She can give up for adoption? If the father is known does he not have to agree to the adoption? I was under the impression there had to be a good faith effort to find the father so he will sign the papers as well. If this was very casual sex or bar pick ups or such, it may not be possible to know
But you make it sound like a woman in each case has the right to give up the baby for adoption without the father's approval. But my guess is there are laws against adopting the baby without good faith efforts to find the father.
Everything is so unfair to us men! :2bigcry:
All a man has to do is look at the pregnant mother, and he will know she is pregnant. It is not something that is easy to hide.
The key is "
if the father is known;" not by the woman but by the authority she is submitting the child for adoption to. Furthermore, the male can't do anything
unless she has told him she is pregnant, so he won't necessarily know that he has a child to assert any rights to.
She may very well
know who the father is, but
she does not have to admit it. In cases where there is no husband she can simply tell the hospital she does
NOT know, sign the paperwork giving up the baby for adoption, and that's all there is to it. She has fully opted out for both her and the male.
Beyond the hospital option there is also the "baby drop off" option in some states where all a woman has to do is drop the baby off at a church, hospital, or fire station and then simply disappear. In either case unless the male knew about the prenancy and actively seeks the child, she's just opted-out for both of them. These are clear pro-life option's for women opposed to abortion but who do not wish to raise a child.
Even if the male knows, it's possible for the woman to simply claim she had a miscarriage. Only a husband might know better since they share the medical bills.
It is also disingenuous to presume every male
will KNOW a girl he slept with is pregnant. Why? Some engaged in one-night stands; some in short-term hook-ups; some in moderate-term "relationships;" some in long-term but not live-in relationships; some in long-term relationships in which she "takes a break" and he might not see here for a few months. Hell, there's even the possibility in a marriage where the husband is away like a soldier on overseas duty. In each case the woman is in total control of not only her decision to abort, but also her decision to place the child up for adoption. In each case she can also decide to tell him and he is stuck with the obligations.
Are the members arguing against SAM's position really that myopic; only seeing things one absolute way?? The man MUST know? Really? REALLY?!?!
Women abort without telling men all the time. Many women also simply give the child up for adoption without ever telling the male she gave birth. Thus the woman can uniltarally opt-out of childbirth either via abortion, or simply by not telling the male and then abandoning the child for adoption. However, if she tells him and she states she is keeping it...he's stuck.
That is inequitable, and all your fallacious arguments do not balance the equation. Those arguments do not address the essential question, why does she get to unilaterally decide for both when it comes to keeping a child?