Let's stick to the facts and not conflate with assumptions of poverty and despair. This is about the right to deal with a sudden consequence of a humanly act. Women can put a child up for adoption, sign away parental rights to a family member, etc. Not fair that those options aren't extended to men and is actually an assault on one's civil rights and freedom as an American. These laws are mainly in place so the government isn't on the hook. Well, the government should have no right to dictate this instance especially if a man were given his options prior to that child being born. Also, you brought in the sympathy plight of a few men who wanted their "alleged" child but the woman aborted or gave him/her away. That's a point for my argument that men aren't being given options. It's between two consenting adults so if he wants him/her (the baby) then can come to an agreement with signed documentation that he sponsors the pregnancy, gives her a stipend and he gets sole custody no matter if she changes her mind. If he allows the mother to be a part of the child's life afterward then they can do so.
I've said what I had to say in this any many of the other repeats of this topic on here. Not gonna keep going back and forth with you on this since this thread right here is the best example of an irresponsible man. Was he fukking irresponsible chicks? Sure looks like it. Doesn't absolve him of shyt though.
The laws are NOT Gonna change.
Facts.
I don't have any sympathy for any man or women who has an "unintended" pregnancy with completely intended sex.

.........nikkas eating eggs and and scrambling eggs at the same time. Chef Sanger wins again. 
.