Tuesday, March 21, 2006

An American man is seeking to have his obligation to his seven -month old daughter legally terminated, because her mother gave birth to her against his wishes.

In what the National Center for Men has dubbed the Roe VS Wade case for men, Matt Dubay, 25, said that the news of his impending fatherhood came as an unwelcome shock. Dubay claims that after a one-night stand with 20 year-old Lauren Wells, she became pregnant despite telling him that she was both infertile and on contraceptives.

Both? It seems rather a waste of money to bother with contraceptives if one is infertile...You think this'd be a big red flag, but apparently Mr.Dubay wasn't thinking with the proper head.

Now faced with a child support order of $500 per month, Dubay says that not paying is his constitutional right.

"I don't believe men have any say," he complained last week from his home in Saginaw, Michigan. "Whatever a man has to say is simply ignored."

"I painted a very clear picture at that point that I was not ready to be a father," he said. "I was not ready to be a part of the child's life."

The picture he painted involved Wells having an abortion. She informed him that not only would she not have one, but he would have to pay his share in their daughter's upbringing, regardless of his wish to have her or not.

While Dubay's lawsuit doesn't seek to force adoption or abortion on expectant mothers, his federal lawsuit claims that men who face fatherhood without their consent should be able to opt out of fiscal responsibility.

I would think that the opportunity to opt out involves not getting a girl pregnant.

The founder of the National Centre for Men, Mel Feit, said says that as a result of Roe vs Wade, "women now have the freedom and security to enjoy lovemaking without the fear of forced procreation".

Forced procreation? Have these guys not heard of the pill?

But, he said: "Men are routinely forced to give up control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as the price of intimacy."

He claimed that the lack of male reproductive rights violates the principle of equal protection under the American Constitution. "A man must choose to be a father in the same way that a woman chooses to be a mother," Mr Feit said.

In cases of IVF where the father doesn't want frozen embryos used, yes. But when it comes to good ol' fashioned sex, the man has the pre-emptive option to not impregnate a woman using birth control or abstinence. In Dubay's case, trusting a total stranger to be on birth control (and infertile) was his mistake. He should have brought along his trusty raincoat, if you get my drift.

Saying that she was "disappointed" in her ex-boyfriend's decision, Wells said: "I believe that life begins at conception and blossoms. I take responsibility for my acts and will do my best as an adult and mother to protect and provide for our daughter."

Dubay has never held his daughter, and met her only once, at the lab facility where her paternity test was performed.

I say this lowlife is nothing but a deadbeat dad trying to escape the consequences of his actions! If he's so deadset against having a child, he should've taken measures to prevent it.

No comments: