Roe v. Wade for Men?

March 9, 2006

Well, I guess it was just a matter of time.

The National Center for Men today filed a lawsuit in Michigan on behalf of 25-year-old computer programmer Matt Dubay. It seems Matt has been ordered to pay child support for a daughter he fathered with his ex-girlfriend, and Matt is crying, “No fair!”

A snippet from the very comprehensive AP story:

The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause.

The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.

“There’s such a spectrum of choice that women have — it’s her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions,” said Mel Feit, director of the men’s center. “I’m trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly.”

Our pal Matt has been ordered to pay $500 a month. His argument: the girlfriend knew he didn’t want a kid, and assured him she couldn’t get pregnant because of a “physical condition.”

 
Aaaaww, poor Mattie. He was lied to! Why should he be forced to support a child he didn’t want? Yes, he repeatedly inserted his uncovered penis into his girlfriend’s vagina, but he was under the impression her plumbing wasn’t working! So WHY should he be forced to help shelter, feed and clothe the resulting child?

What a freaking joke. This group apparently expects to lose the case, but hopes to “spark a national discussion” on the matter. I hope nobody tries to “discuss” this with me. It would be a rather short discussion. I tend to agree with Elisa’s comment on a previous post: Don’t want a baby? Put on a condom! (or keep it in your pants altogether, Skippy.)

The hard truth is, unintended parenthood is a chance you take every single time you get your freak on, ladies and gents. Deal with it.