I saw this guy being interviewed last night....he was devastated. Unfortunately the wife ended up having a miscarriage. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/25/politics/main516284.shtml Ex-Boyfriend Can't Stop Abortion WASHINGTON, August 5, 2002 (AP) A judge gave a woman the go-ahead Monday to get an abortion after her ex-boyfriend won an extraordinary order that temporarily prevented her from terminating her pregnancy. Common Pleas Judge Michael Conahan dissolved the temporary injunction issued against 23-year-old Tanya Meyers by another judge a week ago. Conahan also dismissed a lawsuit filed by the ex-boyfriend, John Stachokus, to force her to carry her fetus to term. A woman's right to have an abortion "is not subject to being vetoed by a woman's husband or partner," said Conahan, who is based in eastern Pennsylvania's Luzerne County. "Neither an ex-boyfriend nor a fetus has standing to interfere with a woman's choice to terminate her pregnancy." The order preventing Meyers from getting an abortion had outraged abortion rights activists. Meyers is about 10 weeks pregnant. One of Meyers' lawyers, Susan Fritchey of the Women's Law Project, welcomed the decision issued Monday. "Her right to privacy has been restored and she is free to go on with her life," Fritchey said. "It's a great relief for her." John Stachokus, 27, had said he was willing to take full or partial custody of the child and claimed in his lawsuit that Meyers was being pressured by her mother to have the abortion. The case gained the support of abortion opponents and fathers' rights groups. "I see it as a very sad case," said Dianna Thompson, executive director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. "The woman has the right to choose, which means the child has no right to live and the father has no right to raise this child." Stachokus' attorney, John P. Williamson, did not immediately return a call for comment. "We're relieved, but at the same time we're disappointed that it had to go this far," said Elizabeth Cavendish, legal director for the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. "We hope this won't encourage anti-choice advocates to misuse the litigation process to stand in the way of the execution of a woman's constitutional rights." Meyers had filed for a protection-from-abuse order from Stachokus, an emergency dispatcher she met 10 months ago. She said he had threatened and harassed her since their breakup on July 22. Anti-abortion and fathers-rights groups defended the decision made by the court earlier to issue a temporary injunction on Meyers' pregnancy. "We talk about fathers negatively so often, about how they don't want to be responsible for their children, and this guy is doing everything he can to be sure his unborn child isn't aborted," said Dianna Thompson, executive director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. "Men's rights are trampled on all the time when it comes to reproductive rights."
Forgot to mention that no one even called the dad to tell him about the miscarriage. He found out when a reporter called his house to ask him about it. Sad.
While it appears that this man was sincere in his desire to raise the child, ruling that the woman could not have the abortion could cause abuse of the ruling. What if it was an ex-boyfriend who hated the woman? He could claim that he wanted her to have the kid, then once it was born, refuse to support it in any way. Are you going to make the fathers sign something guaranteeing that they'll support the child financially?
Abortion or no, this is the key paragraph. If he truly was abusive and had to have a restraining order placed on him, this goes well beyond just a desperate father trying to save his unborn child.
There is nothing the father can do once conception occurs. He certainly can't (and shouldn't be able to) force the female to have an abortion...so he's stuck with parental obligations (child support, etc). But when a woman wants to have an abortion to terminate his parental rights, she can do so summarily and without his input at all.
they're required under the law to support them finanically...in the state of texas you'll get your wages garnished if you don't...you can't discharge child support in bankruptcy... texas, and many other states, have gotten very serious about the enforcement of child support.
Just because they're required under law to do that doesn't mean they will...I have an ex brother in-law to attest to that.
Very inconsistent. You can also be prosecuted for killing a fetus if the fetus were to die in an assault. That means it's legal for your mother to kill you, but illegal if someone else does.
i realize that...but you said that he should sign something to agree to take care of the child...my point was that he didn't need to..he's compelled by law...of course, anyone can breach an agreement and anyone can break the law... as for the pro-lifer point you make above...sure, personal responsibility plays into it...i agree entirely that if you have sex you better be ready to support a child...i just think it's inconsistent (and maybe it has to be) to say that someone else gets to forfeit your parental rights for you...i mean, having someone else make choices for you is what all those pro-choice people champion all the time.
How is this any different then some of the women that Shawn Kemp has gotten pregnant, and now has to pay to raise the kids? I mean, I am sure he asked them to get abortions too. Seems a bit contradictory to me. DD
the Why should women be exempt from . . THINKING ABOUT IT BEFORE SEX Hypocracy?????? three people involved. . . one gets a choice. . yea that's fair Abortion: The single most selfish act a human can commit [no different than the Menedes Brothers] Rocket River
Read this article. Again, the issue rests on what point you believe a fetus becomes a human being. If you believe that the fetus is a human at conception, then it really doesn't matter what either the mother or father wants. The fetus has the right to life and should thus be born. But if you believe that the fetus only become human later (a tricky issue unto itself, but I won't go into it here), then you have to balance the effect of the pregnancy on the mother and father. No matter where each parent stands on the decision to keep or terminate the pregnancy, the woman is affected emotionally and (arguably) physically while the man is only affected (arguably) emotionally. Therefore, the woman's interests clearly outbalance the man's. In all honesty, I'm really not sure where I stand on the abortion issue in general. I just hope it's not a situation that I'll ever have to deal with personally.
That's why they have adoption agencies. At least give the father A CHANCE to prove he is going to be a father, and not just abort the pregnancy because you ASSUME he isn't going to be a good father. If the mother can't support the child there's adoptions, there might be family members willing to raise the family. And if the father is a pathetic loser who is trying ot "punish" the mother, well have the child adopted.
Speaking of child support... http://foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59963,00.html Moms Can Be Deadbeats Too Thursday, August 08, 2002 By Liza Porteus Single dads are sick and tired of being labeled "deadbeats" when it comes to paying child support. And data suggest they have good reason to be upset. The percentage of "deadbeat" moms is actually higher than that of dads who won't pay, even though mothers are more consistently awarded custody of children by the courts. Census figures show only 57 percent of moms required to pay child support -- 385,000 women out of a total of 674,000 -- give up some or all of the money they owe. That leaves some 289,000 "deadbeat" mothers out there, a fact that has barely been reported in the media. That compares with 68 percent of dads who pay up, according to the figures. Men who are due child support are also getting tired of deadbeat moms' excuse that they can't pony up the money, and some courts have responded. California lawyer Eudene Eunique in February was denied a passport because she was $30,000 behind in child-support. Instead of spending money on visiting her family in Mexico and on business contracts, the appeals court ruled Eunique’s money should go to her kids. Meanwhile, warrant officers in southwest Florida earlier this summer dubbed an effort to list the area’s top deadbeat moms who owed up to $19,000 in support as "Operation Father’s Day." Included on the list were Trudi Dana, 43, who owes $19,001 and 29-year-old Mary Mahadie Friar, who owes $16,493. Of course, the problem of deadbeat dads remains a serious one. Many more men than women have to pay child support, making the overall number of deadbeat dads much greater. The statistics show 4.3 million moms out of 6.3 million who are supposed to receive child support actually get it. That leaves the alarming figure of about 2 million deadbeat dads, putting them more in the media spotlight than deadbeat moms. But men also still pay much more in child support. The Census Bureau last month also released numbers showing fathers paid an average of $3,000 to custodial moms in 1997. Women paid little over half that. Moms also get about 60 percent of what they are owed, whereas dads only get 48 percent. Not only are the dads paying up more when they don’t have custody, but when the court does hand the kids over to dads, they work more than moms who have custody. While 7 percent of custodial moms work more than 44 hours a week, 24.5 percent of single custodial dads work more than 44 hours. And only about half as many custodial dads get government help than moms. Some dads say it’s not for a lack of laws that moms are getting away with not paying up. Bill Henry is head of Dads Against Discrimination of West Virginia and a single dad. In 1983, his first ex was ordered by the court to pay $25 a month in child support – which he did not start actually receiving until 1987 – even though the state minimum then should have been $75 a month. Henry said dads are often discouraged from pursuing custody battles by attorneys and often don’t like to make waves in the system, as long as they get to regularly see their child or get complete custody. "A lot of men are afraid to ask for child support simply because they think if they’re asking for child support, they won’t get a chance to get custody," Henry said. California dad Scott Downing has also experienced child-support snafus and said courts continue to give dads the short end of the custody stick. "The laws are there, but it’s the way the courts interpret those laws," he said. Single dad David Wood of North Carolina has similar concerns. "My frustration … is not so much there’s any biases in me getting child support … it’s just the whole system needs a lot of work. If you don’t get aggressive with it … you have to really work to get it if someone doesn’t want to play the game" and pay up. Wood, whose ex-wife has had trouble in court, said there are four men he knows of just at his workplace who are currently or are going to be single dads, or are grandparents of kids who had deadbeat moms. "It’s not the exception anymore," Wood said, adding that before he became a single dad two years ago, "I would have almost bought into that stereotype" the dads are usually the deadbeats. But "that philosophy is just 30-40 years out of date." But more moms that don’t have the kids simply can’t afford to pay child support since they are poorer, said Geraldine Jensen, president of the Association for Children for Enforcement of Support. Studies show the average income for non-custodial moms is only $15,000 a year, whereas non-custodial dads average about $40,000 a year. And moms who don’t have custody of the kids often remarry and have more kids, and often choose to not work. But "that’s certainly no excuse," Jensen said. "It doesn’t matter if you’re a mom or dad, you should meet your child support obligations."
Just like to add some documents I've read and saved in my personal files. Female Murderers Seen in a Different Light: Society Prefers to View Violent Women as Victims By Glenn J. Sacks A Miami mother is drowning her six month-old baby in an apartment swimming pool when a maintenance man stops her and rescues the child. A Jacksonville woman asphyxiates her three children with car fumes. A Houston woman drowns her five children in a bathtub. A San Diego toxicologist poisons and kills her husband after he discovers her affair. All of these crimes shocked the nation during the past week. But should we really be so surprised? The truth is, female violence in American families is anything but rare. For example: • According to the US Department of Justice, 70% of confirmed cases of child abuse and 65% of parental murders of children are committed by mothers. • Police investigators and academics believe that 15% of the roughly 7,000 Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) cases reported each year in the United States are really cases of suffocation, primarily committed by the mother. This alone accounts for at least 1,000 homicides a year. Criminologists point out many if not most cases of SIDS aren’t reported and, because autopsies are rarely able to distinguish between suffocation and SIDS, the actual number of murdered infants is probably much higher. • Female juvenile crime rose 75% from 1980 to 1999, and female crime rose 200%. At the same time, violent crime nationwide declined. • Infanticide in the industrialized nations is as common or more common as the killings of adults, and the vast majority of these infants are killed by their mothers, according to the World Health Organization • A custodial mother is five times more likely to murder her own children as a custodial father, adjusting for the greater number of single mothers, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services. And women are getting away with it. Among women convicted of killing their infants, two-thirds avoid prison completely and the rest serve an average of only seven years. The average prison sentence for females in the U.S. is only about 70% that of males for most violent crimes. A man convicted of murder is 20 times more likely to receive the death penalty than a woman. How do women get away with it? For one, their victims tend to be the helpless, or semi-helpless, such as children, the elderly, and infants. Thus there’s less struggle in their crimes, and less evidence left behind. Also, they tend to use “hands off” methods such as smothering and poisoning, which are less traceable. Female murderers tend to be older than male murderers, and thus are looked upon with more trust and less suspicion. When killing husbands or other adults, women often hire others to do the killing. However, according to crime journalist Patricia Pearson, author of When She Was Bad: How and Why Women Get Away With Murder, the reasons women escape punishment go far beyond the evidence (or lack of it) left at the crime scene. Female killers, Pearson says, are often successful at turning their violent crime into victimhood by citing, among others, defenses such as Postpartum depression, Pre-Menstrual Syndrome, and Battered Wife Syndrome. According to Pearson: “The operative assumption is that the violent woman couldn’t have wanted, deliberately, to cause harm. Therefore, if she says she was abused/coerced/insane, she probably was.” Pearson also blames male judges and law enforcement personnel and men in the media who don’t take women’s capacity for violence seriously and tend to make excuses for, and cover up for, violent women. The case of Russell Yates illustrates Pearson’s point. His wife Andrea murders their five kids and he, while commenting on the horror of her crime, seeks to protect her from harsh punishment. During the week after the murders, writers, talk-show hosts, and talk show callers rushed to make excuses for Ms. Yates. One caller suggested that Russell Yates is the real perpetrator for allowing Andrea to be alone with the kids in her condition and that he should be charged with manslaughter. Another caller compared the murders committed by a pair of 10 year-olds to the Andrea Yates killings, saying that all three perpetrators need sympathy and understanding. The insulting infantilization of the mother--as if a grown woman is no more accountable for her actions than a 10 year-old--went unnoticed by both the conservative male talk show host and his feminist co-host. After the Miami near-murder, one prominent internet news service posted the story and asked readers to sound off on the question: “Should children be permanently removed from their mother if she tries to kill them?” Treating the violent woman as if she were a child, or insane, or a victim worthy of sympathy--is this the way to protect society and our children from violent criminals?
Father Care The Other Child Care Option By Glenn J. Sacks The stay at home mom vs. working mom debate is raging again, following a report by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development that children in day care are more aggressive and hostile by the time they're in kindergarten than those in a mother's care. One could make a case for either side in the debate but let me instead suggest a third option--father care. There is plenty of research to support the idea, but I'll begin with my own research--my family. Three years ago, at the birth of my daughter, we were a traditional family--I worked long hours, and my wife had left her job to be at home. My wife was unhappy at home and missed her career, and I was unhappy being away from my kids. My wife suggested that we switch roles. The idea had never occurred to me, but I decided to try it. Our new roles worked better than I ever would have dreamed. My daughter and I have bonded as closely as any mother and child and have spent countless happy days together. Both family and strangers always comment about my daughter's radiant confidence and self-esteem, as well as her attachment to daddy. She is happy, well-adjusted, and strong-willed--and a product of father care. Can fathers do the job? Research says yes. A Yale study found that infants living only with their fathers were two to six months ahead of other infants in personal and social skills, and that older babies in father-care exhibited similar advantages. Another survey found that boys in father-custody homes have higher self-esteem, are more mature, more independent, and less demanding than boys in mother-custody homes. A recent Danish study comparing toddlers in single mom and single dad homes found that the father care children had fewer temper tantrums, were less-sensitive to criticism, less fearful, less likely to feel lonely, and more likely to have high self-esteem. Fathers were included in the controversial new National Institute study but in such small numbers that the results were not statistically meaningful. Can men be as nurturing as women? If given the chance, yes. Men, in general, aren't as nurturing as women not because of biology or testosterone but because it has never been men's role to be nurturing. Men's role has been to compete in the work world in order to provide for their families. The woman's role has been to nurture. Give a man the role of nurturer and he'll become nurturing. My wife often remarks upon how much calmer, patient and "centered" I've become since switching roles. Are men more likely to lose patience with children and abuse them? Studies show that fathers are less likely than mothers to use physical punishments with their kids. According to the US Department of Justice, 70% of confirmed cases of child abuse and 65% of parental murders of children are committed by mothers, not fathers. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, adjusting for the greater number of single mothers, a custodial mother is five times as likely to murder her own children as a custodial father is. Children are 88% more likely to be seriously injured from abuse or neglect by their mothers than by their fathers. There's no reason to think that children are safer in the primary care of a mother than of a father. Can men be convinced to do it? Given the proper adjustments, many can. The idea never occurs to most men--just as it never occurred to me--but if they think about the advantages--loving care for the kids and plenty of time to spend with them, no supervisor breathing down their necks, a temporary release from the 40 years of work without interruption that is the fate of most men--many men will come to embrace the idea. Sometimes when I get frustrated with housework I remember days when I'd work until 10 and come home and carry my sleeping son around the house on my shoulder because I missed him so much and I realize how lucky I am. Stay-at-home dads will have to struggle with certain prejudices. For one, our society exalts female sacrifice in mothering and housework, yet when a guy actually says "OK, I'll do all that stuff--you go have your career" he's immediately derided as a slacker or a leech, as well as unmanly. Unfortunately, some women's advocates have helped to aggravate this situation by producing misleading studies specifically designed to portray stay-at-home dads as lazy. Men will also have to approach the job in their own way--not as a poor copy of a stay-at-home mom, but as a dad. All baby-care products and rituals now revolve around women and men will need to make some changes. For example, in place of the standard changing table, which seems to be built for a woman who's about 4' 10", I built my own--one comfortable for a 6' 2" male, with shelves above it, instead of cabinets below it. My wife says she can't use it without a ladder, but that's not important because it's right for me and I'm usually the one who uses it. I keep us on a home-cooking only economy and to help myself I partially remodeled the kitchen, installing lots of ceiling racks and hooks to keep pots and pans up where I can get to them. Can father care work economically? For some families, it clearly won't. But many couples find that having a stay-at-home parent is much more economical than a two-income family. The second income is lost but the one-income couple saves on day care, taxes, food, and a thousand other expenses that two-income couples rack up due to a lack of time or workday flexibility. Having me at home has saved us tens of thousands of dollars not only because I've used my "female" skills (child care, cooking) but also because I've used my "male" skills (carpentry, woodworking, etc.) to fix our "fixer-upper" house where another couple would have to pay contractors. As author Warren Farrell notes, in the beginning of the feminist era we were often told that "the best man for the job is a woman," and sometimes it was true. In the current child care dilemma, sometimes the best "mother" for a child is a father.
STATISTICS 1) 43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census] 2) 90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census] 3) 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behaviour, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978] 4) 71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999] 5) 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census] 6) 85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control] 7) 90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28] 8) 71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools] 9) 75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children] 10) 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988] 11) 85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992] 12) Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
Falcons Talon: On all the stats you listed, a fatherless home is very likely only one of many problems faced by children in those categories. I would argue that poverty and lack of education play the greatest role with fatherlessness being mixed in there. In addition, these stats only prove that fathers are not involved with children enough and I agree with that. It does not prove that the mothers have ANYTHING to do with the reason the father is not in the life of the child. This isn't to say that the lack of a father in the home isn't a significant factor in the development of children. No question there is a dramatic effect. But, the stats cannot stand on their own in defense of fathers or against mothers. They have to be taken in context.
