National NOW Times >> Summer 2006  >> Article

Viewpoint: Father's Rights ... and Wrongs

By Kim Gandy, President

The good news as Father's Day approaches is that more and more men are sharing duties on the home front. The bad news is that groups claiming to represent fathers are really out to restrict women's options.

With the recent addition of two right-wing conservatives to the Supreme Court and an anti-abortion rights battle spreading from state to state, I was encouraged to hear this spring that the National Center for Men planned to join the fight for reproductive rights. It's always good to have friends in battle, right?

Until I heard the rest of the story: It's their own "rights" they're concerned about.

You probably heard about this so-called "father's rights" lawsuit, even though the resulting media outcry was over as quick as it began. The National Center for Men is still pushing ahead, though: The suit was filed on March 9 in U.S. District Court, on behalf of Matt Dubay, the 25-year-old Michigan man who is suing his ex-girlfriend to avoid paying child support for their infant daughter.

Dubay's logic? Well, she could have had an abortion. That was her choice. He ought to have a "choice" too, and since he didn't, he shouldn't have to help support the child.

It's ironic, isn't it? The threat of women losing our bodily integrity grows larger with every passing day, with politicians telling us that our most personal decisions should be theirs to make. And now some men are saying they should have "reproductive choices" too—in other words, if he wants a baby, he should be able to force her to give birth, and if he doesn’t want any responsibility, then he should be able to force her to have an abortion. It's absurd.

In some of the media interviews I saw with the National Center for Men, they even argued that women should be asked to sign a "reproductive rights affidavit" before engaging in intercourse with men. I can only imagine how that conversation would start: "Just so we're clear..." My advice to any woman who is presented with one of these 'affidavits': Run!

These men go so far as to say, "Only women have the extraordinary freedom to enjoy sexual intimacy free from the fear of forced parenthood." Did I hear that right? Only a person who had never had sleepless nights fearing an unplanned pregnancy, never had to rush to the drug store for emergency contraception after a broken condom or, much worse, a sexual assault, would make such a ridiculous statement. The lawsuit reads, in part, "I will challenge any court order that seeks to impose a parental obligation upon me against my will...."

"Imposing parental obligation," hmm? As in, forcing a woman to have a baby she doesn't want and can't provide for? No, they're not concerned with that.

According to the National Center for Men Web site, as a result of Roe v. Wade, "[w]omen now have control of their lives after an unplanned conception. But men are routinely forced to give up control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as the price of intimacy. "That's a whole lot of talk that, when you get right down to it, means "have an abortion or I get to walk away." Either way it means zero consequences and zero responsibility, and they want the courts to call it "reproductive choice for men."

And no choice for women at all.

Wait, there's more...

Some father's rights advocates actively support the right of a man to obtain joint custody of his children, even if he has abused their mother—effectively re-battering domestic violence survivors in the court system and exercising continued power by forcing the ongoing contact required by joint custody—requiring her to obtain his permission for every little thing, even if she has primary physical custody.

And the Bush Administration is in the father's rights business as well—which is no surprise with Wade Horn, formerly the head of a major father's rights initiative, having taken over all of the public assistance programs at the Department of Health and Human Services. Now they've decided to divert critical funds to a so-called Responsible Fatherhood program. Why? To provide fathers (yes, only fathers) with job training and education benefits that are denied to mothers! NOW will be the plaintiff in a class action lawsuit, represented by Legal Momentum, to challenge the limitation of funding to fathers, and demand in court that the benefits be extended to mothers as well.

Between the mostly male politicians clamoring to force women to have babies, the National Center for Men claiming they shouldn't have to provide for the babies they helped produce, and the administration rewarding fathers at the expense of mothers, it seems they'd like to make every day Father's Day.

But lest we forget, amid the multitude of attacks, there are many, many men (and fathers) who are our allies and our supporters. They are egalitarian men, partners like mine who do their fair share of parenting, support women's rights and the women in their lives, and, of course, are members of NOW. To all of you, Happy Father's Day.