She puts it as thus:
Rather than focusing on the relationship between the man and a hypothetical child, the new technology invites us to change the way we think about the relationship between unmarried lovers who conceive. Both partners had a role in the conception; it’s only fair that they should both take responsibility for its economic consequences.
Former spouses are often required to pay alimony; former cohabiting partners may have to pay palimony; why not ask men who conceive with a woman to whom they are not married to pay “preglimony”?
I don’t agree with Ms. Motro on this. Child support is not supposed to be financial support for the mother, but for “the best interest of the child.” In the case of pregnancy, there is no child, not yet, not legally. I can’t think of another case where someone is obligated to pay for another person’s medical expenses, without that person agreeing to it, or having been found liable in some way. As the partners have no recognized legal relationship to each other, under what legal theory would preglimony be put under?-I see that the author tries to shoehorn it under child support, but it doesn’t fit until there is an actual child. You can argue that the male helped “contribute” to the woman’s condition, but as long as she consented at the time, how would that obligate him? Could a woman sue her boyfriend for being a great cook, serving delicious meals, and causing her to get fat? Should she be able to get him to pay for her diabetes bills after they break up?
I can’t help but wonder if this is another backdoor attack on abortion rights. After all, once a man is obligated to pay for a pregnancy, he also presumably gets some say in the pregnancy and its ultimate outcome, even if he and the woman are no longer together. Would he then be able to choose the hospital or birthing center, doctor or midwife, pain medication or no pain medication, all of which, while personal decisions, are also deeply tied to finances as well. Could it go even further? Men's rights groups are, predictably, up in arms over this proposal. Ultimately while I think preglimony is an interesting thought experiment, I don’t feel that it is either fair or practical to implement.