Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa_Complex
Two things, to that; as I've said before the man isn't put through the same physical compromises and the kid didn't ask to be conceived, so why penalize the kid?
|
On both points you appear to be making assumptions about what a woman's decision would be.
On the first point, I don't see a woman being put through any unique physical compromises when comparing keeping the baby and putting the baby up for adoption. Either way on the physical side she is carrying the baby to term and whether a man is responsible for parental obligations doesn't change that process at all.
Secondly I am going to make my own assumption about what you mean, but your assertion that a kid would be penalized leads me to think you are referring to either being raised without paternal financial support or being aborted. Of the potential options being raised exactly the same, just with no paternal financial support is very likely to result in a "penalty" to the kid. The result of adoption is much more difficult to predict in my view. Abortion by its nature is a touchy subject but as Trip already pointed out the pro-choice movement has sold this country on the idea that a kid isn't a kid until they are born.
Taking a look at the available options there is a decent chance adoption would actually benefit the kid while having no physical effects on the mother.