Abortion Rights Question

[Mr. T]

This is another hypothetical. Even though it's been established the man can't and shouldn't force a woman to undergo an abortion, what if once the baby was born he went to court and made the case that neither he nor the mother were capable (financially, emotionally, whatever) of raising the child. Since the child is now born would he have "equal rights" to argue that the child must be given up for adoption and by extention avoid child support payments that way? Or are the laws as set up that if one parent wants to keep the child, they automatically keep the child and the other parent must pay child support?

[Plekhanov]

This is another hypothetical. Even though it's been established the man can't and shouldn't force a woman to undergo an abortion, what if once the baby was born he went to court and made the case that neither he nor the mother were capable (financially, emotionally, whatever) of raising the child. Since the child is now born would he have "equal rights" to argue that the child must be given up for adoption and by extention avoid child support payments that way? Or are the laws as set up that if one parent wants to keep the child, they automatically keep the child and the other parent must pay child support?

In most western countries today you have to be really screwed up to get your kids taken off you against your will so whilst a father could try to force an adoption either by making allegations against the mother to social services (or I suppose going to court though I really wouldn't know about that) the mother would have to be incredibly ill suited for him to succeed.

[Darth Wong]

This is another hypothetical. Even though it's been established the man can't and shouldn't force a woman to undergo an abortion, what if once the baby was born he went to court and made the case that neither he nor the mother were capable (financially, emotionally, whatever) of raising the child. Since the child is now born would he have "equal rights" to argue that the child must be given up for adoption and by extention avoid child support payments that way? Or are the laws as set up that if one parent wants to keep the child, they automatically keep the child and the other parent must pay child support?

How would this be any different from a family's neighbour reporting them to Child Services? Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if many deadbeat fathers had tried this tactic already.