April 4, 2006
OPINIONSLegend's View:
Avoiding child support for unwanted baby irresponsible
Controversy surrounding Roe v. Wade is nothing new.
The law, passed in 1973, has been the cause for numerous court cases and rallies, in addition to becoming a hot button topic that affects the rise and fall of politicians.
It also played an important role in the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court, as Conservatives hope they will someday overturn Roe v. Wade.
Furthermore, the states of South Dakota and Mississippi are taking their own courses of action in banning abortion.
South Dakota led the way, when on March 6, 2006, a bill banning abortion was signed into law by the state’s governor, Mike Rounds. It was passed undemocratically with no public vote.
Mississippi’s attempt at overturning Roe v. Wade fell short because the State House and Senate failed to agree the basis of the bill, while Gov. Haley Barbour had already said he would sign it if it passed.
However, a new angle is being added to the debate. It includes a voice for the little guy or in this case the cheapskate.
Matt Dubay is a 25-year-old computer programmer who is attempting to avoid financial responsibility for a child he fathered.
How is his attempt different from any other deadbeat dad?
Dubay claims that while he was dating Lauren Wells, the mother of his eight-month-old daughter, that she told him she was unable to become pregnant because of a physical condition.
Now, instead of embracing the miracle of life, Dubay is turning his back on it and filing a lawsuit.
The suit, nicknamed Roe v. Wade for Men and supported by The National Center for Men, debates that if a woman can choose among abortion, adoption, or raising a child once becoming pregnant, then a man should be able to choose whether or not to pay child support if the pregnancy is unwanted.
Yet, what Dubay and others like him should really be choosing is to wear a condom every time they partake in sexual intercourse.
These problems could have been avoided if responsibility had been taken on both Dubay and his partner’s behalf.
Even if his partner really couldn’t get pregnant, they had unprotected sex and the risk of STDs was at hand.
The problem is that it should have never had come to this sort of dilemma.
Now, in light of having a child that needs to be supported, raised and cared for, an additional problem has been created.
While condoms are not a 100 percent guarantee to prevent pregnancies, they are a guarantee to lessen the chances of a pregnancy.
Dubay should have not had unprotected sex, regardless of what his partner’s condition is, if he was so concerned about not fathering a child and having to support it. Or, he even could have chosen not to have sex until he felt he could handle the risks.
Ultimately that is what is comes down to; that if a woman and a man decide they are responsible enough to have sex, they both should be responsible enough to accept any repercussions of their decisions.