It is understood why it came about. The ruling then allows her to arbitrarily decide if he should be burdened. That is neither fair or right. Especially when she is allowed not to burden herself if she so chooses.
She should not be able to make a decision that burdens him. That is wrong.
Which is why he should have the same effective right.
There is no g_d involved here, nor should there be.
Times change. Laws need to keep up with the changes.
What is even simpler would be making the woman 100% responsible for the outcome of what she allows into her body.
We are past that point.
She is pregnant and presently gets to arbitrarily decide whether or not to burden the man. Which is wrong and unfair
Giving the man an effective right removes the unfairness.