Why shouldn't he have that right? What if the mother does have access to abortion (or the father offers to provide the financial means for such access) and still chooses to bear and raise the child? What if the father paid for hormonal contraception and the mother failed to use it correctly or chose not to do so? (For years, I took primary responsibility for birth control in my relationship, because biologically, I was the one who would get pregnant and therefore I had a greater stake in using it correctly.) Women can also choose not to provide financial or physical support...that's called adoption. When a woman chooses to give her child up for adoption, and the father objects, he is almost always perceived as selfish; if he ultimately wins custody, the mother is seldom required to pay child support (after all, she maturely and unselfishly wanted to place the child with a lovely, middle-class nuclear family). Women choosing to keep their children shouldn't be relying on support - financial or psychological - from former partners who have clearly expressed a preference for abortion.

The matter is not the woman. It is an innocent person who didn't ask the man to have sex knowing he doesn't want a child . By keeping a pregnancy, the mother choose to save the life of an innocent. And since that innocent is not responsible for the parents actions, he/she should be taken care of by both the man and the woman...his/her parents....

i think a man should take responsibility if he fathered a child. If he can decide that he didnt want one, then he can decide to put on a condom. It is all to common of a man to run out a women who is bearing their child. Women and men sometimes dont think of the consequences while their having sex. That child should not be punished because their mother or father wasnt responsible enough to have control and take care of business. That's like everybody wants to throw a party but afterwards no one wants to help clean up. I think that its becoming harder and harder for kids. Instead of having laws to protect these babies dumbass parents, we should have laws to protect the innocent babies from their wacked out parents and they obviously are not considered the child in the situation.

I think this mentality stems from the myth that women lie to "trap" men into marriage or commitment. This is indeed a myth. Many women - due, in fact, to their intimate knowledge that pregnancy will affect their body - DO talk about birth control with their partners. What happens in situations where, after mutual discussion and agreement, the couple decides not to use birth control? If the woman then gets pregnant (this is a clearly known risk), is it OK for the man to back out and legally deny responsibility when her only "solutions" involve one of two paths, neither which is a simple choice: abort the baby (from which follows a lifetime of emotional pain) or have the baby, either to raise it or put it up for adoption (which both also carry tremendous emotional, financial and other considerations). Until men can physically experience pregnancy IN THEIR BODIES I do not think that it is fair to give them the right to deny responsibility for pregnancy. I do resent the few women that do lie to their partners, but I stress that the MAJORITY of women do not behave in this way. The reality is that women bear the burden of pregnancy. To give men the right to legally deny responsibility of any kind is a slippery slope that tempts abuse. Legal precedent would open the door for any man to simply change his mind and lie his way out of supporting a child he played half the role in creating. This does not establish a situation of equality but rather one where men will be even further removed from the responsibility of pregnancy than they already are. If they don't experience the physical, bodily changes that accompany pregnancy and society also gives them an escape from the emotional and financial impact, they will have true freedom in a system where women are shackled to fate and forced to trust men who have may or may not be trustworthy. How can one take that risk?

It irks me when male reproductive rights groups complain they dont have choices. They do...the difference is the timing when that choice happens. For men, they have the choice BEFORE sex either by using condoms, abstaining or having a vasectomy. All are highly effective methods. Many men resonate that condoms dont often work. The fact is that a properly used condom, combined with a spermicidal lubricant, is just as effective as the best Pill on the planet. Vasectomies, again are highly effective as long as patients make the follow-up appointment to make sure the vasectomy took. Abstinence is 100% guaranteed effective. If Mr. Dubay have taken responsibility and took his own percautions (in his case, continuing to use condoms), he would not have found himself in that situation.