According to the Associated Press, Michigan Assistant Attorney General Joel D. McGormley argued that men can’t decline to pay child support simply because they don’t want to become fathers. The argument was part of McGormley’s request to dismiss the lawsuit filed by The National Center for ‘Men’ (quotation marks mine), which is being called ‘Roe vs. Wade…for Men™‘ (trademark symbol theirs).

The presiding judge has said that he will make a ruling, but didn’t specify a timeframe. I’ll be keeping an eye on the case, and will post updates of any new information.

The lawsuit was filed on March 9, 2006 on behalf of Matt Dubay, a 25-year-old man who says he shouldn’t have to pay child support for a daughter he never wanted. Dubay ‘insists that the child’s mother repeatedly assured him she could not get pregnant and…that she knew he did not want to have a child with her’.

‘The’ child, not ‘his’ child. Oh, what a difference a pronoun makes.

I’ve made it clear how I feel about the situation. It’s not the Mother’s fault if the Father slept through Biology; nor is it a child’s fault if his Mother did the same. This case isn’t about ‘equal protection’ for men, as the NCM claims. It’s about creating a legal excuse to be selfish and irresponsible.

This case also reinforces the stereotype that men are prats. Thanks, Matt. Not only do you want to shirk your duties as a father, you also want to make it harder for the rest of us.

So, what can we do, apart from making snide comments in obscure blogs? Should we start a National Center for Real Men? Actually, you can join the National Fatherhood Initiative’s Dads Club, or show your support for fathers and fatherhood by wearing their ‘No Ifs’ bracelet. I have a general taboo against bracelets, car ribbons, and patriotic antenna toppers, but, for this, I’m willing to make an exception.

The bracelets are sold in packs of two, so I have an extra. If you really think you’ll wear it, let me know, and it’s yours.