Reason.com
Most Popular Stories
- St. Louis Cops Worry That In-Car Cameras 'Are Being Used Against Them' (5.23)
- Here Are the 15 Senators Who Voted to Stop Armed FDA Agents From Conducting Warrantless Raids on America's Farmers (Not One of Them is a Democrat) (5.24)
- Reason "Hero of Freedom" Larry Flynt's Latest Stunt? Photoshopping a Penis into Mouth of Conservative Pundit S.E. Cupp (5.24)
- When Government Privileges Trump the Rights of Citizens (5.25)
- Plastic Bag Ban Will Put Los Angeles In Landfill (5.23)
Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey
- Reason-Rupe: Wisconsinites Favor Increasing Public Union Retirement Contributions to Address Budget Deficit (5.25)
- Reason-Rupe Poll Finds Support for Public Union Reforms (5.25)
- New Poll: Obama Leads Romney In Wisconsin, But Gary Johnson Could Impact the Race (5.24)
- Wisconsin Recall: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42 Among Likely Voters (5.24)
- Reason-Rupe Poll: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42, Obama Leads Romney 46-36 (5.24)
advertisements
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsSite comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
|3.28.06 @ 4:03PM|#
Whaddaya guys think? 200 comments? 300?
|3.28.06 @ 4:28PM|#
No.
|3.28.06 @ 4:30PM|#
Dunno, Thoreau. Are you and Jennifer up for it?
|3.28.06 @ 4:34PM|#
I certainly think that if an unwed mother gives up her baby for adoption, the father should have first dibs on it. Don't know how much of an argument that can start here.
|3.28.06 @ 4:36PM|#
Given that the server squirrels seem to be near death, I give it no more than 50, thoreau.
|3.28.06 @ 4:53PM|#
ahhhh, let's see...
If all the "mother has absolute authority" commenters from last week want to be consistent then if a man gets a woman pregnant he doesn't have any say in the matter at all whether it's adoption, abortion, or child support.
|3.28.06 @ 4:54PM|#
Jennifer's being reasonable, Thoreau isn't making any manliness cracks...I say 30, tops.
|3.28.06 @ 5:17PM|#
Well I'm a "mother has absolute authority" commenter from last week and I find this pretty upsetting.
Also, I don't think anyone thought that there weren't scenarios going on where men were getting the shaft.
For myself, I married my crazy ex because I knew that it would cement my relation to my at-that-time imminent offspring in the eyes of some future judge.
Wow, wasn't that previous sentence romantic? no wonder I get all the girls.
R C Dean|3.28.06 @ 5:18PM|#
If all the "mother has absolute authority" then if a man gets a woman pregnant he doesn't have any say in the matter at all whether it's adoption, abortion, or child support.
Two out of three ain't bad, jelly roll.
I certainly think that if an unwed mother gives up her baby for adoption, the father should have first dibs on it.
He does. As the father, he has parental rights to the child, and no one can adopt unless and until he surrenders those rights.
|3.28.06 @ 5:21PM|#
Eric-
Good point. I don't really have any problems giving the father first dibs if the mother doesn't want the kid after giving birth. Jennifer and Eric agree. And the squirrel only lets us post sporadically. We'll be lucky to break 30.
|3.28.06 @ 5:24PM|#
OK, I'll make a manliness crack.
The server squirrel is a flabby baby-faced girlyman!
Or squirrelyman. Whatever.
lunchstealer|3.28.06 @ 6:18PM|#
I certainly think that if an unwed mother gives up her baby for adoption, the father should have first dibs on it.
He does. As the father, he has parental rights to the child, and no one can adopt unless and until he surrenders those rights.
That's the theory. What Cathy's article alleges is that in practice, the adoption goes through by default. His rights are precarious, and he can 'surrender' his rights simply by not filling out obscure forms within 30 days of birth. Neither the state, adoption agency, nor mother are obligated to inform the father of any of this.
|3.28.06 @ 6:55PM|#
Perhaps Jersey McJones can come along and help with the comment count.
|3.28.06 @ 8:22PM|#
If we were really concerned primarily with the welfare of the child we would have to admit that any given kid is going to be better off with two loving parents than just one. But I suppose biology trumps logic. In any event I bet the number of single men willing to raise their ex-girlfriend's kid must be vanishingly small.
|3.29.06 @ 2:46AM|#
Rhywun,
You are so wrong. The vast majority of men that I've known would raise their children given the chance. Unfortunately, the govmint makes that difficult in many cases.
Something to keep in mind when comparing mothers and fathers: Mothers kill their children at a significantly higher rate than fathers do.
|3.29.06 @ 10:09AM|#
Mothers kill their children at a significantly higher rate than fathers do.
WTF?
|3.29.06 @ 10:59AM|#
In recent decades, thanks to both technology and social change, we have made strides to alleviate the inequality for women, helping them avoid unwanted childbearing. But we have lagged far behind in equalizing the situation for men.
That makes it sound like men's rights are just passively lagging behind, but the reality is that the gov't spends billions of dollars every year actively violating those rights.
From Phyllis Schlafly's recent column:
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=13577
Federal funding thus provides powerful monetary incentives for states to maximize the number of single-parent households with high transfer payments, and to minimize equal child custody which would lessen transfer payments. Depriving or reducing children's access to one parent is thus a source of revenue for states.
Mothers kill their children at a significantly higher rate than fathers do.
WTF?
It's true.
|3.29.06 @ 1:38PM|#
It's true.
And it's also totally irrelevant, which was why I called WTF.
Amy Phillips|3.29.06 @ 3:30PM|#
Here's a question: say a pregnant woman intends to put the child up for adoption once it's born. She has no desire to raise it and wants to give it a family who can provide for it financially and emotionally better than she can. Now say that the father of the child does wish to raise it and wants to take sole custody of the child instead of having it be adopted by strangers. In this circumstance, should the mother be forced to contribute financially to the upkeep of the child, having her wages garnished if necessary to give money to the father to help him defray the costs of raising the child?
I hope that those people who believe men should be forced to pay child support for children they did not want will answer yes to the above question. If a father can be forced to financially support a child being raised solely by its mother, then a mother should also be forced to financially support a child being raised solely by its father. If current law is to be fair, she shouldn't be able to abdicate financial responsibility for the child just because she wanted to put the child up for adoption and he didn't.
|3.29.06 @ 5:35PM|#
she shouldn't be able to abdicate financial responsibility for the child just because she wanted to put the child up for adoption and he didn't.
For the record, I don't think either parent should be forced to pay child support unless they were married when the child was born. But I also think it's delusional to *willingly* raise a child on your own. But then I don't have the biological urge to procreate, either...