Choice for Men FAQ

Q: What is "Choice for Men"?

A: Choice for Men is a proposal to improve the law so it protects men's
right to plan their families.


Q: Would Choice for Men force women to have abortions?

A: No.


Q: What exactly is Choice for Men?

A: Choice for Men would give men a recourse, remedy or relief from being
tricked or trapped into parenthood, perhaps by allowing them to relinquish
their parental rights and responsibilities, like in an adoption, via
financial compensation or by forcing an actual adoption. Some proposals
would limit the time during which the choice can be made, make the choice
irrevocable, only apply when men are lied to about birth control or when
boys are statutorially raped. One proposal even allows women to relinquish
their parental rights and responsibilities. Choice for Men isn't a medical
procedure.


Q: How many men are tricked or trapped into parenthood?

A: No one knows the exact number, but we can estimate from the following
statistics:

* Preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended
according to fathers[0].

* Paternities are established in U.S. courts at the rate of one or two
per minute.


Q: Isn't Choice for Men simply a way for men to get out of paying child
support?

A: No, it's more. Choice for Men is about fairness and family planning.


Q: Can't men avoid paying child support by just using condoms?

A: Proponents of legalizing choice for men generally support
contraception, but keep in mind that condoms are unreliable. They have a
16% annual failure rate [1]. After just four years you can bet on having
an accidental pregnancy and after 20 years of using condoms, the chances
are that a man will most likely experience not one, not two, but three
accidental pregnancies!


Q: Can't men avoid paying child support by not consenting to sex?

A: Many people are surprised to learn that men can't legally avoid
parenthood by not consenting to sex. It's true! Here's a quote from a court
case in Kansas:

"The issue of consent to sexual activity under the criminal
statutes is irrelevant in a civil action to determine paternity
and for support of a minor child born of such activity." [3]

Similar cases have happened in other states.


Q: Aren't all children entitled to support from both parents?

A: No. A common exception is single parent adoptions, which are fully legal
and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies.


Q: Wouldn't Choice for Men impoverish children?

A: It's not yet clear whether legalizing choice for men would affect how
many fathers choose to be absent. The simple reason is that the current
paternity laws reward women with child support for forcing men into
fatherhood and may well result in more absent fathers. Even if legalizing
choice for men did result in more single parent families, adoption and
sperm donorship are already legal for single parents and looked upon
favorably by various social service agencies. One can also show that the
economic benefits of a second parent's income don't rise to the level of a
"compelling state interest" which justifies the state forcing men into
legal parenthood. [4]


Q: Where can I find out more about Choice for Men?

A: 1. Email list servers dedicated to legalizing Choice for Men
(www.choiceformen.com/list_servers.html)
2. www.choiceformen.com
3. National Center for Men. Call (503) 224-9477
4. Men's Rights Inc. Call (916) 484-7333


References

0 - Abma, Joyce and Linda Piccinino, 1994 "Unintended Births: Women's
Attitudes vis-a-vis their Male Partners' Attitudes: 1982-1990", paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association,
August 3, 1994, Los Angeles, CA. NCHS, 6525 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD
20782, (301) 436-8731

1 - Facts in Brief, Contraceptive Use, Alan Guttmacher Institute, New York
City, New York, (212) 248-1111.

2 - Griswold v. Connecticut 381 U.S. 479 (1965)

3 - State of Kansas, ex rel., Colleen Hermesmann, Appellee, v. Shane Seyer,
a minor, and Dan and Mary Seyer, his parents, Appellants. No. 67,978.
Supreme Court of Kansas. March 5, 1993.

4 - See generally Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 265-6, 90 S.Ct. 1011,
1019, 25 L.Ed.2d 287, 1970.

On Mar 16, 4:02�am, Kingsley G. Morse Jr. (Delete the D)
wrote:
Q: What is "Choice for Men"?

A: Choice for Men is a proposal to improve the law so it protects men's
right to plan their families.

Q: Would Choice for Men force women to have abortions?

A: No.

Q: What exactly is Choice for Men?

A: Choice for Men would give men a recourse, remedy or relief from being
tricked or trapped into parenthood, perhaps by allowing them to relinquish
their parental rights and responsibilities, like in an adoption, via
financial compensation or by forcing an actual adoption. Some proposals
would limit the time during which the choice can be made, make the choice
irrevocable, only apply when men are lied to about birth control or when
boys are statutorially raped. One proposal even allows women to relinquish
their parental rights and responsibilities. Choice for Men isn't a medical
procedure.

Q: How many men are tricked or trapped into parenthood?

A: No one knows the exact number, but we can estimate from the following
statistics:

* ** Preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended
* * *according to fathers[0].

* ** Paternities are established in U.S. courts at the rate of one or two
* * *per minute.

Q: Isn't Choice for Men simply a way for men to get out of paying child
support?

A: No, it's more. Choice for Men is about fairness and family planning.

Q: Can't men avoid paying child support by just using condoms?

A: Proponents of legalizing choice for men generally support
contraception, but keep in mind that condoms are unreliable. They have a
16% annual failure rate [1]. After just four years you can bet on having
an accidental pregnancy and after 20 years of using condoms, the chances
are that a man will most likely experience not one, not two, but three
accidental pregnancies!



33% of births (those that are "unintended") are NOT caused because
condoms are unreliable.

Put on a friggin rubber.

"A: No one knows the exact number, but we can estimate from the following
statistics:
* Preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended
according to fathers[0].
* Paternities are established in U.S. courts at the rate of one or two
per minute."

I fail to see how the above has ANY relation what so ever to men being
tricked into pregnancy. The fact that a pregnancy was unplanned does NOT
mean that the man was "tricked". Thats a very misleading statistic that
actually proves NOTHING.



"A: Proponents of legalizing choice for men generally support
contraception, but keep in mind that condoms are unreliable. They have a
16% annual failure rate [1]. After just four years you can bet on having
an accidental pregnancy and after 20 years of using condoms, the chances
are that a man will most likely experience not one, not two, but three
accidental pregnancies!"

So NOW you want any man to be able to abandon any child for any
reason....because his condom was unreliable? BS. In the first paragraph
you said that men who were trapped via rape would benifit from this "law"
but now it seems that this IS just a way for ANY man who wants to up an
abandon his child to do it legally. The failure of a condom or BC is NOT a
valid reason for a man to claim that he was raped or "tricked" into
parenthood.




"Q: Aren't all children entitled to support from both parents?

A: No. A common exception is single parent adoptions, which are fully
legal
and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies."

Single parent adoptions are TOTALLY IRRELIVENT in cases of childsupport.
The two things have NOTHING to do with one another. Single parent adoption
ONLY happens when BOTH bio parents rights have been terminated....so
neither parent has any responsibility. Single parent adoption IS NOT the
same as a man abandoning a child. What a stretch.


"Q: Wouldn't Choice for Men impoverish children?"

YES.

"A: It's not yet clear whether legalizing choice for men would affect how
many fathers choose to be absent. The simple reason is that the current
paternity laws reward women with child support for forcing men into
fatherhood and may well result in more absent fathers. Even if legalizing
choice for men did result in more single parent families, adoption and
sperm donorship are already legal for single parents and looked upon
favorably by various social service agencies. One can also show that the
economic benefits of a second parent's income don't rise to the level of
a
"compelling state interest" which justifies the state forcing men into
legal parenthood. [4]"

BULL****. Single parent adoption and DI have absalutley NOTHING to do with
a man abandoning his child. This article is obviousley written by a moron
who has NO understand of the LAW and is grasping at straws. If a single
woman can adopt....why can't I abandon my baby(that resulted from
consentual sex) and force all my responsibility onto the mother. After all
if some women WANT to be single parents....my baby's momma should be
FORCED to be a single parent so I can save a bit of cash.

"A: No one knows the exact number, but we can estimate from the following
statistics:
* Preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended
according to fathers[0].
* Paternities are established in U.S. courts at the rate of one or two
per minute."

I fail to see how the above has ANY relation what so ever to men being
tricked into pregnancy. The fact that a pregnancy was unplanned does NOT
mean that the man was "tricked". Thats a very misleading statistic that
actually proves NOTHING.



"A: Proponents of legalizing choice for men generally support
contraception, but keep in mind that condoms are unreliable. They have a
16% annual failure rate [1]. After just four years you can bet on having
an accidental pregnancy and after 20 years of using condoms, the chances
are that a man will most likely experience not one, not two, but three
accidental pregnancies!"

So NOW you want any man to be able to abandon any child for any
reason....because his condom was unreliable? BS. In the first paragraph
you said that men who were trapped via rape would benifit from this "law"
but now it seems that this IS just a way for ANY man who wants to up an
abandon his child to do it legally. The failure of a condom or BC is NOT a
valid reason for a man to claim that he was raped or "tricked" into
parenthood.




"Q: Aren't all children entitled to support from both parents?

A: No. A common exception is single parent adoptions, which are fully
legal
and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies."

Single parent adoptions are TOTALLY IRRELIVENT in cases of childsupport.
The two things have NOTHING to do with one another. Single parent adoption
ONLY happens when BOTH bio parents rights have been terminated....so
neither parent has any responsibility. Single parent adoption IS NOT the
same as a man abandoning a child. What a stretch.


"Q: Wouldn't Choice for Men impoverish children?"

YES.

"A: It's not yet clear whether legalizing choice for men would affect how
many fathers choose to be absent. The simple reason is that the current
paternity laws reward women with child support for forcing men into
fatherhood and may well result in more absent fathers. Even if legalizing
choice for men did result in more single parent families, adoption and
sperm donorship are already legal for single parents and looked upon
favorably by various social service agencies. One can also show that the
economic benefits of a second parent's income don't rise to the level of
a
"compelling state interest" which justifies the state forcing men into
legal parenthood. [4]"

BULL****. Single parent adoption and DI have absalutley NOTHING to do with
a man abandoning his child. This article is obviousley written by a moron
who has NO understand of the LAW and is grasping at straws. If a single
woman can adopt....why can't I abandon my baby(that resulted from
consentual sex) and force all my responsibility onto the mother. After all
if some women WANT to be single parents....my baby's momma should be
FORCED to be a single parent so I can save a bit of cash.