From: morgana@infonode.ingr.com (Angela Morgan)
Subject: Re: Fair?? (was Re: Abandoment is not same as Adoption)
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 02:58:35 GMT

king@meaddata.com (Mike King) writes:

>In article <1992Sep1.153206.10521@infonode.ingr.com>, morgana@infonode.ingr.com (Angela Morgan) writes:
>|> king@meaddata.com (Mike King) writes:
>|> 
>|> >Like every man alive, I to, would like to have some say in what
>|> >happens to my child before it's born.  Would I put it up for adoption,
>|> >keep it, abort it, or forget about it.  Unfair or not that decision is
>|> >not in my hands.  Would I like it to be?  Yes.  So long...flame away.
>|> 
>|> Are you saying that you favor taking that control away from the woman
>|> and putting it in the hands of the man?  That's what it sounds like you're
>|> saying....

>No, I don't favor taking ALL of the control away from the women.  I'd
>just like to get some small piece of it.  Anything is better than nothing!  

>|> Is that what you think is *fair*?!?!  Oh well, if you do, I guess you
>|> simply join the ranks of millions of men who have twisted and warped
>|> definitions of "equality" and "fairness".

>I can hardly believe you said that!  Unless, of course, you consider
>the mother having all of the say and the father no say as being FAIR.

I said that because it sounded to me like you were saying that "turning
the tables" (i.e., taking the control away from the woman and giving it
to the man) was "fair."  Certainly *I* don't think that is "fair" that
either side should have absolute control.  However, there are many (bitter)
people who think that "turning the tables" is somehow fair.  I've seen
quite a bit of that on this group.  Sorry if I misunderstood you.

>When you were pregnant you, and you alone, had the choice as to what 
>to do with the child.  The husband had no say in it.  Is the child any
>less his?  You call that fair?

When I got pregnant, I considered the "fate" of the child to be a joint
decision between me and my husband.  I would never have considered making
that decision on my own.  Sounds like it's too bad more women don't think
this way.

But, of course it's not fair.  It might not be possible to make it fair,
considering the biology of the situation.  There are many things that are
dictated by biology that aren't fair, but we can't do a damn thing about them.

I don't think the answer lies in giving the man some say in whether the
woman keeps the child or aborts it, however.  The answer lies in giving
the man some way to renounce fatherhood if he wanted the woman to abort
the child, but she refused to do so.  This seems to be the situation that
most of you are complaining about.  The converse (man wants child but woman
wants to abort) simply cannot be equalized, in my opinion.  Sometimes
people lose children that they want; that's a fact of life.  And it's not
just you guys, either.  Many a woman has aborted a child that she really
wanted to keep, but couldn't for whatever reason.

>|> [I realize, of course, that many women also have pretty twisted definitions
>|> of fairness and equality, but I'm not one of them.]

>|> I'm so sick of all the whining and bellyaching that I hear on this group,
>|> I feel like starting a new group called alt.ncp.woman.  Even though I'm
>|> in the same boat as all you ncp men (I'm the ncp, I've been raked over
>|> the coals by the system, I pay a large part of my salary in child support,
>|> etc., etc.), I feel practically *nothing* in common with any of you.

>You definately are unique.  How on earth did you NOT get custody?
>I'm assuming that you were a "fit" parent.

I certainly am.  A fit parent, that is.  I don't know about "unique."  :-)

>If that is the case, it's the first time I've ever heard of a father
>getting custody over a "fit" mother.

Wake up!  It's happening more and more.  The system is getting more liberal
on custody issues.  Judges are getting more liberal, and are more likely
to look at the father as a candidate for being the CP.  It's not just
fathers who get screwed by the system; it's *any* NCP whether male or female.
I know this to be a fact through firsthand experience....

This is why I've been saying that any efforts to change the system should
be NCP-oriented, not father-oriented.  You guys are really turning off any
NCP women, with all the bitching about how fathers are always the ones who
lose custody, and fathers are the only ones who pay child support, and
fathers are the only ones who get trampled by the system, and so on.
(You're turning *me* off, anyway.  I'm starting to think I'm wasting my time
reading this group.)  Seems to me that NCP women could be a real asset in
system reform, especially since it doesn't seem to be "fashionable" these
days to be sympathetic to fathers' rights....

--angela

_________________________________________________________________________
|                              |                                        |
|  Angela Morgan, NSS 24044    |  UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!infonode!morgana  |
|  Intergraph Corporation      |  INTERNET: morgana@infonode.ingr.com   |
|  Mailstop LR23A2             |  205/730-8324, FAX 205/730-8300        |
|  Huntsville, AL  35894       |  "Real cavers don't have suntans."     |
|______________________________|________________________________________|
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,soc.men