The right to abandon your child (aka - Roe v. Wade for Men)

"Ken Chaddock" wrote in message
news:152Rf.24417$dg.13566@clgrps13...
Joy wrote:

"NewMan" wrote in message
...

Well perhaps with the advent of the birth control pill for men things
will change too! If men have the option to take "the pill", and no
women could "trick him" and get pregnant. Further, if a woman DID get
pregnant while he was on the pill, he would immediately challenge the
paternity of the child!


I know several children who were conceived while their mothers were on
the pill. Think about it - first of all, the pill isn't 100% effective,
even when used absolutely correctly. Second, there are medications that
interfere with the pill - for instance, some antibiotics can render it
ineffective or less effective. Third, the mother could get sick - get a
bout of the stomach/intestinal flu, for instance - if she can't digest
it, it is much the same as if she hadn't taken it - a few days of the flu
at the wrong time could leave you fertile.

All things that most women *know* and should take into account if they
decide to have sex don't you think ? I know this may seem like I'm trying
to put the onus for contraception onto the woman, but realistically, she's
the one who knows her personal situation, whether she's taking medication
that interferes with the pill or whether she's been sick and how that
might effect her birth control efforts...if she doesn't take these issues
into account, can you reasonably and credibly assert that any man who has
been assured by her that she's "on the pill" could possibly be "culpable"
in an unwanted pregnancy under such circumstances ?

I think you missed my point. My point is, *nobody* can know for sure - so
it behooves *everybody* to grasp that, in the absence of a physical cause
for absolute infertility (like a hysterectomy, for example), ALL sexual
encounters bring some risk of pregnancy. Using birth control minimizes the
risk, it does not eliminate the risk. Therefore "an assurance that she's on
the pill" shouldn't give *either* party a sense of invulnerability. Both
parties should understand that every sexual encounter does carry a risk of
pregnancy, even with the pill. Even if the pill is taken 100% correctly.
For many people this brings the risk down to a level they find acceptable -
but the fact that there was a known, albeit small, risk means that IMO both
parties are equally culpable.

So are you saying that if the guy is too ignorant to know that even if she's
on the pill there is some risk of pregnancy then he shouldn't be "culpable"?
I'd disagree, because every sexually active adult really should know that
birth control isn't 100% reliable and you are accepting that risk when you
choose to have sex. The safest bet is to only have sex with somebody who
you know well enough to know they would handle a surprise pregnancy the same
way you would.