Abortion | Father's Rights

[Trey of Diamonds]

Abortion topics pop up now and again but I don't see any that have focused only on the Father's Rights. So, does the father have any rights when it comes to an unborn child?

Why dads don't count when it comes to abortion. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine
The Y Files: Abortion, fathers' rights, and equality
http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articlepdf/dadsrights.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/06/weekinreview/06belluck.html

I find the choice between the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice groups to be horribly limiting. I don't really like either of them, kind of how I feel about Democrats and Republicans. I believe in life being sacred and I don't like the idea of women killing off child after child just because they don't want to use birth control. But I also don't see where it is the government or a religious groups right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body.

But most of all, I think that the father has rights when it comes to the decisions that affect his child, born and unborn. And that is what this thread is about so please restrict your answers to how you feel about Father's Rights. (Note: Feel free to state your opinion on abortion in general as it pertains to your views on Father's Rights, let's just not argue abortion in general here as there are plenty of other threads for that.)

 

[Storm]

While I'm not unsympathetic to fathers whose wishes clash with the mothers', I have to say that the woman's rights trump all. It's her body.

 

[Buttercup]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/06/weekinreview/06belluck.html
But most of all, I think that the father has rights when it comes to the decisions that affect his child, born and unborn. And that is what this thread is about so please restrict your answers to how you feel about Father's Rights. (Note: Feel free to state your opinion on abortion in general as it pertains to your views on Father's Rights, let's just not argue abortion in general here as there are plenty of other threads for that.)

I hate the thought of abortion too no matter what I feel about a woman's right to choose. It's still killing life for (mostly) convenience, imo.

I've always found it ironic that a boy/man has no choice in the matter. He might want his girlfriend or wife to get an abortion but if she doesn't, he has to pay child support later. Just another reason to use condoms and anything else you can get your hands on for protection.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I have to say that the woman's rights trump all. It's her body.

Yes but the child is not just hers, she is just the custodian of it for the first 9 months of its existance.

If the father was willing to accept all responsibility for the child after birth with the woman not having to ever see or do anything for the child again, and if the father pays for everything during the 9 months of pregnancy, should he not have the right to have this child? It is of his flesh and blood too. Does his emotional and spiritual trauma have any consideration? Is it automatically thought that a man will simply shrug his shoulders and go one as if nothing happened after his child has ceased to exist? Is his pain not to be considered at all?

 

[Buttercup]

Yes but the child is not just hers, she is just the custodian of it for the first 9 months of its existance.

Very true.

For the 9 months gestation period it's hers according to law. The second that child is born, it's his as well. The line has to be drawn somewhere and you can't own or have a right to part of someone's body.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Very true.

For the 9 months gestation period it's hers according to law. The second that child is born, it's his as well. The line has to be drawn somewhere and you can own or have a right to part of someone's body.

So the child is property? I thought slavery was outlawed? And if it is property should it be looked at at the DNA level? Half of the DNA is the males so does that mean it is half his even though it is in her possession? Since when does possession equate total ownership? That would make divorces much easier I suppose.

And if you are interesting in seeing where the concept of DNA ownership could be headed legally, read Michael Crichton's novel Next. Very scary stuff.

 

[Gentoo]

Very true.

For the 9 months gestation period it's hers according to law. The second that child is born, it's his as well. The line has to be drawn somewhere and you can own or have a right to part of someone's body.

The thought that someone else can own part of me is even worse than the thought of being pregnant in the first place is....

 

[Buttercup]

The thought that someone else can own part of me is even worse than the thought of being pregnant in the first place is....

LOL! I meant to write "can't". Crap! I'd better go fix that.

 

[Buttercup]

So the child is property?

Well, in a sense I guess you could look at it that way.

As I said before, (well, tried to anyway ) you can't "own" a part of someone's body. Therefore, the man has no rights until after the child is born.

 

[Kungfuzed]

I don't see why the law should even be involved in this. What a father wants with his future son/daughter should be discussed with his baby momma. I don't see how the government could have any say in the matter regardless of what she chooses.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Well, in a sense I guess you could look at it that way.

As I said before, (well, tried to anyway ) you can't "own" a part of someone's body. Therefore, the man has no rights until after the child is born.

I suggest you read Next, it will chill you to the bone.

I understand what you are saying but I still disagree. In the case of conjoined twins, does one own the other? They are physically connected so does that mean one is part of the other? Which one is the owner and which is the property? Can they even claim to be individuals or should they be considered only one since they are physically one creature?

Your argument makes as much sense to me as the above paragraph does to you.

 

[whereismynotecard]

I don't think people should kill their babies, and I think it's really unfair that when women can legally kill their babies there is nothing the father can do about it. If you put yourself in the father's shoes, I don't see how you could claim it is fair, no matter what your stance on abortion is: Your wife(girlfriend) is pregnant, and you've always wanted a little baby. You are so excited! But your wife wants to kill your little baby, because she doesn't think she is ready, even though you think you are, and want to raise this baby and be a family... Too bad she can have your baby killed and the law is on her side. Sucks to be you.

But, my opinion doesn't matter, so who cares? There's nothing I can do to make things the way I want them, and it doesn't really affect me anyway. I didn't know any of those babies. If you kill them before anyone personally knows them, the only people who are going to be sad is the woman(maybe) and maybe the father if he disagreed. But I'll never have the chance to be a father, so I guess I don't have to worry about it. Any of my babies being killed will be my own choice, so I won't have to worry about disagreeing with myself. At least I got to be born. That's what I care about.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I don't see why the law should even be involved in this. What a father wants with his future son/daughter should be discussed with his baby momma. I don't see how the government could have any say in the matter regardless of what she chooses.

The involvement would be in if they disagree. Surely you don't think everyone is going to peacefully come to an agreement on what to do in this situation. There has to be laws that ensure the rights of all parties are respected.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

my opinion doesn't matter,

Never say that, even in jest. Your opinion is as important as everyone elses. (Doesn't mean its right, just that it's important, and indeed, does matter.)

 

[McBell]

While I'm not unsympathetic to fathers whose wishes clash with the mothers', I have to say that the woman's rights trump all. It's her body.

This is pretty much my thought as well.

Now before anyone whines about being in the situation, I was.
Now do not get me wrong, I wanted her to have the child.
However, I respected the fact that it is her body, not mine.

 

[Kungfuzed]

The involvement would be in if they disagree. Surely you don't think everyone is going to peacefully come to an agreement on what to do in this situation. There has to be laws that ensure the rights of all parties are respected.

Of course they won't always come to an agreement. But if they disagree there is nothing the government can do about it. If the father wants the baby and the mother doesn't, what will be her punishment if she gets the abortion anyway? Jail? If the father doesn't want the child and the mother does are the cops going to show up and take her down to the clinic and strap her down on the table? This is a personal domestic disagreement and the government has no business butting in unless they start beating each other.

 

[whereismynotecard]

Never say that, even in jest. Your opinion is as important as everyone elses. (Doesn't mean its right, just that it's important, and indeed, does matter.)

Well, nothing is right. I don't think my opinion matters, because no one listens to it. I don't mind though. I'm used to it.

 

[Buttercup]

Your argument makes as much sense to me as the above paragraph does to you.

Well, what's funny is that the law agrees with me.

Post your argument concerning why a man should have rights over part of a woman's body?

Is there even a way to discern paternal dna during the gestation period?

 

[Apex]

Yes but the child is not just hers, she is just the custodian of it for the first 9 months of its existance.

If the father was willing to accept all responsibility for the child after birth with the woman not having to ever see or do anything for the child again, and if the father pays for everything during the 9 months of pregnancy, should he not have the right to have this child? It is of his flesh and blood too. Does his emotional and spiritual trauma have any consideration? Is it automatically thought that a man will simply shrug his shoulders and go one as if nothing happened after his child has ceased to exist? Is his pain not to be considered at all?

These are basically my exact thoughts on the issue. I think there is a problem when it takes two people to create a life, and only one person to kill it.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Of course they won't always come to an agreement. But if they disagree there is nothing the government can do about it. If the father wants the baby and the mother doesn't, what will be her punishment if she gets the abortion anyway? Jail? If the father doesn't want the child and the mother does are the cops going to show up and take her down to the clinic and strap her down on the table? This is a personal domestic disagreement and the government has no business butting in unless they start beating each other.

How very libertarian of you, and I respect that. Still disagree though. Yes, the government should protect the rights of the father and stop the mother from having an abortion if he wishes to take over raising the child on his own. The governments job is to protect the rights of it's citizens so if a father's rights are ever identified as such, they should protect them.