I'm against the idea.
The woman actually has to make the choice of whether or not to let their child live. That has its own moral controversy attached to it. The man is just deciding whether or not to know and support the child, so whether or not to provide time and money basically. The child can still live a good live without the fathers support. This also has moral controversy, though not as bad.
Money and life are 2 very different things is basically what I'm saying...
I'm unsure of a better alternative though, I realise that the woman getting all the rights is pretty unfair :/
The woman actually has to make the choice of whether or not to let their child live. That has its own moral controversy attached to it. The man is just deciding whether or not to know and support the child, so whether or not to provide time and money basically. The child can still live a good live without the fathers support. This also has moral controversy, though not as bad.
Money and life are 2 very different things is basically what I'm saying...
I'm unsure of a better alternative though, I realise that the woman getting all the rights is pretty unfair :/