... why did she not demand that he use birth control...
This is, once again, the same as saying the female is ultimately responsible for contraceptives and ... at the end of the day... the male simply is not. That is ALL this comment says. You either believe the man is responsible to prevent conception or you don't. Sinc you don't want me to read your mind, pick one and let me know.
... the choice to carry a conception to term is totally the woman's by court ruling...
Yes but. I have been discussing from the point of view (and of Mr. Bush et al) no abortion. If there is to be no abortion, if that is the goal, then there are only a few other choices. Prevention, birth and both parents obligated to suport the child, adoption. That is it.
To bring up the fact that a woman can (at this time) legally abort, as an excuse for the male to ultimatley say he has ZERO responsibility to prevent conception, is a fallacy. All the more so in a discussin about illiminating/reducing abortion.
We are up to 1/3 of all births happening with this sort of scenario.
What is the 1/3 figure?
The question is, why is this so?
Because there is only one 100% assurance of no conception. That is no sex. Everything else which includes sex are calculated risks. None of those calculation include 0% chance of conception. Even if one partner has been surgically sterilized are deemed medically infertile, there is still a risk of conception. People pretend this is not the case but it is. People pretend all sorts of things. People take risks and believe they are not taking them. People believe what they want to believe.
I think something much more serious than simple irresponsibility is behind this. When one considers that this didn't used to happen I wonder what has changed that it is happening now.
You'll have to spell out for me what you are implying here. I'm not convinced it didn't happen a lot in past times. People just got married in a hurry and we had a lot of preemies.
I personally think people put too much faith on one method of contraception. I think the failure rate is higher than that advertised with the Pill. Also with the Pill it can become less effective when the woman is under stress, ill or is taking some other medications. This is not widely publicised. If people were to double up on methods, consistently, there would be fewer "accidents". Dual partner use would also cut down on the possibility of deceipt by either party.
I personally think deceipt is a smokescreen. Another one of those predictibel debate items which never fails to materialize (And BTW, what a perfect example of males making use of the "victim" card). Even if deceipt did occur, it cannot be easily proven. It's a classic he said/ she said scenario. And you cannot discount false claim deciept as well, where she says that he said he wanted a baby, and vis versa. Or double deceipt. He says that she said she was on the Pill but lied, when she never said she was. Or he she says that he said he had a vasectomy, when he never claimed that he did. It is just too messy to contemplate and would be thrown out of any court of law. In the end, it boils down to individual responsibility of each partner. Protect yourself and you won't have to wonder what the other person is up to.
Which brings me back full circle to my point about men. They are 50% part of the biological instigation of conception. Immutable fact. Nothing can change that. Why are there so few who take the responsiblity to use contraceptives and why haven't we seen men demanding better methods of birth control? I believe this come directly from the attitude of men not believing (again suspending disbelief) that they have risks or responsibilities in sex. Women are to blame too. Many prefer to gatekeep everything in the sexual/reproductive realm.
Still doesn't change the facts of life for me. Now that everyone is on the same page .... we all know for sure that conception takes 50% participation from each sex, there is no point in elaborate pretense to the contrary.
Since there is no 100% assurance of no conception in sex, no 100% zero-risk method of contraception (even if sterilized) we all know where our responsibilites are. It then becomes a simply a matter of risk assessment and risk mitigation.
Each person must ask themselves "How risk averse are you?" If you drive, you can put on your seat belt and that's it. Or you can do that and drive a white car with air bags, keep your headlights on, wear a helmet, drive cautiously, ride only with trusted drivers, don't go on expressways, avoid known dangerous intersections... etc. Each layer of protection indicates your risk aversion quotient. But as long as you drive (or ride in) a car, you can never reduce your risk to 0%. Never. That's life.
In sex that applies to both parties as well. If your conception risk aversion quotient is 100%, don't have sex.