Having their cake and eating it too

That's a question un-addressed. And I agree with the poster's outrage; such a question: "Just what does a man do for his children anyway?" is beyond infuriating.

Really, as bad as it is in the US, etc., I really can't see why Indian men so much as take a chance on becoming a father.

I am not going to click on the whole article, but just comment on the excerpt.

I do not think this is a good law, as fathers are important, and like Matt said, men need to be careful that they are not on the hook for child support. Where I am from parents have to provide financial support for any child conceived OR ADOPTED during the marriage.

Since I am an advocate for adoption, I would like anyone considering giving a child up, to know that parents (this includes fathers) get to say what family their child is adopted into.

I urge anyone to stipulate that their child be given to a biological male/female heterosexual couple if it is important to you. With so many singles, gays and transgender people adopting nowadays, it really should be stipulated and exact wording used in the contract.

And also, what a terrible time to adopt. It must be a stressful and unstable time for the mother as well as for children in the family, if there are any. "Hey kids, your losing your dad, but gaining a brother!"

I think this is poor family values.

And for the person who asked:

"Just what does a man do for his children anyway?"

Must not have had a father in their life. If they did, they would know the answer.

... that men are not given anywhere near the same rights as women vis a vis children or financial rights over their own income when conflict arises. Women it seems have almost complete right to manage their own income and that of their estranged spouse or ex-husband without oversight or scrutiny (X-ref: alimony, child support)

Basically unless there is an absolute right for a man separated from a woman (ie, a couple who is legally married but also legally separated), there should be an absolute refutation of any obligation around HER unilateral decision to adopt. This is not unlike the matter of men having no "paper abortion" option but it is even worse in that the couple is known to be estranged, legally so in fact.

But as you say, most women would not want to adopt a child while separated though legally married still. But not all women are like that. Enough of them are more than happy to seek to adopt a child while still married to a man they are seeking divorce from. A stressful time? For some women they have no sense of stress unless it is that they are not getting whatever they want; a child, for example, whether he or she be 1 year old or 16.

This is about equal rights for men, not about "what-ifs..." and "well, maybe buts..." Think of it: Is there any mention of a man having the right to adopt a child free from discrimination should he be separated from his wife? See what I mean? No equal rights.

I daresay the commentary of the feminist interviewed suggesting men are utterly without utility or input vis-a-vis children pretty much gives it away. There is no defense in the slightest for such a condition arising under any form of legal system claiming to seek justice.

BTW, sorry if this comes across as if I didn't read your comment. I can see you are firmly siding with the idea that this is a bad idea. Think of this post merely as an elaboration on my first comment.

Why would any sensible person allow a man or woman in this position to adopt? If they are still married, one spouse shouldn't be able to adopt in a time of estrangement, and definitely not w/o the agreement of the other party.

I wouldn't be surprised if the husband ends up being required to pay child support for the adopted child, even though the two are separated.

If you're giving up your child to adoption you're giving up your parental rights. You shouldn't have any say in how that child is raised, especially to foster your personal bigotry based on sexual identity and orientation. Until the community - government - starts providing programs that give every child in every family a more fair shake, if you plan on giving up your child to adoption you should realize that they may end up in a good home or a poor home regardless of who they end up with.

If you're really concerned you should support abortion. Children should be brought into this world with love and support, not abandonment.

http://jayhammers.blogspot.com

thanks for finding it for us.

Becuase the general reports were that even separated men will be allowed to adopt as well.

this is frankly a response by the male hating NCW to the directive by home ministery that men should no longer be arrested on mere allegations of Dowry .

AIMWA will take care of this now

Am I to understand that separated women can adopt, but not separated men?

Does anyone know for sure (provide link)?

If it is true, then it is gender discrimination, but if adoption during separation is open to both genders it is still a bad time to adopt and nothing I would support.

Is there some cultural difference that I am not understanding? Here in the USA a person usually is 'separated' for a short period, then the divorce is final.

Is divorce so frowned upon in India, that people stay 'separated' indefinitely?

So far, this is what I understand (what I think is correct). Anyone can correct me if I am wrong, as some of this is confusing and takes a leap of assumption.

The adoption laws were formed by the Hindu religion. Although not everyone in India practices Hinduism, the country is governed by Hindu law.

It appears that in the Hindu religion, the man can take more than one wife and the man is committed to providing for his wife(s) until the end of her life(s). But a woman can have only one husband.

From what I can tell it is difficult to get out of a marriage, if not impossible unless the wife commits adultery (which is punishable) or she ceases to be a Hindu (not likely). So instead of divorcing it is common to remain 'separated' indefinitely. The husband can take on another wife, but the wife is not allowed to take on another husband.

So in India, you have Hindu women that are separated and have no chance of divorce (as it is not really allowed) but they are not living with their husbands and they want to be mothers so adoption is their only option. Separated men are also allowed to adopt.

The law does mention consent of the spouse is needed and adopting parents must be able to provide financially for the child, but I am unclear if this applies in situations when spouses are separated.

PS- It seems there is a lot of gender discrimination going on in Hindu laws. But it does not seem like the new change of allowing 'separated women' to adopt is discriminatory as it allows both men and women the same right. (Still a bad law in my opinion).

I visited several sites, but here is where I got most of my info:

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Hindu_Adoptions_and_Maintenance_Act_(1956)

"Most of the Indian fathers I've met, don't even plan to become a father in the 1st place. They just marry to have sex"

That kind of reminds me of the guys that join wrestling team, but don't plan on getting hurt, or people that eat a lot but don't plan on getting fat.

There seems to be a conflict in the choices these people make versus the outcome they are expecting.

Divorce is frowned about by only Indian courts .

Hell my relative gives divorce to couples through a stamp paprer but she ( note the word she ) gives then anyways .

Is it accepted in customs as it is done after a jury decision in the panchayats ( village courts)

Is it legal ? Indian courts take 19- 20 years to decide

Even women prefer the village court mechanism

It is only the stupid urban men who try to really try for divorce which is not granted even after 19-20 years.

on adoption which was the issue if a panchayat issues a adoption decree even the suprem court cannot overturn it .

This issue is more aroun thatr fact that father is seen a natural guradian which is frankly a disadvantage then advantage to men

According to the hindu law a husband if he takes another women is criminal
where as if a wife takes another man she is a victim .

Regarding your PS : do not underestimate the feminist of Inida they have the ability to use word women ( always to advantage) and man ( always to disadvantage )

In fact the only country in the world to tax men higher at the same salary levels is India
the most brutal and anti-sensitive feminists of USA in the mensactivism have turned to be from Indian Origin.

Kris please identify your credentials .

The kind of statements above do not have head or tail

"Most of the Indian fathers I've met, don't even plan to become a father in the 1st place. They just marry to have sex"

The reaction you gave to that has never a meaning.

how many american men will marry and not have sex?

bharati,

I am no expert on India or Hindu law. If you read my opening statement you will understand that I am trying to get this right, and I do ask to be corrected if I am wrong.

I am guessing that you are from India and I appreciate your response, although a little is lost in the language barrier. Maybe that is why you think I am writing as 'fact', when I even disclaim that it is so confusing that I am making "assumptions".

In this link that I read from: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Hindu_Adoptions_and_Maintenance_Act_(1956)

It mentions that a husband can take another wife, and it often uses the phrase "wife or wives" as in, "the husband must provide for his wife or wives" (paraphrasing). That implies that a man can have more than one legal wife. But a woman can have only one husband.

It also says that both married and single men and women can adopt.

From Time magazine (in an article about India and remarriage): "Some [Indian women] have no chance to remarry because according to the rules of their caste they cannot, even though the man can."

Are you saying these sources are wrong or I mis-interpreted? If so, I will take your word for it.

And I think you are even supporting the notion that divorce is difficult if not impossible in India. (I think you are suggesting that there is a 'less legal' form of divorce - something I am not familiar with as it doesn't work that way in my culture)

I do not support adoption while separated. I was just trying to understand what would motivate a woman to adopt at this stage. And if a woman is stuck in a stage of separation becasue divorce is nearly impossible, that would explain it a bit.

....And no, I am not a feminist. I am a wife, stay-at-home mom, nurse, business owner, barber, dancer, homeschooler....