What rights should the father have re: an abortion decision?

Great Debates
21

A fetus is not an entity entirely seperate from its mother, it’s a little disingenuous to suggest otherwise. In some ways, yes it is a part of the mother’s body but this does not preclude it being a seperate being - the fetus cannot survive without living off the mother’s functioning body systems, but is also busy developing systems of its own. However, at this time in order for a fetus to live to a survivable birth weight, it would involve forcing a woman to carry the child for a certain period of time, which does deny her autonomy over her own body.

Personally, I think it would be marvellous for the father to be able to demand a right to life for his child (I know I’d want to) but can’t get past the fact that would force the mother into carrying an unwanted child which it does not do to the father. Biology dictates that all a man has to do in order to father a child is orgasm, whereas the mother is subject to a hugely intensive process of body changes, so I do not believe there is an equal right in the say to whether the pregnancy continues or not.

22

Kelly I had hoped that we would all have the sense to know that a rapist would be excluded from this.

Of course, there’s another way that this wouldn’t work: women would start screaming rape in order to keep the man out of the decision.

Why is it enslavery when a woman has willingly had sex with someone and she gets pregnant?

So should a man be allowed to sue for damages if his child is aborted against his will?

23

Indeed. And if you make the woman prove the rape before she gets to have an abortion without the rapist’s consent, you’ve mooted the question as such proof will take longer than the pregnancy.

So, as a matter of effectiveness, we have to either forbid the “rape exclusion” (which results in injustice to women who are raped), or we have to allow women to abort even when they weren’t raped (which, perhaps, results in injustice to the man who fathered the child). When you add to the balance the fact that not allowing a woman the right to preserve her own life in the event that the father determines that her life is worth less than that of his incipient child, I think the balance of fairness is in favor of not giving the father a veto.

In my opinion, no. Such lawsuits would only be used by vindictive men to further punish women that they have probably already treated poorly enough as to get pregnant in a situation where the mother, at least, is not in a position to be able to bear or raise a child. Men should not be allowed to profit from their insensitivity to the concerns of the women with whom they have sex.

24

No. He should be able to give up his parental rights before the child is born, and not have to pay child support.

The choice of whether to have an abortion should still rest with the mother, of course, but she shouldn’t get to force him to pay any more than he can force her to carry the child.

25

Wha?

“Such lawsuits would only be used by vindictive men to further punish women that they have probably already treated poorly enough as to get pregnant in a situation where the mother, at least, is not in a position to be able to bear or raise a child.”

Treated poorly enough? Did the man make the sole decision to have sex? Do women never let their hormones get out of control and have sex knowing that they couldn’t/wouldn’t be willing to take care of a baby if they got preggers?

Do you honestly think that all women who have abortions do it because they don’t have the money or support or the health?

Women have abortions all the time for no other reason that a child would be inconvenient to their plans, nothing more.

Which is more vindictive: denying a man the right to raise his own child or a man suing a woman who has aborted his child with absolutely no regard to his wishes?

26

Why? If you are going to take a position, be consistent. The fetus is innocent no matter how it came to exist.

Unless, of course, your position has nothing to do with consideration for the fetus and is really more about making women “pay” for being sexually “free”, something that doesn’t seem entirely unlikely given this:

Because she willingly had sex, she didn’t sign up for motherhood.

27

Stoid anyone with a brain knows that when you have sex, you run the risk of getting pregnant. The only exception is if you have no uterus.

As much as people want to separate sex and pregnancy, it’s not gonna happen.

28

Really? You got some cites for that assertion? Nearly every woman I personally know has had at least one abortion, and not a single instance would I characterize as avoiding mere “inconvenience”. It is inconvenient to have to park 3 blocks away, it is life-altering in a profound and irrevocable way to have a baby, whether you keep it or give it up.

Neither one is necessarily vindictive, since vindictiveness is a motive it is hard to quantify. But without more information I’d say it would be the lawsuit. Lawsuits tend to be, by their very nature, kinda vindictive. Abortions are not.

29

WV_Woman-how about a cite on statistics for WHY women have abortions?

30

In most of these cases, It was the man’s choice to put himself in a position to create a new life. It’s common knowledge that sexual intercourse can cause pregnancy.

I could understand where you’re coming from if a woman used deception to get herself pregnant… like spitting out the semen after oral sex and using the old turkey baster method to inseminate herself… In those cases, which would probably be impossible to prove anyway, the man shouldn’t have to pay because he couldn’t reasonably expect a baby to result from that.

31

So ared you suggesting that only women without uteruses (uteri?) be permitted to have sex?

And in this day and age, that risk can be reduced to something very close to zero.

It happened a long time ago. Checking my butt for statistics I see that 99 out of 100 acts of sex on this planet are engaged in without the slightest intention of pregnancy occuring, and mostly with actions undertaken to avoid it.

Much as some people would like all acts of sex to be about procreation, it ain’t gonna happen.

32

Um, there is such thing as birth control.

And while I really hate abortion being used as birth control, I do not want it made illegal.

33

Stoid “actions undertaken to avoid it” – guess what? Sometimes those actions don’t work.

There is not a person alive that doesn’t know that every single form of birth control carries a risk of failure.

34

So, WV? What’s your point?

35

Stoid you’re the one saying that sex and pregnancy was separated a long time ago shrug

36

You miss the point (presumably deliberately).

Suppose we did create a cause of action that allowed the father of an aborted fetus to sue the mother for aborting it, resulting in money damages. What sort of man would actually bring such an action? Not one who cared and loved for the woman, I should think. No, such actions will be brought when the man and woman were at best casual acquaintances, or possibly disaffected lovers. Now, it is true that there are times that women “let their hormones get out of control”, but history has shown us that it’s far more likely that it’ll be the man who does. So, some guy who sows some wild oats, finds out that some of his oats landed in fertile soil, but were plucked before maturity can now make money off the poor woman he inseminated? Such a regime would reward irresponsible male behavior, and I cannot countenance that.

Of course, most of the “male consent to abortion” proposals are designed to reward, or at least diminish the punishment for, irresponsible sexual behavior by males. Women pay the price for their irresponsible behavior by the very nature of women’s sexuality. Men, on the other hand, do not; the physical penalty for carelessness for men is a risk of STDs (one lower than that borne by women, by the way), and that risk ends after the sex act is complete. For men to also bear the lesser financial risk, and especially for them to be able to impose further financial burdens on their female partners, is absurdly unjust.

I don’t think it’s appropriate to probe deeply into the reason any particular women seeks to have an abortion. And the need for an immediate decision makes it impossible for there to be any involved decision making process on whether a woman should be allowed to have an abortion; otherwise, the delay of the decision process will effectively take away the possibility entirely.

When men can give birth on their own, they can raise children on their own. A child belongs not to the man – or the woman – who conceived it.

I cannot imagine how permitting the proposed cause of action would benefit society as a whole. If you think abortion should be outlawed, outlaw it. The proposed measure is just another way to make abortions so difficult as to practically outlaw them, without actually outlawing them, and as such is nothing more than a cowardly backdoor attack on abortion rights.

37

:rolleyes:

Of course, airbags, brakes and seat belts aren’t 100% perfect but you still drive, right? You cross the street even though a car could peel out around the corner at any second and run you over, or could be mugged on the sidewalk once you have crossed the road. Almost any action carries with it some risk, so you shouldn’t be calling people responsible enough to use birth control, which greatly reduces that risk, foolish.

38

I think Kelly M was using rape as an extreme example of a whole slew of grey area situations. Well, I don’t want to speak for Kelly M if that’s not what was meant, but it’s what I mean anyway.

What if it’s rape?

What if the woman discovers after becoming pregnant that the man is already married to someone else, a fact that he had previously lied about?

What if the woman discovers after becoming pregnant that the man routinely beats his children from a previous marriage?

What if the couple first agreed on the topic of abortion, but after hearing the woman was pregnant, the man changed his mind? People change their minds all the time. Is the woman entitled to an abortion, because she began a sexual relationship with the premise that abortion would be the solution to an unwanted pregnancy? How would she prove this? Do we all have to sign “abortion consent” forms before having sex?

What if the woman doesn’t know who the father is, and two men step forward, one who wants the baby, and one who agrees with an abortion? What if blood tests then show the guy who supported the abortion is in fact the father? Does the guy who prevented the abortion have any obligation to assist with child support?

I think such a law would be unreasonable because there are about a million “what if” cases. That’s just not good law-making. Back to the rape scenario, what if the woman claims rape … does she have to wait to go to court to prove/disprove that claim? If she was in fact raped, enough time could go by that abortion is no longer an option.

The decision to abort is 100% in the hands of the mother. It is her body. The law has an obligaton to protect this right 100% of the time. A woman should not be legally obligated to tell anyone else about her abortion, much less be subject to anyone else’s approval. Even the father. It probably isn’t fair, but it’s also not fair that some guilty people walk free because a court could not find the evidence to convict them. However, that’s an unfair situation we, as a society, for the most part accept, because it also makes it more difficult for an innocent person to be wrongfully convicted of a crime. In criminal court, the state must prove guilt 100% of the time (which is why everyone’s in a spin about current events, but that’s another debate). In order to guarantee a woman’s right to an abortion, it must be protected 100% of the time. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

39

Here’s one cite, for starters, about why women get abortions. Note who did the survey.

http://www.lovematters.com/getabortions.htm

40

“A woman should not be legally obligated to tell anyone else about her abortion, much less be subject to anyone else’s approval.”

So … just trying to clarify here … a 14 year old girl shouldn’t have to tell her parents she’s having one?