Tweet
http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?se...cal&id=3975949
SAGINAW (WJRT) - (03/09/06)-- It's being called the male version of Roe v. Wade. The National Center for Men has prepared a lawsuit that will be filed today in Michigan.
The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violate the Constitution's equal protection clause.
While the group is ready for the lawsuit to fail, they hope to spark a debate.
The National Center for Men argues women have more options than men in the event of an unintended pregnancy.
The gist of their argument is if a pregnant woman can choose abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.
A mid-Michigan man will be the plaintiff in this lawsuit.
Matt Dubay, of Saginaw, says he's been ordered to pay $500 a month in child support for a baby he had with his ex-girlfriend.
Dubay argues his ex knew he didn't want to have a child with her and she assured him repeatedly that because of a physical condition, she could not get pregnant.
State courts have ruled in the past that any inequity experienced by men like Dubay is outweighed by society's interest in ensuring children get financial support from two parents.
The group doesn't advocate an unlimited fatherhood opt-out. The goal is to propose is a brief period in which a man, after leaning of an unintended pregnancy could decline parental responsibilities.
SAGINAW (WJRT) - (03/09/06)-- It's being called the male version of Roe v. Wade. The National Center for Men has prepared a lawsuit that will be filed today in Michigan.
The suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violate the Constitution's equal protection clause.
While the group is ready for the lawsuit to fail, they hope to spark a debate.
The National Center for Men argues women have more options than men in the event of an unintended pregnancy.
The gist of their argument is if a pregnant woman can choose abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.
A mid-Michigan man will be the plaintiff in this lawsuit.
Matt Dubay, of Saginaw, says he's been ordered to pay $500 a month in child support for a baby he had with his ex-girlfriend.
Dubay argues his ex knew he didn't want to have a child with her and she assured him repeatedly that because of a physical condition, she could not get pregnant.
State courts have ruled in the past that any inequity experienced by men like Dubay is outweighed by society's interest in ensuring children get financial support from two parents.
The group doesn't advocate an unlimited fatherhood opt-out. The goal is to propose is a brief period in which a man, after leaning of an unintended pregnancy could decline parental responsibilities.
Comment