Post: #1

Good story in the NYT today. Woman meets Olympic skier Bode Miller via "high-end" matchmaking service. They date for 1 1/2 months, conceive a child, which she decides to keep apparently against his wishes. She moves from California to NYC for school while pregnant, files for custody in New York. New York court refuses to take jurisdiction of the case from the California court, accuses her of forum-shopping (i.e. gaming the court system to find a place with preferential laws/judges). Miller and his new wife win temporary custody of the child, have had the baby for the first 9 months of its life.

So instead of what she no doubt expected to happen--custody of the child and a nice child-support check based on the income of an international ski star--she got her newborn jerked away from her. No word on whether she has been ordered to pay child support to Miller--I suppose that will have to wait on the permanent custody decision (the case is on appeal).

I'm not saying this woman is a terrible person, and don't doubt this is pretty miserable for her. But I am saying people respond to incentives. If girls knew there was a reasonable chance of this happening instead of their preferred scenario, they'd be less likely to cavalierly decide to get knocked up and keep the child against the father's wishes.

Personally I think violating a man's reproductive rights by bearing his child against his wishes should be crime, the same way forcing a woman to have an abortion would be. That's probably impractical, but at the very least she should have no right to financial support.

Of course the NYT's spin is that the case "Raises questions about the rights of women."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/us/cus...h_20131124

Post: #2

(11-24-2013 01:19 PM)Ryre Wrote:  Personally I think violating a man's reproductive rights by bearing his child against his wishes should be crime, the same way forcing a woman to have an abortion would be.

Nice post but but I'm confused here. It seems like you are contradicting yourself. If the mans wishes are to not have the child then what other option is there besides forced abortion, however it may be forced.

If the woman wants the kid and the man doesn't I have no problem with her being able to have the child but he should not be held responsible if she decides to keep it against his wishes, IMO. I think allowing the guy to sign his rights away is the option we are looking for here.

Post: #3

(11-24-2013 01:31 PM)Jaydublin Wrote:  

(11-24-2013 01:19 PM)Ryre Wrote:  Personally I think violating a man's reproductive rights by bearing his child against his wishes should be crime, the same way forcing a woman to have an abortion would be.

Nice post but but I'm confused here. It seems like you are contradicting yourself. If the mans wishes are to not have the child then what other option is there besides forced abortion, however it may be forced.

If the woman wants the kid and the man doesn't I have no problem with her being able to have the child but he should not be held responsible if she decides to keep it against his wishes, IMO. I think allowing the guy to sign his rights away is the option we are looking for here.

No, you're right. That's why I said criminalizing such--what would you call it...involuntary fertility?--isn't practical.* I suppose you could have a law that did not force her to have an abortion, but did give her a criminal penalty, say a little jail time, a fine, and probation. But really I was saying that "In an ideal world this would be a crime, in the real world the man should be able to relinquish all paternal rights and responsibilities."

*I do think paternity fraud should be criminal, like any other fraud. And how about a penalty for bearing a man's child but not telling him about it? That's almost a form of kidnapping if you think about it.

Post: #4

Bode Miller is the man.

He trolled really hard in 2006. He flopped performance wise, and when the media asked him how he felt about his performance, he responded saying something like "I achieved what I set out to do, I went out there and partied at an Olympic level." The media basically said his career is over and that he will be forgotten in skiing history, but after his performance at the 2010 Games he solidified his position as the best American male Olympic skier yet.

Post: #5

They were dating for 1.5 months and she got pregnant?
So he has had the baby for the first mine months?

So he was either banging the girl on the side when he was with his gf (current wife) or got married within 9 months from ditching her.

Interesting

Post: #6

I applaud her for pursuing her academic goals. Her status as a veteran, and firefighter, thus a "heroine," adds to the perception that she's somehow a victim. Frankly, Miller is in the better situation to care for the child at the moment - he's more stable. At the same time, the initial ruling seemed kind of harsh. She made a decision to attend one of the greater institutions of higher learning in the world, and she happened to be pregnant at the time. I can't accuse her of moving across country JUST to spite Miller, or forum shop. Miller, while initially disapproving of her having the child, changed his mind and decided he wanted to be a part of the child's life and stepped up, which men are criticized for NOT doing.

Naturally, her attorneys will make this about women's reproductive rights, but we can't ignore the decision that brought them to this point - the father had no rights regarding whether or not he wanted a child in the first place. Women have ALL of the reproductive rights, and men have NONE. Women and courts force men every day to pay support for children that aren't even their own - rewarding fraud perpetrated by the mother. I agree with the court's rejection of the premise that “the mother needed to somehow arrange her relocation with the father with whom she had only a brief romantic relationship,” but based on that same brief romantic relationship, Miller would have to pay her thousands of dollars based on a decision he had no voice in. We can't look at one side of these issues without looking at the other...

Post: #7

(11-24-2013 03:38 PM)CThunder86 Wrote:  They were dating for 1.5 months and she got pregnant?
So he has had the baby for the first mine months?

So he was either banging the girl on the side when he was with his gf (current wife) or got married within 9 months from ditching her.

Interesting

"Mr. Miller is currently training for the Sochi Winter Olympics. In October 2012, he married Morgan Beck, a beach volleyball star and model he started dating around the time Ms. McKenna became pregnant. They often travel together to tournaments and promotional events, posting pictures of Nate on social media."

My guess he knew he was done with McKenna in his mind, but hadn't ended it yet[/i], and had already started looking around. It just so happened that at the end of the relationship he got her pregnant. He kind of fucked up there...

Post: #8

(11-24-2013 03:59 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  

(11-24-2013 03:38 PM)CThunder86 Wrote:  They were dating for 1.5 months and she got pregnant?
So he has had the baby for the first mine months?

So he was either banging the girl on the side when he was with his gf (current wife) or got married within 9 months from ditching her.

Interesting

"Mr. Miller is currently training for the Sochi Winter Olympics. In October 2012, he married Morgan Beck, a beach volleyball star and model he started dating around the time Ms. McKenna became pregnant. They often travel together to tournaments and promotional events, posting pictures of Nate on social media."

My guess he knew he was done with McKenna in his mind, but hadn't ended it yet[/i], and had already started looking around. It just so happened that at the end of the relationship he got her pregnant. He kind of fucked up there...

No. the easy explanation is that he is not monogamous.

no problem there.

Post: #9

Why would a guy like that need a matchmaking service? He can go into any club and get laid. Maybe he was looking for a wife......

I'm sure the girl told him she was on birth control

All men should depend only on themselves for birth control-meaning either condom or pullout- any other way you're puting our future in the hands of a woman

Post: #10

(11-24-2013 04:48 PM)kdolo Wrote:  

(11-24-2013 03:59 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  

(11-24-2013 03:38 PM)CThunder86 Wrote:  They were dating for 1.5 months and she got pregnant?
So he has had the baby for the first mine months?

So he was either banging the girl on the side when he was with his gf (current wife) or got married within 9 months from ditching her.

Interesting

"Mr. Miller is currently training for the Sochi Winter Olympics. In October 2012, he married Morgan Beck, a beach volleyball star and model he started dating around the time Ms. McKenna became pregnant. They often travel together to tournaments and promotional events, posting pictures of Nate on social media."

My guess he knew he was done with McKenna in his mind, but hadn't ended it yet[/i], and had already started looking around. It just so happened that at the end of the relationship he got her pregnant. He kind of fucked up there...

No. the easy explanation is that he is not monogamous.

no problem there.

You misunderstand. He fucked up by getting her pregnant. Not by seeing other women.

Post: #11

(11-24-2013 07:47 PM)MrXY Wrote:  Why would a guy like that need a matchmaking service? He can go into any club and get laid. Maybe he was looking for a wife......

I'm sure the girl told him she was on birth control

All men should depend only on themselves for birth control-meaning either condom or pullout- any other way you're puting our future in the hands of a woman

Yeah...I think he was looking to settle down. That's why people like him drop thousands to go to high-end matchmaking services. However, there's no guarantee it will work out. He obviously was looking to marry because he married the chick he started seeing before he was completely done with the one he got pregnant. And I agree...men need to handle the birth control on their end if they're sure they don't want kids with a certain woman. If you're a high-profile guy, even if the didn't completely intend to get pregnant by you, she'll keep it if she finds out she's knocked up.

Post: #12

(11-24-2013 03:53 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  I applaud her for pursuing her academic goals. Her status as a veteran, and firefighter, thus a "heroine," adds to the perception that she's somehow a victim. Frankly, Miller is in the better situation to care for the child at the moment - he's more stable. At the same time, the initial ruling seemed kind of harsh. She made a decision to attend one of the greater institutions of higher learning in the world, and she happened to be pregnant at the time. I can't accuse her of moving across country JUST to spite Miller, or forum shop. Miller, while initially disapproving of her having the child, changed his mind and decided he wanted to be a part of the child's life and stepped up, which men are criticized for NOT doing.

Naturally, her attorneys will make this about women's reproductive rights, but we can't ignore the decision that brought them to this point - the father had no rights regarding whether or not he wanted a child in the first place. Women have ALL of the reproductive rights, and men have NONE. Women and courts force men every day to pay support for children that aren't even their own - rewarding fraud perpetrated by the mother. I agree with the court's rejection of the premise that “the mother needed to somehow arrange her relocation with the father with whom she had only a brief romantic relationship,” but based on that same brief romantic relationship, Miller would have to pay her thousands of dollars based on a decision he had no voice in. We can't look at one side of these issues without looking at the other...

Yeah, although the court spanked her for the move across the country/forum shopping, the part that pisses me off the most is the unilateral decision to have his baby in the first place.

Post: #13

This is the site he apparently used;

http://www.kelleher-international.com/

Wonder if they have a 90 day money back guarantee if she turns out to be a money grubbing baby factory?