Its one of the most unfair situatiosn within our society, and its one of the reasons that frankly you will not get me crying many tears over the plight and unfair treatment of women, but ultimately its a situation where there's a bad answer and a worse answer. In this case, the woman having sole sovereignty over the child's life based on it residing within her body is the bad answer, but the father being ble to have an equal call is worse, in regards to rights and the ramifications it has.
As we are continually told during abortion debates, its not "just" the womans fault that they chose to have unprotected sex. That is correct. Its both's fault, so to say "too bad, the guy should've wore the condom" is as bull**** as saying "well the girl should've just not had sex". Its a horrible and sad thing in our society that we have such situations where a child is concieved, has a parent that is happy and willing to raise it and love it, and it is aborted because the other doesn't want it. This both applies when a father wants it but the mother terminates, or if the situation was reversed either legally or illegally (through threats, intimidation, or force). However, the stakes of allowing another control over another persons body is equally disturbing.
Ultimately, and I know this is going to sound crazy, my hope would be that a reliably safe way of either allowing for a surrogate mother, a artificial surrogate, or even a method in which men could carry a child could be developed. If it could be done with relatively minor risk (IE no more risk then say a C-Section) then I would be in favor of a law stating that if a woman wishes to abort but the father wishes to keep it that a transplanet would be required rather than an abortion, after which the mother would relinquish rights and responsabilities to the child. This to me would be a reasonable balance between "infringing upon the rights of the mother's control on her own body" and the rights of the child whose residing within it. It does not force the mother to carry a child for 9 months, having the multitude of affects that pregnancy brings in addition to the after affects lasting for untold months. At the same time, it does not terminate the child when there is a willing biological parent choosing to take it.
Until such a point though the "bad or worse" decision has to be made, and that decision has to be that it is the womans choice though I would hope any reasonable women WOULD give input to the father.
Now, with this said...
I am in favor to review of paternity law in regards to responsability. If a father is not made known of the child prior to the 6the 3rd trimester then he should not be legally compelled to give financial support, or have a reduction of the amount of financial support he is forced to give. If a father IS notified prior to the 3rd trimester he has the option to relinquish claim to the child within the first 2, thus removing any rights he has towards the child but also any responsability in regards to financial support. He could not relinquish his position after the 3rd trimester, to remove people getting suddednly cold feet. The woman has sovreignty over her own body, she should not have it over the the wallet of the father. The action of conception is a two person act and if women has the ability to wipe her hands clean of the child prior to its birth then the father should have an equal if different ability to do such as well. All the complaints that forcing pregnancy is "punishing the woman" equally applies in regards to forcing financial slavery on the part of the man.
If they are forced to pay and that doesn't change, then new regulation should be put on it requiring the mother to specifically detail where every dollar of child support is spent to justify that it is going to half of the support of the child. If it accounts for more than half of the money used to support the child then the amount the father is forced to pay should be reduced. If its found that the money is being for things other than the child then it should be a violation, with 3 violations leading to a potential reduction of support requiring to be paid and grounds to potentially contest custody.