Court Rejects Roe v. Wade for Men Claim

It is called a Roe v. Wade for Men claim: when men demand the right to refuse to procreate or, if denied that right, the responsibility to pay child support. The Sixth Circuit has upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit by Matthew Dubay that he was tricked into conceiving a baby and should not have to pay child support to his ex-girlfriend. Dubay alleged that Lauren Wells knew he didn’t want to have a child and assured him repeatedly she couldn’t get pregnant because of a medical condition.

Child support cases involving misrepresentation of sterility are usually raised in an action by the woman for payment and then opposed on the basis of fraud and misrepresentation. They almost always go against the male in such cases. Due to the public policy in favor of parental support, even a hoodwinked father is expected to pay for the raising of the child. The same, however, is not true for cases where women have alleged injury due to unwanted pregnancies after misrepresentations by males. In those cases, successful battery actions have been brought based on the misrepresentation. The different treatment is due largely to the public policies involved. Courts uniformly uphold state policies demanding that fathers take responsibility for their offspring. For the full story, click here