As a group, fathers who skip out on their children are universally despised. There are websites for showcasing their shame [1] and for bringing them to justice. [2] There is even a new reality show about these “deadbeats.” [3] When we think of a man who skips out on paying child support, we don’t think of the man who cannot afford to pay (and is thrown in jail as a result) [4]. We don’t think of the man whose sperm was stolen from a sperm bank and then used to impregnate his ex-girlfriend [5]. We certainly don’t think of the 15-year-old who was forced to pay child support to the woman who went to jail for statutory rape [6]. No. We think of a caricature. We think of a prowling rake who, after seducing a chaste 16-year-old and convincing her that a condom is unnecessary, skips town as soon as he discovers he is a father.

“Fine,” says the pro-choice progressive, “but those examples you cited are extreme situations. Most ‘deadbeat dads’ could have been more careful and, failing that, they should have paid!”

Let’s look at that first claim. Can we reasonably expect men to “be more careful”? According to Planned Parenthood, men have five options when it comes to male birth control [7]. The first option is using a condom, an option that has an 83% success rate (with typical use) [8]. The next option is “withdrawal,” a method that surpasses condoms in failure, with an 82% success rate [8]. No reliable options so far. The next option is a vasectomy. That’s a bit more permanent than most men would want. Can we really expect every young man to get a vasectomy before ever having sex? The last two options are “outercourse” and abstinence, neither of which are likely to be implemented by very many young couples (those most in need of consistent birth control).

Let’s take a look at one such hypothetical young couple. Jack and Jill are two young lovers who engage in vigorous sex whenever they have the opportunity. They are responsible, so Jack wears a condom. Unfortunately, they are not lucky. Jill becomes pregnant. They are both young professionals, and they see their mentally sculpted futures come crashing to the ground as they tearfully run to the drugstore to purchase another pregnancy test. An hour later, their bathroom floor is covered in used pregnancy tests, and they have to face reality. Jill runs through her options. It’s a bit late in the game, so she really only has three. She can have an abortion (now legal in the vast majority of the developed world), she can give the child up for adoption, or she can keep the baby.

What can Jack do? He has one option: abide by the will of the mother. If she chooses to have an abortion, it doesn’t matter what he wants. If she chooses to give the child up for adoption, he can choose whether he wants to raise it on his own, and he can ask for child support. If she chooses to keep the baby, he is forced to pay child support for a full eighteen years or risk going to jail. He has the “right” to consult with the mother, but, like the pre-19th Amendment housewife who is told she can talk to her husband about his votes (but not vote herself); such a “right” is hardly reassuring.

So should men and women have exactly equal reproductive rights? Probably not. Men and women are not the same. Women get pregnant, men don’t. Women should not be forced to carry a child they do not want, so women should be able to terminate a pregnancy even if the father would rather keep the baby. It’s a sad situation, but it’s the closest to “right” that we are going to get. On the other hand, a man shouldn’t be able to force a woman to terminate a pregnancy. He is not carrying the baby. The question then arises, what rights should the man have in that situation, if the mother wants to keep the baby, and the father does not?

If the only argument we ever heard from those who are “pro-choice” was in regards to the pregnancy itself, then it might seem reasonable to say that the man shouldn’t have any rights at all. That isn’t the case, though. As I wrote about in an earlier post [9], a major reason we are “pro-choice” is compassion. We don’t want a woman’s life to be demolished because of one night’s mistake or a failed condom. This argument applies equally well to men. Men shouldn’t have to bear the financial, emotional and legal responsibilities that come with a child (unless they choose to). We have already decided that it’s a tad extreme to argue that a man should be able to force an abortion on a woman, so what are we left with? Opting out. A man should be able to opt-out of being a father.

Yes, that sucks for the mother. If she wants to keep the baby, then she will have to support it on her own. What a person has to recognize, though, is this “unfair” choice that the woman is left with is far superior to what a man has now. As it stands, if the father wants to keep the baby and the mother does not, then the father is out of luck. If he pleads and pleads and she is exceptionally compassionate, she might choose to carry the baby and pay child support, but she has the much cheaper and easier option of just getting an abortion.

Let’s join with people like Karen DeCrow, former president of the National Organization for Women [10], in advocating for a move toward fairness, a move toward compassion, and a move toward fathers’ rights. Let’s also give men the option to opt-out of parenthood.