It's called, "Child Support" ...

Jul 7, 2012 -- 11:31AM, Jcarlinbn wrote:

www.nytimes.com/2012/07/07/opinion/time-...

Former spouses are often required to pay alimony; former cohabiting partners may have to pay palimony; why not ask men who conceive with a woman to whom they are not married to pay “preglimony”? Alternatively, we might simply encourage preglimony through the tax code, by allowing pregnancy-support payments to be deductible (which is how alimony is treated).


Has the time for this come?

I think it's a good Idea, personally ...

But, aside from a VERY invasive and potentially dangerous Test in Utero, I don't know how "Paternity" could be demonstrated in Court ...

Jul 7, 2012 -- 11:59AM, JCarlin wrote:

Jul 7, 2012 -- 11:39AM, teilhard wrote:

It's called, "Child Support" ...

Jul 7, 2012 -- 11:31AM, Jcarlinbn wrote:

www.nytimes.com/2012/07/07/opinion/time-...

Former spouses are often required to pay alimony; former cohabiting partners may have to pay palimony; why not ask men who conceive with a woman to whom they are not married to pay “preglimony”? Alternatively, we might simply encourage preglimony through the tax code, by allowing pregnancy-support payments to be deductible (which is how alimony is treated).


Has the time for this come?

Child support starts at birth.  This is talking about support for a pregnant unmarried woman by the conception partner.  Is there only one sinner until birth?

Jul 7, 2012 -- 11:31AM, Jcarlinbn wrote:

www.nytimes.com/2012/07/07/opinion/time-...

Former spouses are often required to pay alimony; former cohabiting partners may have to pay palimony; why not ask men who conceive with a woman to whom they are not married to pay “preglimony”? Alternatively, we might simply encourage preglimony through the tax code, by allowing pregnancy-support payments to be deductible (which is how alimony is treated).


Has the time for this come?

Maybe.

But if so, then that father gets a say in what happens with the child.

In other words, if the mother wants to abort, he should be able to veto that.

Otherwise, stay out of his wallet.

IMO, from a man's perspective, as long as your Little Private Ryan is firing live rounds, you should be prepared for the responsiblities of a pregnancy -- and be mindful of that every time you send Little Private Ryan up the beach.

From a woman's perspective, same thing, unless one, the other or both of you have been "fixed," be prepared for the possible consequences.

And no, "birth control" isn't always effective. I know children who were concived when both the man and woman were using birth control.

Jul 7, 2012 -- 11:31AM, Jcarlinbn wrote:

  why not ask men who conceive with a woman to whom they are not married to pay “preglimony”? Alternatively, we might simply encourage preglimony through the tax code, by allowing pregnancy-support payments to be deductible (which is how alimony is treated).

I presume the rationale for this is to compensate women for the time they are unable to work due to their pregnancy, yes? If so, I can see a problem straight away. While this is unnecessary for those in a committed relationship, there's no way to prove paternity prior to birth, AFAIK. The other problem is that the amount of time a woman has to be off work due to pregnancy varies wildly by occupation and by individual. Some women might be able to work right up until the day before they give birth while others may have difficult pregnancies and be unable to work for months prior to the birth.

I'm also wary of putting all the responsibility for a pregnancy on the male. It takes two to cause a pregnancy (barring truly horrible crimes) and responsibility should be shared.

EDIT: I see that it IS possible to determine paternity prior to birth. I did not know that.