In case one does not want to be a father – men should use condoms

Father against his own will wrote an opinion piece titled “Forcing fatherhood is not in the child’s best interest” on (HS 4.11.2022). We want to address the problems found in the text, both from structural and judicial angles.

Firstly, the text equates a man’s right to decide over parental responsibility with that of a woman’s right to make decisions considering her own body. Additionally the text raises “male right to act out sexuality” in the form of intercourse without “the fear” of a possible pregnancy. According to our understanding a solution to this problem is already available – contraceptive devices intended for male use, most notably condom, which is 98% effective in preventing unwanted fatherhood. Solely, this effectively questions the existence of  “a societal problem” raised in the text.

Becoming a parent against one’s own will might be a sentimental journey, but luckily Finnish laws and international covenants are not in place to protect the parent’s feelings or indolence but the child’s best interest. Currently there are no laws that would effectively force a father to meet or otherwise participate in his child’s life against his own will. The minimum stake is the responsibility to participate in child support fees, which is a fundamental subjective right belonging to the child. If we question a parent’s financial responsibility over the child, who else would be responsible?

Making a decision of having children – even on an equal basis – entails socially gendered outcomes that are unequally burdensome between the parties. Pregnancy, absence from work, and responsibility for child rearing are still structurally accumulated to women in Finland. According to our understanding, the opinion piece in question aims at freeing the other party from all responsibility based on individual choice. The consequences of the argumentation found in the text are worrying.

In its current form, the text deliberately confuses the contents of children’s and women’s rights and aims at harnessing them for advocating dubious goals, to say the least. Similar strategies have been used for instance in discussions on the rights of several minorities. In these cases a right or a principle is turned inside out. In the present case a reluctant father is not entitled to legal protection, but the child is.

Juho Aalto
Doctoral researcher, University of Turku
Iiris Kestilä
Doctoral researcher, University of Lapland
Pia Eskelinen
Postdoctoral Researcher, University of Turku