How Deadbeat are Deadbeat Dads, Really?

[Dextroden]

There's a lot of things unhealthy that people do on a daily basis.

And we shouldn't care. Women can do as they please. Anyone saying otherwise is trying to crush their bodily autonomy.

- - - Updated - - -

Remember earlier when I told you to actually attack arguments made? I'm saying it again.

If you want to have a reasonable discussion, I'm all for it. If you want to shriek hyperbolic one liners, there's a mirror and a room that'll echo for you.

Don't agree with it. Handwave away. Clap clap.

[THE Bigzoman]

It actually does. Mostly because a fetus isn't considered a person who's body autonomy can be breached until birth.

The impacts go beyond the fetal status and carry on throughout the child's life, when that definition no longer applies.

- - - Updated - - -

No, but if you slap a fine on it, you're hurting her and the kid economically.

I'm sure that one fine isn't going to have that profound of an impact economically.

You're also assuming that money would've went to the kid. If she's already boozing, that's highly questionable.

[Vanyali]

The impacts go beyond the fetal status and carry on throughout the child's life, when that definition no longer applies.

.

I'm aware, but that's where the weirdness of legality of it is. It is not a person, ergo it cannot force the mother to not do anything by existing. You could make it a person.. but then accidental miscarriages (or natural miscarriages) become manslaughter, and abortions murder. Anything that might harm it (and if you look at the list, using a cell phone is classified as potentially harmful, as is a heating blanket and a microwave) becomes child neglect.

Which is why educating people is far superior - you don't end up in situations where, because of a natural miscarriage, a woman is on trial for manslaughter because a fetus is considered a person, and said person died in her "care"/ while dependant.

[Dextroden]

I'm aware, but that's where the weirdness of legality of it is. It is not a person, ergo it cannot force the mother to not do anything by existing. You could make it a person.. but then accidental miscarriages (or natural miscarriages) become manslaughter, and abortions murder. Anything that might harm it (and if you look at the list, using a cell phone is classified as potentially harmful, as is a heating blanket and a microwave) becomes child neglect.

Which is why educating people is far superior - you don't end up in situations where, because of a natural miscarriage, a woman is on trial for manslaughter because a fetus is considered a person, and said person died in her "care"/ while dependant.

Okay. Once it becomes a person, it's fucked up by neglectful behavior. But whatevs. Future baby's wellbeing <Mommy's life.

[Deleted]

Because most crimes are not about preventing you from your bodily autonomy.
I say most because yes, drug laws technically do so, though generally it's for possession.

No, Being on them is a crime too.

- - - Updated - - -

No, body autonomy is the control of what you do with your body. It actually has zero to do with abortion (baring that getting one is based on your choice because of it), and applies to men as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodily_integrity

"Bodily integrity is the inviolability of the physical body and emphasizes the importance of personal autonomy and the self-determination of human beings over their own bodies. It considers the violation of bodily integrity as an unethical infringement, intrusive, and possibly criminal."

yeah, but this has zero to do with abortion.
US abortion is predicated on privacy, not bodily autonomy.

[Mehrunes]

http://www.pregnancy.org/article/thi...ring-pregnancy

Live for 9 months avoiding everything on this list, please.

Ehhh, not that super restrictive tbh. And the majority of the examples from that site you pointed here aren't even from the "Things You Should NOT Do" section of the article but merely the "Think Twice" part...

I'm aware, but that's where the weirdness of legality of it is. It is not a person, ergo it cannot force the mother to not do anything by existing. You could make it a person.. but then accidental miscarriages (or natural miscarriages) become manslaughter, and abortions murder. Anything that might harm it (and if you look at the list, using a cell phone is classified as potentially harmful, as is a heating blanket and a microwave) becomes child neglect.

Which is why educating people is far superior - you don't end up in situations where, because of a natural miscarriage, a woman is on trial for manslaughter because a fetus is considered a person, and said person died in her "care"/ while dependant.

Well, countries influenced by Roman law have the institution of nasciturus, i.e. a baby that's conceived, but not yet born. It is a legal fiction and requires a condition of the baby being born alive, but as long as this condition is met in the future, the fetus can be subject to certain rights and such (which come into effect once it's born). Main use of this fiction is inheritance. The general rule is that one needs to be alive during the moment of testator's death, but a baby already conceived during that time can be an inheritor (if it's born alive that is).

But more importantly to this discussion, nasciturus gains claims for damage to its health once it's born. Usually such laws are used for damage performed by third parties, like someone who assaulted a pregnant woman, but such concept could easily be extended to women who were drinking during pregnancy. And even though my country has such laws, our legal system does not treat miscarriages as manslaughter (and even though legality of abortion is very limited here, the mother faces no legal consequences, just the person performing it). The lawmaker isn't always that stupid to make a mental leap from "drinking alcohol while pregnant is now forbidden" to "miscarriage is manslaughter" (though YMMV depending on your country).

[Vanyali]

Well, countries influenced by Roman law have the institution of nasciturus, i.e. a baby that's conceived, but not yet born. It is a legal fiction and requires a condition of the baby being born alive, but as long as this condition is met in the future, the fetus can be subject to certain rights and such (which come into effect once it's born). Main use of this fiction is inheritance. The general rule is that one needs to be alive during the moment of testator's death, but a baby already conceived during that time can be an inheritor (if it's born alive that is).

But more importantly to this discussion, nasciturus gains claims for damage to its health once it's born. Usually such laws are used for damage performed by third parties, like someone who assaulted a pregnant woman, but such concept could easily be extended to women who were drinking during pregnancy. And even though my country has such laws, our legal system does not treat miscarriages as manslaughter (and even though legality of abortion is very limited here, the mother faces no legal consequences, just the person performing it). The lawmaker isn't always that stupid to make a mental leap from "drinking alcohol while pregnant is now forbidden" to "miscarriage is manslaughter" (though YMMV depending on your country).

I'd be 100% fine with the bold, as I've said.

Unfortunately.. this is 'murica, and we're already prosecuting for stillborns and miscarriages. For a more extreme look, here's El Salvador on miscarriage.

It's a way to get around abortion being legal and it's one of the more disgusting things to come out of the pro-life politics.

[turboether]

Some fathers love their children and not their ex's, news at 11.

[Mehrunes]

The whole "the male is only involved if a female wants him to be" is also really funny, mostly because it assumes that you're either pump and dumping or have zero trust at all with you girlfriend. And by funny, I actually mean sad. If you get someone pregnant and you don't even know they're pregnant I question what happened in the two months or so before she probably knows and the month or so when she'll be showing enough to tell. Mostly because going from "yeah, sex!" to "never seeing again" when it results in a pregnancy is also rare.

Some people just can't go through abortion, for a variety of reasons. It's really not as simple as "oop, child be gone, no side effects at all!"

These two kinda contradict each other. You can easily be in a stable relationship where you both agree, trust and all, that in a case of contraception failure abortion would be the way to go, because you're (as a pair) not ready for a child, financially or in any other way. But once that happens the girl is confronted with the reality of abortion and she can have a change of mind because well, it's a serious decision that can be traumatizing and she can't go through with it in the end. There's a difference between making a statement on how'd you behave in such a difficult situation from the position of safety and how'd you actually behave in such a situation. And for the other part of the first post, well, one night stand's aren't exactly uncommon.

And while I agree that abortion laws have other focus point, I can't agree that they don't factor in "at all". While focused on bodily autonomy, it does have the side effect of preventing the legal ties between a woman and her child being created (by eliminating the successful creation of the child, but still). And just as nasciturus laws can be used to create legal ties between an unborn child and someone else, they could be adapted to do the opposite, which is preventing other ties between an unborn child and another person being created (once it's born), which would mimic this side effect of abortion.

I'd be 100% fine with the bold, as I've said.

Unfortunately.. this is 'murica, and we're already prosecuting for stillborns and miscarriages. For a more extreme look, here's El Salvador on miscarriage.

It's a way to get around abortion being legal and it's one of the more disgusting things to come out of the pro-life politics.

As I said, your millage may vary. But it's not really an argument against laws prohibiting mothers from drinking during pregnancy (if they decide to have the baby at least) themselves, and more of an argument against stupid lawmakers that are on the extremely slippery slope from there to "miscarriage=manslaughter". People this stupid have no place passing laws.

Though you have a point about 'murica... I've got an idea. If you could convince the Congress to make it so that pregnant women are seen as corporations by law ("human factories" could be the driving catch phrase of the campaign), they would have increased protection by law compared to actual humans. So no miscarriages witch hunts. And now you can pass as many laws on prohibition of drinking during pregnancy as you want (in this case they could even be passed under the umbrella of "business environmental regulations").

[Deleted]

Some people just can't go through abortion, for a variety of reasons. It's really not as simple as "oop, child be gone, no side effects at all!"

It is that simple, remember you talking about how your state was telling you that one glass will kill the baby? Now then, why do you think that if this is taken out off context so much that they have been telling you the truth about abortion? I think you have preconceptions about them that are not realistic. Im not saying that it is something that can't be dangerous, or that it has no consequences, but its not as horrific as you paint it to be.

Which is why I've said repeatedly the mother has a choice between two fairly terrible medical procedures. Yes, the father can share in the emotional side (of both)... but while he has no rights in saying which one, he ALSO doesn't have to deal with the physical effects of either. That's the major issue - people seem to want a choice for something they are not physically going through. The financial burden is on both. The emotional burden is on both. The physical burden.. is on one. And that one gets the choice of which crappy door to walk through.

- - - Updated - - -



I've definitely said it has effects on guys too, and I feel sorry for any guy whose child is aborted when he wants it. That's still not a reason to remove bodily autonomy, but it IS a reason to wish artificial wombs get here faster.

Again with the physical burden, stop arguing against nature! You can walk through whatever door you want, but don't complain about it being crappy. It is your decision so therefore it is your responsibility. Stop trying to pawn it off on men, the double standards are mind boggling here. They do not want to choose what their body isn't going through, they want to be the ones that can decide what their lives will be like. You have not given a single reason as to why a guy should not have the right to be able to choose their offspring just like females can. This has nothing to do with your body, it only lays the financial burden on the people who want to have a baby.

[Deleted]

http://www.pregnancy.org/article/thi...ring-pregnancy
Live for 9 months avoiding everything on this list, please.

Who the hell wrote this shit? If you read this, safely disregard everything here.

"Check your core temperature during workouts every 20 minutes using a rectal thermometer. You might not feel hot, but remember your baby can't cool down by sweating. Slow down or rest if your temperature reaches 101°F."

But the baby is inside you, it will have your Temp, pretty much always.
I.E you can cool of by sweating.
This doesn't even make sense.

"Cell phones and computers: Regulatory agencies find no compelling evidence of health risks when devices are used properly but they still recommend following precautionary. These steps can lower your baby's exposure to low-level radiation.

And this one is retarded.
Cellphones use radio (not exactly but it does not matter) waves, Those are not, as a matter of physics, capable of inducing dammage.
They are simply too big to do so.

Electric blankets and water bed heaters give off low-level electromagnetic fields which may be harmful to a developing baby. A regular bed with a quilt or extra blanket might be your best plan during pregnancy.

What about your temperature? whatever, the electromagnetic thing is once again, Bonkers, A, you live inside electromagnetic fields so if you want to avoid them, move out into the woods (and then there is the earth field) B, Once again, not strong enough to harm anything.

Dopplers and ultrasounds: These noninvasive procedures, when used properly, have not shown harm. Because the long term effects of repeated, more frequent scan on the growing babe in utero remain unknown, ultrasounds are recommended only to be used if medically indicated. Read our keepsake ultrasound checklist.

/facepalm.
Those are medical procedures.
They should of course only be done by professionals.

Microwave ovens are shielded to reduce microwave radiation levels. If your microwave is older, check or replace the door seals. Because of uncertainty about danger to your baby, it's wise not to stand directly in front of a microwave. Move to the opposite side of the room while it's in use."

Microwaves are closer to radiation sure, but ultraviolet light is much closer, best the pregnant woman not leave the house in the days.

"Watch Out for Stress
Try to avoid major upheavals like moving or changing jobs while you're pregnant. If stress creeps into your life, minimize it with these relaxation tips."

This one is actually (somewhat) valid.

[Rennadrel]

Any man stupid enough not to get a prenup these days is just asking for trouble. Better yet, also use a rubber and don't have kids.

Also, if you want to see deadbeats, go watch Maury, there is a prime example of it.

[Deleted]

"1. Fathers are less involved in their children's care during the marriage.

2. Fathers are less involved in their children's lives after divorce.

3. Mothers gain custody because the vast majority of fathers choose to give the mother custody.

4. There is no Family Court bias in favor of mothers for the majority of fathers who divorce. The argument that Men's Rights activists make doesn't hold water. Not based on the statistics above, anyway!"

Funny, I don't see "dads love their kids less" in that list.

You seem to believe that men only want to have sex with women, and men want to abandon their children.

Nothing could be further from the truth.