The letter from Jeff Kochis (Oct. 21) asserted that any man opposing abortion is a “cruel, demeaning control freak” seeking to return to the days when men ruled the world. While I personally believe that abortion should normally be limited to cases of rape, incest and verifiable medical necessity, I have no desire to control others, nor rule the world – unless it is a paid position.

Kochis has apparently unquestioningly accepted the male-bashing mantra that permeates the Lifetime channel and afternoon talk shows. His discussion of “choice” also excludes any mention of the absence of choice provided to the father. If the mother chooses to abort, the father is powerless to prevent the act, even if he is ready, willing and able to raise and support the child.

If the mother decides to keep the baby, the father is obliged to provide support for the next 18 years, even if he would have preferred to abort.

Though equal partners at the time of conception, and for the 18 years following birth, this literal life-and-death decision is left entirely to the female, primarily based upon the fact that she is the de facto incubator for the first nine months of the child’s existence.

Is that really enough to totally exclude the father from such a momentous decision?

While neither party should have veto power, leaving the decision entirely in the hands of one party is patently unfair and is based upon the same anachronistic sex stereotypes that Kochis decries.

Robert D. Beauchesne, Lewiston