what do you think of recently proposed "preglimony" policy?
Until and unless the pregnancy produces a child, any costs associated with it are regarded as the woman’s responsibilityRecently it has been suggested that the man who has conceived with woman but has no conjugal ties with her should chip in for medical bills, birthing classes and maternity clothes and to help to cover the loss of income that often comes with pregnancy, or to contribute to the cost of an abortion.. This sounds nice, but do lawmakers- while making this assumption- considered that it is a woman who intentionally goes for what she is going to. The sexual act as such is done by mutual assent but not by some illegal actions such as rape or abuse for what we have punishment on legal grounds attached in the Constitution. I think that the onus should lie on it ,for man to take full responsibility for what he is doing by his own incentive as a liable individual or as a genuine man after all but this should by no means be an obligatory measure
