The fact that the consequences are largely emotional/psychological in the former & financial in the latter doesn't mean former insignificant
-
-
-
Generally our reasons for having or not having children are emotional & psychological. Probably a problem if we have them for other reasons.
-
Biology makes identical rights impossible sometimes.Pregnancy is 1 of them.Then we have to think about how to make things as fair as we can.
-
I don't think its irrational to factor in the emotional &psychological wellbeing of everyone concerned as well as the financial implications
-
My concern for men re: unfair custody rights is largely for their emotional wellbeing. Same is true for women re: abortion decisions.
-
We disagree on this subject but I have to salute your open-mindedness, yet again. I don't know why I mention it: it's a given.
-
Do we disagree? Tell me why tomorrow. Sick of subject. I don't know what the right answer is but I suspect it won't be facile.
-
It's not a straightforward ethical case. It fact, it's the most difficult one I've faced, I think.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
>deciding whether to pay for it. >deciding ???pic.twitter.com/qqEBwYvPAQ
-
Yes. That is what we are discussing. Men's right to decide not to pay for child & whether it same as deciding whether to have 1.
-
Well obviously it wouldn't be the same but giving men that option would at least give them *an* option. RN it's abstinence...
-
.. or giving your sex partner the possibility to make life-altering choices on your behalf. No opting out.
-
I'm so sick of this subject now. Pls see my timeline for last few hours.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.