Monday, July 12, 2010

But What If I Don't Want To Be A Dad?

NFI President's Roland Warren has recently responded to an article by Cord Jefferson entitled, "But What If I Don't Want To Be A Dad?," addressing the argument of "financial abortion."

Roland writes: Actions have consequences, and although a person can choose his actions, he cannot choose the consequences of his actions. When it comes to sex, one of the consequences can be a child. So if a guy wants to keep his wallet closed, I suggest that he keep his zipper closed, too.

Check out Roland's full response here at


  1. I agree, men need to begin with the end in mind.
    Friends of the Fathers

  2. The "system" is broken. Opening a wallet to take care of your own child is different than paying for a Mother's overspending lifestyle, attornies, psychological evaluators, a parental coordinator, forensic accountants, court reporters, babysitters, child care, school and the list goes on. The process is a "money machine" with a voracious appetite and it continues to "eat" until there is nothing left for the child. All this while hiding behind the guise that it is all in "the childs best interest". It would be laughable if you could ever stop crying. Lives and families are being destroyed by a government run "ponzi scheme" bilking well meaning, caring Father's of all the money they had saved to take care of their child. Once the process is complete and the Father is broke, his name changes from Father to "Deadbeat Dad". That's the law....not justice...the law.

  3. I generally concur with Roland's point. Fatherhood is all too often reduced to a financial calculation. That being said, the other part of that reduction is that women, therefore, are the sole arbiters of sex and the anotomical reality that they wind up carrying the child waives any responsbility for their behavior around sex, is a parallel mistake. But to simply add to Roland's suggestion for men with one for women (if you're concerned about the chance of raising a child alone, then don't have sex), has the same oversimplification weakness. Neither a "financial abortion" policy, or a "then don't have sex" retort, really gets at re-defining roles in relationships entirely, something fathers should be at the center of in the first place as co-primary teachers of their children, particularly their male children. The "financial abortion" question would be a moot one if men believed in their true role as a father, the role Roland and Barrack talk about, because it was what the adult men in their lives had been telling them all along.

  4. i agree that the ideal is that the father is involved in the parenting, but as this is not always possible, the child needs some kind of male role model in his/her life - an uncle, friend of the family etc. I think it is particularly important for boys.

  5. As to Bodhisavta comment, and similar I've often heard, I'm wondering who they believe created and runs this "broken" system. I think its tough to refute that its history is that its a creation of men and fathers, not over-spending lazy housewives who simply want to avoid work (even though there are those women who do try to use family court for that very reason; just as there are biological fathers simply wishing to avoid the very same - work and responsibility). The message I get from divorce court is that we (men and women)are still holding tightly onto the idea that a father's primary (and really only) role in his family is as provider, and that everything is a distant second to that, including parenting. The irony is that is a distinctly (tired) old school idea established by fathers that has never served fathers well at any time on this country's history. I propose that rather than fix a system that was never egalitarian in the first place, we overhaul it altogether to have one that does recognize fathers intrinsic, complex, and essential role in a child's holistic well-being. Such a system might start by adopting a rebuttable presumption of joint physical and legal custody of any minor child in divorce or never-married family court proceedings. Of course, that would mean both mothers and fathers would have to let the provider first mentality go. It doesn't appear to me that many are willing to do so.

  6. I agree with Patrick's comments about abolishing a "justice" system that equates fatherhood to financial provision. I also agree with Bodhisatva's comments about all the various things fathers (through divorce or other custody hearings) are having forced on them by the mothers that have little to nothing to do with the welfare of their children. Two things need to be addressed in order to have any equity here. One, as having a residence, food, childcare, utilities and clothes (of some sort) are requirements for raising a child, there must be a way for contributions to be equal toward that end. The only way I know of to do that would be for both parents to cohabitate. I realize that completely kills the main benefit of divorce and puts a serious strain on never-married parents, but it's the only way to make provisions for a child independent of provisions for the guardian.

    Two, if not the former then there needs to be parity in how custody cases are resolved. The 95% female dominance in custody and alimony cases virtually creates a culture in which having a child, by a man with means is an income opportunity for some women. It's not all women, obviously, but if you are on the hook to one of those women and she has custody of your child it might as well be.

  7. Roland's opinion on the subject is obviously sexist.

    Women can unilaterally surrender their parental responsibilities AFTER a pregnancy has occurred. Men cannot. Ihat is obviously immoral and a gross violation of equal rights. The 14th amendment of our constitution is suppose to provide for EQUAL protection under the law for ALL us citizens.

    By the way this subject isn't inherently linked to abortion. A single mother can unilaterally surrender her parental rights by returning her baby to the hospital. Not only that, but; handing over her baby can be done more easily then returning a DVD to best buy.

  8. The day that you guys know how it feels like to have a baby that turns and kicks inside you, while nausea and other symptoms are also interrupting your sleep. when you look next to you to your partner, who agreed to have a baby and realized that his snoring sounds are also the cause of your poor sleep during that time you are making a human been. 9 month, forget about pain and discomfort of giving birth that you guys will never know... that is the day that you will understand the point of view of a woman, there is no money that can buy spending time with your child be there for your partner while pregnant and after. why do we feel with the right to make sole decisions of our kids? maybe because some fathers (not all of them ) money is the only thing they can do to provide any help to their kids.
    sorry, I wish it was different in my case

    mother-father me

  9. Very nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to mention that I've truly enjoyed browsing your blog posts.


We welcome many points of view and great discussion. However, please be aware that comments go through an approval process. The blog administrators reserve the right to not post or delete any comments that are not appropriate (ie: comments with obscene, explicit, sexist, racist or otherwise derogatory language), impolite (ie: comments containing personal attacks, insults or threats), dishonest (ie: potentially libelous comments), or are spam. Thanks for understanding!