If SCOTUS won't enforce Roe/Casey, and there are several "Right to Life" states

[Person Man]

...

Should child support be able to be collected for fetuses?

[DC Al Fine]

Interesting question. Obviously an unborn child doesn't need clothing or toys yet, but they would have healthcare costs, which could run quite high. My gut reaction is 'yes, but not to the same extent as post birth', but its not a thought out position.

Would this be enforceable in practice? You'd have to go from conception to relationship breakdown to court orders in nine months, and there would be paternity issues in a sizable percentage of cases. Family court doesn't seem to work that fast, at least where I am.

[Person Man]

Interesting question. Obviously an unborn child doesn't need clothing or toys yet, but they would have healthcare costs, which could run quite high. My gut reaction is 'yes, but not to the same extent as post birth', but its not a thought out position.

Would this be enforceable in practice? You'd have to go from conception to relationship breakdown to court orders in nine months, and there would be paternity issues in a sizable percentage of cases. Family court doesn't seem to work that fast, at least where I am.

Well, healthcare costs and its probably more expensive to live when you are pregnant, am I wrong?
It's primary goal wouldn't just be to preserve familial resources for children but also to make both parents share in the burdens of extended personhood.
If abortion were made illegal, I would also have the father be punished as an equal accomplice to the mother unless he files a police report within a week of the alleged abortion.
Though, the punishment of the parents would be sterilization (instead of jail/prison/supervision) or something like that. 

I am thinking ahead to where pro-choice people are basically in the position of anti-abortion people are today. Basically, I would chip away first without actually fighting the actual ban. I would just try to make enforcement less discriminatory.

[Mr. Reactionary]

You would need a court order and I'm not sure on a state by state level whether the jurisdiction of the juvenile court would extend to fetuses. If allowed the mother would have to file a petition and prove paternity. I have no clue if it is safe to extract DNA from a fetus to determine paternity, but either way it could be a drawn out process.

[DC Al Fine]

Well, healthcare costs and its probably more expensive to live when you are pregnant, am I wrong?

Day to day costs don't really change much, but there's a decent sized up front cost before the birth. Cribs, strollers, maternity/baby clothes etc. There's a pretty huge range in the actual cost. Mrs. DC figured out it would take about $6k to buy everything we need at the name brand maternity store*. OTOH my sister in law spent only a few hundred thanks to Craigslist and generous church ladies.

If abortion were made illegal, I would also have the father be punished as an equal accomplice to the mother unless he files a police report within a week of the alleged abortion.

This is completely unenforceable. It is trivially easy for a woman to hide a pregnancy in the first trimester. It's not like they get huge bumps the second they conceive.

You would need a court order and I'm not sure on a state by state level whether the jurisdiction of the juvenile court would extend to fetuses. If allowed the mother would have to file a petition and prove paternity. I have no clue if it is safe to extract DNA from a fetus to determine paternity, but either way it could be a drawn out process.

There's a way to extract DNA from an unborn baby, used to test for Down's Syndrome. It causes miscarriages 0.5-1% of the time, so its only done in high risk pregnancies. I'd vehemently protest any legislation that forces women to gamble on miscarriage.

*There is no way in hell we are buying everything at the name brand maternity store.

[Person Man]

Well, healthcare costs and its probably more expensive to live when you are pregnant, am I wrong?

Day to day costs don't really change much, but there's a decent sized up front cost before the birth. Cribs, strollers, maternity/baby clothes etc. There's a pretty huge range in the actual cost. Mrs. DC figured out it would take about $6k to buy everything we need at the name brand maternity store*. OTOH my sister in law spent only a few hundred thanks to Craigslist and generous church ladies.

If abortion were made illegal, I would also have the father be punished as an equal accomplice to the mother unless he files a police report within a week of the alleged abortion.

This is completely unenforceable. It is trivially easy for a woman to hide a pregnancy in the first trimester. It's not like they get huge bumps the second they conceive.

You would need a court order and I'm not sure on a state by state level whether the jurisdiction of the juvenile court would extend to fetuses. If allowed the mother would have to file a petition and prove paternity. I have no clue if it is safe to extract DNA from a fetus to determine paternity, but either way it could be a drawn out process.

There's a way to extract DNA from an unborn baby, used to test for Down's Syndrome. It causes miscarriages 0.5-1% of the time, so its only done in high risk pregnancies. I'd vehemently protest any legislation that forces women to gamble on miscarriage.

*There is no way in hell we are buying everything at the name brand maternity store.

1) It would basically be to stop the type of behavior that gives rise to the need of an apparent vast majority of the need for reproductive health. That is, one person took advantage of another at da club, or on match, tinder, or worse, POF. Basically, the law will assume that when there's the potential for a child, there is a child and that therefore ONS is abandonment. See where I am going with this?

2) You can always file for paternity once the child is actually born and claim back CS from between last intimate contact and birth. This would sort of start the reintroduction of constructive marriage.

3) If everyone believes that a person's person then dad cums, that's when you start being a parent.

[Kingpoleon]

I found the problem: "SCOTUS won't enforce". It's the executive's job to enforce, not the SCOTUS.

[Person Man]

I found the problem: "SCOTUS won't enforce". It's the executive's job to enforce, not the SCOTUS.

"Won't acknowledge as precedent?"

[I’m not Stu]

No, states should not be able to collect child support for fetuses. I am pro-choice, but oppose late-term abortion. I don't want Roe v. Wade reversed; but I think fetuses should have some rights, including SCHIP eligibility to help developing children before birth.

[Person Man]

No, states should not be able to collect child support for fetuses. I am pro-choice, but oppose late-term abortion. I don't want Roe v. Wade reversed; but I think fetuses should have some rights, including SCHIP eligibility to help developing children before birth.

All I was saying is that if abortion is illegal for women, it should be so for men.

[MarkD]

I found the problem: "SCOTUS won't enforce". It's the executive's job to enforce, not the SCOTUS.

"Won't acknowledge as precedent?"

How about the precedent was wrongly decided; not in accord with the original understanding of the 14th Amendment ...?

Here is wording used in Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U.S. 236 ,246 (1941), an occasion in which the Court overturned the precedent of Ribnik v. Nebraska,277 U.S. 350 (1928): "We are not concerned, however, with the wisdom, need, or appropriateness of the legislation. Differences of opinion on that score suggest a choice which 'should be left where . . . it was left by the Constitution -- to the states and to Congress.' Ribnik v. McBride, 277 U. S. 350, 375, dissenting opinion. ... In final analysis, the only constitutional prohibitions or restraints which respondents have suggested for the invalidation of this legislation are those notions of public policy embedded in earlier decisions of this Court but which, as Mr. Justice Holmes long admonished, should not be read into the Constitution. Since they do not find expression in the Constitution, we cannot give them continuing vitality as standards by which the constitutionality of the economic and social programs of the states is to be determined."