![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumI apologise, sort of, for all the posting.
I will be in Korea from the 11th of this month, until the first of next, so I'm feeling the urge to write.
So, lets assume, for the sake of argument, that the SD law passes, and the Missouri law, and a wave of laws like them which make abortion hard, if not impossible, for poor people to get (because the wealthy will come to California, or go to Canada, Sweden or some other place they can get rid of their problems (and they won't be only the rich pro-choicers, Avedon reminds me of The Only Moral Abortion is MY Abortion which I am grateful for the URL for, as I had lost it, about the attitdes of pro-lifers who find themselves with an unexpected guest).
So there will be a whole lot more babies being born, who weren't expected, much less planned for.
We can assume a lot of those babies will be born out of wedlock, the world being what it is today, there won't be as many shotgun weddings as there once were (we aren't Iceland, but we have a much higher tolerance for single parents these days, even if we tend to force it on the mother).
Back in the "good old days, when a woman had damn all for options (she could be a secretary, a nurse, a teacher or a housewife) she was expected to be a virgin when she wed, and not have much in the way of salable skills (I recall my mother, who was rearing two kids alone... the circumstances of that are not clear from here, but they don't really matter, not being able to get credit, because she didn't have a husband around to share a card with. Some years later she got divorced, but it was some years after that before she had credit. She, however, was a phlebotomist, until she married again, and moved to California, which wanted her to go to school for two yaers to learn what she already knew, but I digress, she at least had a salable, and {mostly} portable skill), the law was built in such a way that should her husband leave her (much less get caught cheating) she got some hefty support.
These days, well she gets less, but the theory is she has the ability to earn as much on her own as she loses by being single, and he supplements to meet the extra obligations of the kid.
DNA. Used to be all there was to go on was blood type. One could disprove paternity, but that was it (Maternity was certain, paternity; assumed). These days, daddy can be found.
Something to think about.
I will be in Korea from the 11th of this month, until the first of next, so I'm feeling the urge to write.
So, lets assume, for the sake of argument, that the SD law passes, and the Missouri law, and a wave of laws like them which make abortion hard, if not impossible, for poor people to get (because the wealthy will come to California, or go to Canada, Sweden or some other place they can get rid of their problems (and they won't be only the rich pro-choicers, Avedon reminds me of The Only Moral Abortion is MY Abortion which I am grateful for the URL for, as I had lost it, about the attitdes of pro-lifers who find themselves with an unexpected guest).
So there will be a whole lot more babies being born, who weren't expected, much less planned for.
We can assume a lot of those babies will be born out of wedlock, the world being what it is today, there won't be as many shotgun weddings as there once were (we aren't Iceland, but we have a much higher tolerance for single parents these days, even if we tend to force it on the mother).
Back in the "good old days, when a woman had damn all for options (she could be a secretary, a nurse, a teacher or a housewife) she was expected to be a virgin when she wed, and not have much in the way of salable skills (I recall my mother, who was rearing two kids alone... the circumstances of that are not clear from here, but they don't really matter, not being able to get credit, because she didn't have a husband around to share a card with. Some years later she got divorced, but it was some years after that before she had credit. She, however, was a phlebotomist, until she married again, and moved to California, which wanted her to go to school for two yaers to learn what she already knew, but I digress, she at least had a salable, and {mostly} portable skill), the law was built in such a way that should her husband leave her (much less get caught cheating) she got some hefty support.
These days, well she gets less, but the theory is she has the ability to earn as much on her own as she loses by being single, and he supplements to meet the extra obligations of the kid.
DNA. Used to be all there was to go on was blood type. One could disprove paternity, but that was it (Maternity was certain, paternity; assumed). These days, daddy can be found.
Something to think about.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-03-07 01:55 pm (UTC)But this seems a fragile, even dangerous, thing to tie to considering how easy it is now for deadbeat dads to dodge payments, and in light of the fact that the leading cause of death in pregnant women is murder by unwilling fathers. (A threat to women's lives that is presumably impossible to prove under South Dakota's "law.")