Citizenship of a fetus?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

From the UN Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 15

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Many countries, even if they aren't signatories to the UNDHR, include a similar principle in their laws.

A question for those of you who argue that a fetus is a person: how should this principle be applied to fetuses?

Normally, birthright citizenship gets conferred based on, well, a person's place of birth. Before that, though... is a fetus a stateless person? If so, is that a violation of the fetus's rights?

Should we recognize a nationality of the fetus? If so, how should that be determined? Based on the nationality of the parents? The place where the fetus was conceived?

In cases where the nationality of the fetus doesn't match how we determine the nationality of the child, is this an arbitrary deprivation of the child's nationality?

 

[sun rise]

I never thought about it.

 

[Twilight Hue]

From the UN Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 15

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Many countries, even if they aren't signatories to the UNDHR, include a similar principle in their laws.

A question for those of you who argue that a fetus is a person: how should this principle be applied to fetuses?

Normally, birthright citizenship gets conferred based on, well, a person's place of birth. Before that, though... is a fetus a stateless person? If so, is that a violation of the fetus's rights?

Should we recognize a nationality of the fetus? If so, how should that be determined? Based on the nationality of the parents? The place where the fetus was conceived?

In cases where the nationality of the fetus doesn't match how we determine the nationality of the child, is this an arbitrary deprivation of the child's nationality?

I think nationality is determined on the soil your born on.

It's interesting though , exceptions occur in cases where foreigners give birth in another country and are dual citizens.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think nationality is determined on the soil your born on.

So a person who hasn't been born yet is a stateless person?

Is it okay to create a situation that produces stateless people?

It's interesting though , exceptions occur in cases where foreigners give birth in another country and are dual citizens.

Sure - citizenship by descent is a thing in many (but not all) countries.

 

[Revoltingest]

I never thought about it.

That's because you're keen on not wasting your time.

 

[Heyo]

So a person who hasn't been born yet is a stateless person?

Nope, a fetus that hasn't been born, just isn't a person. It's that simple.

Edit: I just realized that that position is out of the question for this OP. So, sorry. But it is really the simplest answers with the least problems.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Nope, a fetus that hasn't been born, just isn't a person. It's that simple.

I agree, but I'm interested to hear from people who argue that a fetus is a person.

If they really do believe this - and it's not just a line they use to justify their position on abortion - then it will have other implications, such as on issues around citizenship and nationality.

 

[Heyo]

I agree, but I'm interested to hear from people who argue that a fetus is a person.

If they really do believe this - and it's not just a line they use to justify their position on abortion - then it will have other implications, such as on issues around citizenship and nationality.

I realized that and edited my answer - too slow.

Btw.: even a newborn isn't formally a citizen, yet. In our world of bureaucracy, they become citizens the moment a birth certificate is issued.
I think where-ever a fetus is seen as a person, some certificate of citizenship should be requested by a mother-to-be and I want to see how that pans out.

 

[Aupmanyav]

According to Article 5 of the Constitution of India, all the people who were resident in India at the commencement of the Constitution were citizens of India as well as people born in India.
The 1986 amendment restricted citizenship by birth to require that at least one parent had to be an Indian citizen. The 2003 amendment further restricted that aspect by requiring that a parent could not be an illegal immigrant.
The fetus may not have any rights except a conditional right to life, but at least one of its parents who is an Indian will have the right to have the child designated as a citizen of India. So, the fetus has an indirect right.

 

[Ponder This]

From the UN Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 15

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Many countries, even if they aren't signatories to the UNDHR, include a similar principle in their laws.

A question for those of you who argue that a fetus is a person: how should this principle be applied to fetuses?

Normally, birthright citizenship gets conferred based on, well, a person's place of birth. Before that, though... is a fetus a stateless person? If so, is that a violation of the fetus's rights?

Should we recognize a nationality of the fetus? If so, how should that be determined? Based on the nationality of the parents? The place where the fetus was conceived?

In cases where the nationality of the fetus doesn't match how we determine the nationality of the child, is this an arbitrary deprivation of the child's nationality?

I wonder why it is difficult for some to understand that people have some basic (God-given) rights regardless of citizenship or nationality.

Do you also believe that citizenship is "the right to have rights" (and thus that stateless people do not have rights)?

Statelessness

"On November 12, 2018, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees stated there are about 12 million stateless people in the world."​

What is your position on the rights or lack of rights of these "stateless" people?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

According to Article 5 of the Constitution of India, all the people who were resident in India at the commencement of the Constitution were citizens of India as well as people born in India.

Do you think that this should confer rights on people who were - as fetuses - resident in India at the commencement of the Constitution, but were born later (and potentially elsewhere)?

The 1986 amendment restricted citizenship by birth to require that at least one parent had to be an Indian citizen. The 2003 amendment further restricted that aspect by requiring that a parent could not be an illegal immigrant.
The fetus may not have any rights except a conditional right to life, but at least one of its parents who is an Indian will have the right to have the child designated as a citizen of India. So, the fetus has an indirect right.

But I'm asking what you think should happen.

Should an Indian fetus - however we decide the nationality of a fetus - have, say, the right not to be deported from India? Should they have the right to consular protection while abroad?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What is your position on the rights or lack of rights of these "stateless" people?

I think that there should be no stateless people. Everyone has the right to a nationality.

 

[sun rise]

That's because you're keen on not wasting your time.

If that were true, I'd post a lot less.

 

[Revoltingest]

If that were true, I'd post a lot less.

Posting here is still generally of relatively greater
value than pondering something that useless.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do you think that this should confer rights on people who were - as fetuses - resident in India at the commencement of the Constitution, but were born later (and potentially elsewhere)?

Should an Indian fetus - however we decide the nationality of a fetus - have, say, the right not to be deported from India? Should they have the right to consular protection while abroad?

Yes. Their parents, who qualified as citizens of India by the Indian Constitution, could ask for and get Indian citizenship for the fetus.

As I read the law, the Indian fetus does not have this right and depends on at least one of its Indian parent for this. Should it have this right? That can be decided by the Courts and the law if and when it comes up. We go by the word of law.

 

[Koldo]

From the UN Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 15

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Many countries, even if they aren't signatories to the UNDHR, include a similar principle in their laws.

A question for those of you who argue that a fetus is a person: how should this principle be applied to fetuses?

Normally, birthright citizenship gets conferred based on, well, a person's place of birth. Before that, though... is a fetus a stateless person? If so, is that a violation of the fetus's rights?

Should we recognize a nationality of the fetus? If so, how should that be determined? Based on the nationality of the parents? The place where the fetus was conceived?

In cases where the nationality of the fetus doesn't match how we determine the nationality of the child, is this an arbitrary deprivation of the child's nationality?

Jus sanguinis, I guess.

 

[Stevicus]

From the UN Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 15

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Many countries, even if they aren't signatories to the UNDHR, include a similar principle in their laws.

A question for those of you who argue that a fetus is a person: how should this principle be applied to fetuses?

Normally, birthright citizenship gets conferred based on, well, a person's place of birth. Before that, though... is a fetus a stateless person? If so, is that a violation of the fetus's rights?

Should we recognize a nationality of the fetus? If so, how should that be determined? Based on the nationality of the parents? The place where the fetus was conceived?

In cases where the nationality of the fetus doesn't match how we determine the nationality of the child, is this an arbitrary deprivation of the child's nationality?

Interesting question. I'm not sure what kind of circumstances would require giving a fetus a nationality, except in cases of fetal death, where a death certificate may be required under certain circumstances.

On the other hand, if nationality begins at conception, then some people might argue that if a pregnant woman from Mexico enters the U.S. illegally, then the fetus would be considered an illegal entrant, even if the child is born on U.S. soil. I could see some Republicans going along with that.

 

[Heyo]

On the other hand, if nationality begins at conception, then some people might argue that if a pregnant woman from Mexico enters the U.S. illegally, then the fetus would be considered an illegal entrant, even if the child is born on U.S. soil. I could see some Republicans going along with that.

On the other hand, if nationality begins at conception, then some people might argue that if a child is conceived on US soil then it would be a US citizen no matter the place of birth or nationality of the parents.
I could see some republicans not thinking that far when they go along with that.

 

[Kooky]

That's because you're keen on not wasting your time.

Yea, if it can't be used to oppress women and control their bodies, then what is this argument good for?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yea, if it can't be used to oppress women and control their bodies, then what is this argument good for?

So you think citizenship for fetuses is an
issue worth investing time to consider, eh.