Im not a big Dr. Phil fan, kinda think he sells common sense for a massive amount of money, but today there was something interesting on it.

A guy said he had sex with his girlfriend and she got pregnant. He does not want a child and feels it is unconstitutional that he should pay maintenance for the baby because he wanted to put the child up for adoption.

His arguement continues that he has fewer choices than his girlfriend in relation to the child and thats sexual discrimination. All the most common arguments were put forward e.g. “You had a choice that night you had sex…” etc. His argument was “Yea and so did she, and she had all these other choices like abortion, adoption etc. I didn’t”

I personally think the entire situation is sad as no-one is really looking out for the child, but I also think its interesting when you start to go down a humanist legal path that you end up with laws that contradict each other. There were 10 good laws to start with - probably should have stayed that way.

Check out the entire interview.

Your thoughts please?