blah blah.

However, you're not likely to have to take the time off, your pension isn't going to get hit, no one is going to say to you "ah well you've kids now, you don't want those promotions or you're not so interested" and you're not going to be the one dealing with the health ramifications of either an abortion or pregnancy.

The impact on a woman is a metric tonne load more than 23 years child support, and much of it foisted on her by society which tends to reward men more than women, so yeah, when it comes to what to do about a pregnancy, maybe she should have the greater say in the matter.

But the woman has a choice to have none of that.

magicbastarder wrote: »

What you're saying is 'you make the hard decisions while i walk away from a situation i helped create'. Which is the act of a coward.

Yes exactly like a woman does when she chooses an abortion or adoption when the father wants to keep the child.

eviltwin wrote: »

May I suggest you pop over to the Adoption board and read some of the accounts from birth mothers and educate yourself a bit about that option. Giving up a child is a huge decision, please don't reduce it to something as simple as a A or B. I find that really insulting tbh.

I never claimed it was easy. But I'd take if for 100k.