On a bit of a tangent, I have thought that the abortion debate ignores paternal responsibility. I don’t want to get into a debate about abortion (I am in favour), but logically if abortion is outlawed then a father abandoning their child should also be outlawed. Someone can father a child and then disappear without too many consequences, certainly without having to make difficult decisions or undergo a surgical procedure or raise a child for the next 20+ years. It strikes me however that it is impossible to force fathers to take responsibility. Needing to make child support payments is hardly enough. Abortion is in a way a compensating for this differential responsibility. It seems that women are blamed for getting pregnant and then vilified for wanting an abortion, but the father is not mentioned at all.
Au contraire, fathers don't have an option of relinquishing responsibility of having a child (at any time after conception). They have to pay child support, or face jail time! Not only do women have access to abortion, but they can also (AFAIK in many states/countries) give up the child for adoption (in which case they also don't need to pay child support, as the taxpayers/adoptive parents cover the child's costs).
I support abortion, but I also support "financial abortion" for unwilling fathers (same as currently exists for sperm donnors).
> but they can also (AFAIK in many states/countries) give up the child for adoption (in which case they also don't need to pay child support, as the taxpayers/adoptive parents cover the child's costs).
In most jurisdictions, giving a child up for adoption legally requires the consent of both biological parents; it is not something the birth mother can do unilaterally. (Courts do have the power to override the requirement for consent of either or both parents; but, they have to give each parent the opportunity to be heard in court first.) So, when it comes to adoption, the position of the mother and the father are more parallel than you present it as.
I'm not a lawyer and only did a bit of research in this topic, but I found out about things like "baby boxes" that allow mothers to relinquish newborns anonymously.
On the other hand, this US website [1] suggests that fathers do have a right to assume the father figure (so you're right), although their rights are still lesser than a mother's ("Most states require a birth father to provide financial support to the pregnant mother, and failure to do so may result in the birth father being unable to stop an adoption.").
Although I wonder if in the case where the father assumes custody, the mother (who wanted to give up the child for abortion) would be required to pay child support or not (the website suggests "no", but isn't very explicit on this topic).
> I found out about things like "baby boxes" that allow mothers to relinquish newborns anonymously.
Laws permitting that sort of thing only exist in certain jurisdictions. All 50 US states now have laws allowing parents to anonymously abandon infants to certain "safe places" (such as hospitals, fire stations, etc)–usually it is limited to the first 30 days or so of life. However, many of those laws are actually written so that either birth parent can legally do this, although in practice it would mainly be the mother. Also, if the other parent is aware this has happened, they can intervene and object to the process. By contrast, in England and Wales, for either parent to do this is a criminal offence (although they are unlikely to be prosecuted in practice)
> Although I wonder if in the case where the father assumes custody, the mother (who wanted to give up the child
In general, most child support statutes are written in a gender-neutral way. The custodial parent can claim financial support from the non-custodial parent, irrespective of their genders. (Or even, in some cases of joint and equal custody, one custodial parent may be able to claim support from the other.) So, even though in practice it mostly involves non-custodial fathers paying money to custodial mothers, if the father has custody, the mother can be made to pay child support. Even though it is less common, it can and does happen [1]
In one case of which I am personally aware, here in Australia, the mother had full custody of two boys. But, she wasn't sending the boys to school (among other issues); so their father went to court, and got full custody of them awarded to him instead. Legally he has the right to claim child support from her, although it is unlikely in practice he's going to get any significant money out of her (she's unemployed and of no fixed address, etc.)
Of course bad fathers are mentioned. Bad male behavior is called out all the time usually with adjectives such as toxic, aggressive or predatory. And in many cases the default is to assume a man is bad and then wait to see if it's otherwise. I'm pretty sure it as default policy on one UK airline to never have an unaccompanied minor next to a male passenger.
The man can run away but cannot really eliminate the legal responsibility. The woman, however, can do it before and (unless there is opposition from the father) after the birth.
Naturally they can but as a society we don't like to talk about it. It a bit like men who don't want to work to support themselves and others. Anyone at the bottom of the social hierarchy is culturally ignored and abandoning a child as a mother is not a winning strategy for social status.
> if abortion is outlawed then a father abandoning their child should also be outlawed
Men are forced to pay child support. Either if they want the child or not. Woman in almost every state, can choose to abort if they don't want to raise the child or at least monetarily support it. Men have no choice.
Think about how it actually works in reality, and it is obvious women are at a disadvantage. Toy example: man hurts back, can’t work, can’t pay support. Woman hurts back, still has to look after child and work.
Also, if you read my comment and the original article, support payments are obviously not a substitute for actual parenting.
