If men aren't allowed to why are women?

The law doesn't say that men have to provide child support no matter what. The legality is that the non-custodial parent pays when both parents retain parental rights. It's just that women are more often the custodial parent.

If the man doesn't want to parent and the woman does, he pays child support. If he wants to parent and she doesn't, SHE pays child support. Women pay child support too, it's just more rare that the woman is the non-custodial parent, so you hear less about it.

I do think there are double standards in the level of responsibility and expectation between the two genders. I think women are often forced to take an excess of responsibility, and the rights of fathers are often trampled on. Women are usually still favoured in custody battles. The courts are far from gender-blind in applying the law.

But as for what the law actually SAYS: if both parents relinquish their rights, the child can be adopted, and if one parent decides to raise the child, the other parent is on the hook for child support. Legally, there's no difference which parent raises the child and which parent pays maintenance.

There is a double standard, but only until the ink is dry on the relinquishment papers. Then the once selfless woman who made the "loving' choice is just as flawed as her male counterparts who wish to avoid their parental responsibilities.

What concerns me even more in the original question was the statement, "as soon as you place a child up for adoption people suddenly treat you like you are unable to make choices for yourself."

When 'you' become a parent, 'people' treat you as if you are making decisions for someone else. It's part of being a parent. And once a woman has given birth, whether or not she intends to keep her child, she is a parent. She makes the choice to relinquish as the parent of the child.

Surrendering a child for adoption is not a personal decision. It is a parental decision. It is a decision to terminate parenthood and legal parental responsibilities. Its affects are not limited to the mother, the father, or any other individual. For the person making this statement to interpret laws against coercion as a sign that society treats mothers as if they are children, then to extend that to a women's rights issue is completely incorrect.

These laws exist to protect families, and they should be strengthened. Placing a child for adoption has nothing to do with women's rights. And regulating adoption has nothing to do with treating women as if they are unable to make choices for themselves. They are, in fact, not making a decision for themselves. They are making a decision (presumably with the child's father) for themselves, their child, the child's extended family, the prospective adoptive parents, and society as a whole. There is no such thing as a fundamental right to give a child to another family.

Unfortunately, adoption is being sold to young women as a female choice of empowerment. In fact, it is quite the opposite.

I don't have too awful much to add to the discussion since so much has already been said but did want to give a little input.

There are laws in place, like some have mentioned, to deal with women who try to flake out but don't choose adoption. My aunt divorced when she had 4 children from 4 yrs to 12yrs old. She decided she didn't want the responsibility of the children and that their father would take custody. She did have to pay quite a bit in child support because of it. It happens less often that the father is the main care taker so you hear a lot less about women who pay child support but they are out there and it is enforced just as it is with men.

Anyways thats all I wanted to say.

"If a man were to say, I don't want to parent this child I created...will support that child."

-While it does take two to make a child, so too should BOTH parties be involved in the rearing/responsibility of the child's life; financial or otherwise. Message loud and clear? That is an arguable issue. Departments of Children Services wouldn't exist nationwide if 'fathers' were to bear the entire responsibility.

"Now some one asked why in today's society...post i am talking about."

-If I am interpreting your point here correctly, you are referring to instances where a 'mother' vacates/abandons/leaves her situation and child (in the 'father's care). In this matter, there is no free pass. A negative stigma still applies and abandonment is abandonment; the 'mother' is equally responsible for the welfare of the child, financial or otherwise.

"I wonder why a woman...implications of this."

-One thing consistent regarding the welfare of children is the responsibility of the upbringing of the child. By upbringing I refer to cost.The party/parent that stays with possession/custody of the child is the monetary recipient of the child. However, I will concede that there IS an inequitable distribution of responsibility by gender. And generally it is with a heavier imposition upon the male rather than the female that financial responsibility is imposed.

When it comes to the female walking out on the family, we make excuses. The most popular to date is 'Postpartum'. Understanding has been bestowed upon women that have utilized this claim for their actions. Some of these actions being simply heinous. But we (seem to) 'understand'. *sigh* There is no gender equality. Simply stated, there is only equal apathy, selfishness and indifference. The 'parents' only concern is to satisfy their own self serving interest. And these interest can run from a gamut of sex, drugs or whatever else they 'want'.

The right to create with no intention for responsibility? Hardly. It would only be a right in the eyes of like individuals; people just like them. But for the rest who see children as deserving and vulnerable, well, the laws will continue to be preserved and governed on the behalf of children. The only matter of rights that apply to this question are the rights of children.

I do have ONE question myself; this question makes no mention of adoption (even though it is in 'y/a adoptions' and it does refer to a question that did). So why is adoption addressed as part of the answers to this question? Adoption and 'leaving' a child in THAT case is very different to the context of 'leaving' a child as addressed here.

In situations such as divorce and he has custody and she's earning and income then yes she should be made to pay child support. (I think in Australia that happens if it goes to court and he wins custody.)

If you look into state laws you'll probably find there are clauses making it more equal in responsibility. But most people wouldn't think to do it because of social attitudes towards women and raising children. (Its easier to prove paternity with a female than it is for a male for obvious reasons.)

In adoption you know yourself that a mother signs away her rights and a court of law can do that for him if the father isn't involved. In that sense its equal. (Because in the case of abandonment in most western countries a court can do the same for the mother if she vanishes.)

Edit; in our case both of them consented to the adoption. And our childs god father is also a birth dad. (he calls himself that.) He wasn't asked just told at 16yrs old, yet he encouraged us to adopt and adopted a child himself years later. He not bitter about it, he thinks it was the best thing and respects his child's mother.

Biological Bias. Women are pretty much screwed by mother nature in the whole reproductive process. Men can sew their oats all over the place, and the women have to go through the whole nine months, and then find the male afterward if he doesn't stick around. And that's only the tip of what would be a huge argument for that.

If this were a human made law, it would be a civil rights issue. But since it's nature, nothing much we can do about it.

Men can sign away their legal rights to a child. Many men do not know this. They can petition the court to terminate their rights because they cannot parent. In most states you will not have to pay support.

So can women.

A woman can give the child up for adoption but the father must give consent for it to finalize.

I guess this is where the phrase "if you play, you pay" come from ?

Because people have this idea that its ladies first for everything, and men can't say any different. Some people might claim that the man made them go through birth and its always the males fault... bull crap!

Most of the time the women are at equal fault.

Yes there is a bias and/or double standard. The deadbeat dad is a scoundrel and loser according to society while a mother giving her child up for sale is lauded for

1) not aborting

2) knowing her childs best interest lies with non biological people

and lets not forget a mother can sell her child without naming the father or giving him a chance to defend his rights. The father who fights has more hoops to jump through than a veteran circus animal and I can assure you for a fact from personnal knowledge that a single father is not considered par with a single mother. Ranchmom really needs to look up some facts before speaking. As a dad that stopped his daughters adoption and pays child support without visitation to her now foster parents I know what I speak of. 17 days of trial and $238,000 is what it cost for me to be adjudacated a parent even though I refused prior to birth.

Be assured you have a better chance of hitting the lottery three times in a row than you do as a single father fighting for your parental rights. You will be isolated, interrogated, forced to face and justify every action you have everhad involvement with, as well as financially bombardedto near if not total bankruptcy. Your life as you know it if you step up is OVER. The mother will be lauded for knowing what's best and little if any investigation into her background, psychogical state, finances, etc.

I truly believe it is only a matter of time before abortion is banned and all unwanted children are placed under health and human services control or put on the block for sale by private agencies.

Yes there is a bias and yes it is skewed against the dad without a doubt. question if you want but I have 2 1/2 yrs. of court documents, professional opinions and facts that prove what i say. I pay child support for a child i can't see. the mom got off scott free with no obligation. moms can walk if they want so can dads. the dads however will be hunted down and prosecuted, denied driving privleges, have their pay docked, and even jailed. all mommy has to do is sign some papers. even changing her mind doesn't change that.

Nobody is allowed to abandon their children. In our society, women get blamed more than men do because of biology. Men are the hunters and women are the nurturers.