Make the child support like student loans... meaning it never go away. It is a debt, that collect interest and is always there until paid in full or the rapist dies. Support goes to whomever is taking cre of the child, and once the child reaches adulthood, then it goes to the child.

Generally, deterrents don't work as well as one might expect, but I do like the idea that punishment doesn't end once a rapist is out of prison. Seeing such an unavoidable consequence might be a better deterrent than current punishments.

@snytiger6 I agree adding accountability to the public payment would be beneficial to the victims, but I doubt it would deplete the amount much at all

@PaulRecomStop Definite accountability does affect behavior. For instance definite accountability and harsher sentences has reduced drunk driving. Over time, historically, the acceptability of violence has diminished and so has violence. Change always come sslowly and cultural acceptability plays a muc larger role in how peoel behave than most people think.

@snytiger6 drunk driving seems like a bad comparison. The motive in a duo are convenience or irresponsibility based, the motive for rape would likely be something more substantial, I would think.

@PaulRecomStop Granted the motivations are much different, but the my idea of accountability for bad behavior remains constant for both.

I made the comparison because at one time drunk drivers were not held all that accountable, just as rapes were not too long ago blamed mostly on the women, not the rapist. In both cases the perpetrator knows the wrongness for their actions while they do them. In both cases they shoudl be held accountable for both the long and short term consequences of their actions.

We do....and we exercise them....from the "Day after pill to abortion."
BTW, I don't think the member assumed the woman will bear the kid but, in the case she does, the rapist has to support that kid until he/she is 18 u/o

@DUCHESSA I agree that you do, and I am glad for that. However the post is talking about the Right Wing Nut Jobs Not the nearly normal folks like you and me.

I'd actually expect most women who get pregnant by means of a rape to abort. However, if a child is produced and carried to term, the I think the rapist shoudl be financially reponsible whether or not the woman keeps the child. The child still caem into the world via their crime, so they shoudl be held financially responsible.

I also thik that financial responsibility should not ever go away, but rather be like student loans, where the person either has to pay the debt in full, including interest, or die in order for the debt to eve be erased.

Also, the rapist should never be told where the woman, the child, or anyone else who is raising the child lives. No direct contact ever.

@snytiger6 ??? "whether or not the woman keeps the child. The child still came into the world via their crime, " their crime? That sounds like you are placing equal blame on the woman?

Abortion is always an option...and not only in case of rape.

Absolutely, her body, her decision.

I agree, that if the woman aborts, the rapist shoudl be held responsible for the costs... o fnto just the abortion but for any counseling the woman may need.

It is true that deterrents don't work as well as one might expect. However, if they know they may be held financially responsible, and that it is a debt which won't ever go away, like a student loan, until paid in full or they die, I believe it will have some effect when they face the prospect of inescapable consequences may resulting from their actions.

I would hope that she'd abort..I can't image the suppressioned anger that woman would bare towards her child of violation..

@Charlene If abortion is chosen, then the rapist shoudl have to pay for that, as well as any costs for counseling which the woman mnay need.

You play, you pay. Why should the woman be expected to bear all the costs?

@CS60 There have been court cases where women sought to make the man liable when the understanding was that there was no intention whatsoever to have children. Courts ruled the man was not liable. (Extreme but in a case the woman fished the used condom out of the bin to impregnate herself with the sperm/semen that was still inside the discarded condom while he was in the shower).

Was it Your dick that unloaded in her? Then Yas..man up..

Some progress can happen from old clichés.

I disagree with that court ruling. If there was no intention to have kids and they took pre cautions not to, both are still responsible. If you are not willing to accept that consequence, then don’t play. Until we start holing men as financially and emotionally responsible as women, nothing will change.

@CS60 To extract the semen from a discarded condom and use it to inseminate yourself is pretty extreme. He never consented to it. To be honest, she was a crackpot.

Talk about extreme measures. Yeah she does seem like a crackpot. And under those circumstances, she should be solely liable. Frankly, if I was the father I might sue for custody.... if she’s that nutty can she be trusted with a kid?

@CS60 She was taking the biological father to court for maintenance or what ever. I note your comment about contesting for custody of the child. In the UK, there is a legal presumption (effectively bias or prejudice) that the child would be better off in the care of the mother, and it is nigh on impossible for a father to win custody or even joint custody where it is contested (maybe if she was proven to be legally insane would he win).

@CS60 I agree with you. I too generally disagree with the court ruling. There may be exceptions. Such as, if the woman were a "professional" (prostitute, we'll assume a legal transaction in Nevada) where money was exchaned it may be reasonable to expect that part of the fee was expected to prevent pregnancy. Or, in teh above example where the woman used a discarded condom while the man was in the shower to deliberately impregnate herself without his knowledge. In either case, I don't think the man is automatically absent of all responsibility, but in such cases the amount of responsibility shoudl be decided on a case to case basis considering the merits of each case individually.

No, I doubt it would. Even if it passed both houses, Trump, beign a sexual predator himself, woudl veto it.