NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/dadsrig/2609

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-15 | 6.5 KB

Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:2609 misc.legal:19987 alt.activism:18835 soc.women:19658 soc.men:19357
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,misc.legal,alt.activism,soc.women,soc.men
Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ddsw1!karl
From: [e-mail] (Karl Denninger)
Subject: A proposal for reproductive freedom for BOTH sexes
Sender: [e-mail] (Karl Denninger)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 00:35:38 GMT
Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Chicago, IL
Lines: 129

Seems to me that we have, as a people in America, reached a crossroads:

    On the one hand there are people who wish to remove a woman's right
    to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy.  They are gaining
    ground.

    On the other hand there are people who believe that a man is a
    walking wallet when there are children concerned and the couple
    which produced those kids aren't married at the current moment.

    I posit that both of these situations are undesirable for the people
    concerned.

    I further posit that it is >impossible<, or nearly so, for either
    group of people to make a significant difference on their own.

However, we don't have to act alone.

I propose we act together.  I propose that both women AND men do something
historic -- act together as a group to secure reproductive and parental
rights for both genders.

What I envision is a law which provides all of the following:

1)    Provides a declaration of a woman's right to choose up to the 12th
    week of pregnancy whether or not to have an abortion -- as a federal
    law.  Not on privacy grounds -- but on ownership of one's body.

1.5)    Provides a declaration that in the event that a woman does not want
    to keep a child, but also does not wish to abort for any reason, may
    place said child up for adoption at birth.  The male parent shall
    have the right of first refusal to adopt a child produced in this
    circumstance.

2)    Provides a declaration that >men< have the right, up to the 12th
    week of pregnancy of a women that they are the father, to state
    whether or not they want the rights and responsibilities of the
    foetus in-utereo.  Include a provision that should the pregnancy be
    concealed from the man, that he has 30 days from the date of
    discovery to declare his intentions.

    Rights (1) and (2) are to apply >regardless< of the marital status
    of the parties.  (Should married parties disagree on these points
    there may not be a marriage shortly thereafter)

3)    Provides a declaration that in custody cases, and in the event of
    a split of a present-case family unit, that both parties will be
    presumed to be equally capable of parenting, and that the split
    shall be 50-50 with regards to custody.  Further, the default
    support award shall be >zero< (since both parents have the
    responsibility half the time, they both inherently bear half the
    costs).  In particular, repeal the "tender years" doctrine at
    the federal level and require proof by preponderance of the
    evidence that a parent is >unsuitable< -- not "less suitable" --
    before the default custody split of 50-50 is modified.

    Further, should one parent choose to move away from the original area
    where the divorce took place, the parent which decides to move shall
    bear the cost(s) of transporting the child(ren) involved to comply
    with the custody decision.  In no case shall this movement be
    grounds for modification of custody.

4)    Provide a declaration that any allegation of abuse made by one
    parent or another which is proven false and baseless shall be:
    1)    A class X felony (similar to dealing narcotics)
    2)    Immediately cause the accusing person to be ineligible to
        receive further custody of children in said dispute.

5)    Provide that interference with custody arrangements of any kind
    by a parent is grounds for immediate loss of custody of the child(ren)
    affected, and is additionally a federal felony.  This is intended to
    prevent situations where parents "impound" their children against a
    court order or in the hopes of "swinging" a custody dispute.


This package of legislation would provide the following:

1)    It would >guarantee< the right of a woman to choose whether or not
    to carry a pregnancy to term - - that is, codify at a federal level
    the freedom of reproduction that women want.

2)    It would >guarantee< the right of a man to choose whether or not to
    become a father, while insuring that the woman (who is the ultimate
    authority on the final disposition of the fetus) has enough
    information to know whether or not she can expect a full 1/2
    contribution in the raising and parenting of that child BEFORE it
    becomes her (or their) ward.

3)    It would provide that should a child be wanted by EITHER of its
    parents that it would have a home with said parent(s) in preference
    to adoptive placement with any other person.

4)    It would provide that any parent who makes a false accusation of
    child abuse will be punished for the extreme psychological damage
    done to that child and its relationship with the innocent parent(s).

5)    It would provide children with the right to be parented by >both<
    parents, and properly punish unlawful interferance with child
    custody.

6)    It would remove the presumption that women are the "better" parent;
    that women are automatically entitled to preferrential treatment in
    terms of support awards and custody, and that men should be treated
    as "walking wallets".


I expect to get flamed to hell for this suggestion.  Nonetheless, I believe
that a >balanced< approach such as this, which can be supported by both men
and women, is the only way both men and women will manage to guarantee their
reproductive freedom >and< their rights and responsibilities with regards to
minor children.

Further, I will go so far as to suggest that there is a simpler solution to
the problem of "fair" reproductive freedom that is now present in law:
    Remove a woman's right to choose whether or not to become a parent
    after a pregnancy occurs.

I think it is obvious to both men and women that this is a less desirable
alternative than the proposal above.  Nonetheless, I believe it is a
defensible position for men should women decide not to permit equality,
within the limits of biology, in this process.

Anyone want to join in on this one and see if we can get some legislative
action on this proposal at a federal level?

--
Karl Denninger ([e-mail], <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [[phone]] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions