Only 1 parent decides if baby lives or dies??

[angelnmo]

I have a true story that I would like to share that may help some of you guys see what it's like to have the roles reversed.

My auntie was in her late forties when she started dating a new gentleman after her husband died. My auntie is a free spirited woman who likes to travel and enjoy life. She is one of those women who decided that because of her unstable lifestyle, children would not be right for her. Luckily, with her first marriage, she found a man who shared in her desire not to have children. Fast forward 21 or so years. She started dating another gentleman who was childless like her. They dated and enjoyed each other's company for a few years. According to her man, he was sterile and couldnt have children. Hence the reason why he had no children to speak of. After dating for over 2 years, my auntie finally felt that she could trust him and stop using protection. Well, needless to say, she ended up pregnant! Pregnant at such an old age. She was mortified and humiliated!!

The point of my story is this. My auntie now understands what it feels like to become an unwilling mother. She didn't want any children and her man agreed that he didn't want any either. He even assured her that he was sterile. What was she to do?
Well, luckily, women have access to options that men don't when it comes to an unexpected pregnancy. She had the option to keep the baby, abort if she so chose to, or give up the child for adoption. Men don't have this luxury. They can't force a woman to terminate the pregnancy if they don't want the child, nor can they give the baby up for adoption. The man is subject to whatever option the woman
decides to go with. But the woman has the right to kill or give up their baby without the man's consent. It takes two to make a baby, but why doesn't it take two to decide if they want to abort or give the baby up for adoption. Sounds lopsided doesn't it?
Oh, and if you are wondering what happened in my auntie's situation, here it is. She decided to terminate the pregnancy, against all wishes of the father. He wanted to keep the child, as this would be the only child he ever had. My auntie didn't care. Even though this man said that he would keep the baby and wouldn't seek child support from her, she said no. She said she'd be d**ned if she would carry a baby for 9 months and just give it up to him. He might seek child support and she wasn't having that. She said that she would rather kill their baby than give it to him to raise. And of course he had no say in the matter. He couldn't stop her from having the abortion and killing a baby that he wanted so desperately. Does this seem fair. Some women would say that he got her pregnant under false pretenses by lying and saying that he was sterile. How is this any different from a woman lying and saying she is on the pill when she really isn't? Why is it that the woman has the option to choose whether or not to have a baby if she doesn't feel she is ready, but if a man doesn't feel that he is ready to have a child, he doesn't have that same luxury? It takes two people to make a baby, pay for a baby and raise a baby, but only one to decide whether or not it should live!? Where is the fairness in that? Comments please.

[memyslfni]

Very interesting topic...In situations like these, at least one person of the two were unprepared to raise, birth, or devote themselves to such a responsibility. Some people are just plain selfish and cant see themselves taking care of anyone other than self. In a womans case it may be that someone falsified information, or was thinking for that moment, not thinking about the consequences of their actions. Therefore leaving her with the decision to keep or abort which I must say Is not an easy decision... Some women will keep the child and consider the man as a donor/complete stranger or use the child as a pawn to get $$. Some realize that the man they laid up with isnt the one for them and cant fathom having to deal with the guy for x amount of years. There are also the women that dont want a child out of wedlock. I guess u can say the woman wears the pants in that situation. But to keep it real, Its the woman who has to bear the child...If the roles were reversed the decision would be the mans..

[nomoredrama]

This is a very interesting. But, like memy said, the woman bears the child so, it is her decision. In your aunts case, the man probably thought that he could not have children. He may have thought that he had a low sperm count or something like that. But, we know that it only takes on swimmer to fertilize and egg. So, I assume that your aunt went thru with terminating the pregnancy? That is sad and is selfish.

It is also worth noting that some women do tell men that they are on the pill or can't have childrem. A man believes the woman and makes a stupid decision to have unprotected sex and 9 months later, we have baby mama drama.

[wbmama]

Interesting story. I agree that both should have a say. Though, its her body. I'm pro-choice - but in this case I feel sorry for the man.
Did he really lie? Or was he wrong? And if she was so dead set on NOT having kids maybe she should have taken more effort in not getting pregnant (like getting her tubes tied).

[awsomalx]

This is an issue/concern I've raised in many discussions with various people.
If a Mother decides to have a child and the sperm donor doesn't want the child and CHOOSES not to be involved..................Society/Laws says he's a "DeadBeat"
If the CHOOSES to abort said child but the Sperm Donor wants the child...............She's Pro-Choice
Really a messed up system for men.