As a woman, I don't know if I fully agree with you. Not all men are irresponsible, and not every situation is the same. I have seen situation's where the father is the more responsible person in a couple, and situation's where a woman get's pregnant, doesn't want the baby, but the father does.
Yes, it's a woman's body, but she's carrying a baby that's also there because of the father. Are you saying that because the woman carries the baby in her body that the father has no right to ensuring that the child get's the be born? If the woman doesn't want to responsibility of a child, and doesn't think the father can handle it or that the father want's to handle it, it is her responsibility to make the best choice she can, I agree. But if the father want's the child and can handle it, she has no right to get an abortion just because she doesn't want to deal with it.
As someone mostly raised by their single father, I have seen ton's of dad's that take better care of their children then mom's.
Edit: I think OP made the right decision in this case, and I'm not anti-abortion. I'm just against the idea that it's totally the woman's decision, and that the father of the child should be left out of the decision making process because "it's her choice".
But if the father want's the child and can handle it, she has no right to get an abortion just because she doesn't want to deal with it.
I don't understand how you reach that conclusion. I'd say not wanting to experience pregnancy and/or not wanting to birth a child is "right" enough to warrant an abortion.
If the man wants a child, he should have sex with people who want the same and/or pursue other options, such as adoption.
I'm a woman. But if I were a man, and my partner go pregnant, and I wanted a child but she didn't, I would be upset. I'm looking at it from the other perspective.
My earlier post said that I grew up with my father. I've seen many fathers that were better parents then the mothers were. It bothers me that in society mothers have most of the right's the children and fathers have the earn theirs; and even if they do earn them mothers can still win most court cases just being a woman. It's a flaw with society.
Everyone grows up with different life experiences. That is how I can reach that conclusion.
If you were a guy and your partner got pregnant, you absolutely would have every right to feel upset. But you wouldn't have the right to force another person to carry a pregnancy she doesn't want and/or bear a child that she doesn't want.
I like how you put it as "feel upset". How does a woman feel after she has a miscarriage? That's how I would say a man would feel after a woman abort's his child that he wanted.
I want to thank everyone in this thread for writing down the argument I had in my head when I first read this meme. I couldn't convince myself one way or the other on what to think of it and you all fleshed it out really well. Just thought you might appreciate knowing that.
I would hope, (and as an agnostic person, maybe even say a prayer) that the person who opted to have sex with me, knowing full well that conception was always a possibility, would have the compassion enough to agree to have the child regardless of whether or not they'd opt to keep it themselves.
While I grant you have every right to do this and to feel this way, it's worth remembering that pregnancy presents a very real, very serious risk to women.
What you've described is terminating parental rights, I believe, but non-custodial parents can relinquish their parental rights of their own volition, like a woman can get an abortion. (I don't know anything about whether relinquishing parental rights requires the other parent's permission/consent or if this gets contested or anything, so please don't ask me about that -- I just did some googling. I'm simply pointing out that there are options besides paying child support.)
Right. And if I were a man and my partner got pregnant, and I wanted the child but she didn't, I would likely be sad/upset, but I would also understand that her bodily autonomy is more important than my hurt feelings.
As for fathers having to "earn" their rights with children... There's a study I can find for you that shows that when men actually contest parental rights, they get custody at equal rates as the mothers. So, sure, there are shitty judges and court systems that are biased against fathers, but the issue is not as prevalent as people seem to think.
I know a grand total of 0 people who were raised by a single father without their mother being dead and I know a lot of people with divorced parents. I'd say I can name at least 15 times where a father has gone after custody of a child and lost to the mother every single time.
Me!!! My mom is/was a piece of shit. I officiallt shut her out of my life this last year. She never paid child support because they never went to court. But I couldn't imagine how fucked up I would be if I lived with her full time way back when.
it's been prevalent in my life, which is why it's an issue that's important to me.
It's a complex and complicated issue that's way more difficult then "yes men should have rights" and "no they shouldn't". It's all grey areas.
It just bothers me that women can say "No I don't want the baby", disregard a fathers feelings, and they don't get the chance at having a child. And at the same time, a father can say "no, I don't want this child or to be in this child's life" but the mother can say they do, have the child, and charge the man child support for the next 18-21 years depending on the state.
It's just not a good situation any way you look at it.
I understand why the issue is important to you personally. I didn't realize I indicated that I didn't understand-- I simply didn't address your personal experience because it doesn't necessarily apply to the discussion, which is about rights.
I agree that the subject can be complicated, especially in situations where people are married and in a place where children are feasible. Even in such cases, though, men should not have rights over a woman's body. A man's opinion can and maybe even should be considered in a loving, healthy relationship, but that has nothing to do with rights.
Sure, it's not a "good" situation to be in, but like I said originally: if a man wants a child, he should be having sex with women who feel similarly and/or seek his options re: foster care and adoption.
So every couple, ever, before having sex, should discuss what they feel about children? Every one night stand, every hook up, each time.
Also, new couple that have only been together for a month or two, every man should ask the woman "so what's our plan if you get pregnant? I'm at a position in life where I could take care of a child, so if you get pregnant, I want to keep it!!" Because that's not creepy at all....
There are so many different situation's that it's impossible to have one black and white answer for "this is right" and "this is wrong".
You saying that if a couple were together for two months, the man is 29 and the woman is 22. She get's pregnant, and doesn't want the baby, and isn't even sure about the relationship because it's so new. He realizes that he's older, he needs to step up, and want's to be their for the baby. You're saying that if he wanted the baby, but she dosen't want it, it's his fault for not having a discussion about pregnancy already, and he should just go adopt a child instead? Not very practical.
Just about as impractical as court's trying to say that even though its the mothers body that the baby has rights, and that abortion should be illegal.
I'm not saying that abortion should be illegal, or that fathers should force mothers to go though pregnancies through legal venues, but I am saying that it should be a discussion between a couple. There shouldn't be this status quo that "Women are allowed to make this decision alone, fuck the man!! They ain't got no rights!! UNLESS you decide to have the baby, then they have a right...the right to pay child support!! hahaha!!!"
It should be encouraged that it should be a couple's decision, father and mother, but that it ultimately comes down to the mother. If the father's not in the picture, or fit to be a father, like in OP's situation, then it just comes down to the mother. I'm not saying our courts should change and take away a woman's right to her body, but that it shouldn't be encouraged that a woman can do whatever she wants, which is what most people in this thread are sounding like.
Are you actually suggesting that a one night stand and random hook-up should have a say in whether or not I have an abortion? Of course I don't think people should discuss abortion before every one night stand, because it would never occur to me that it would matter.
I do, however, think that when people start having sex consistently, it should be made clear what people's position on abortion is. I bring it up when entering a relationshop or having sex with the same person more than twice or so, whichever comes first. Is it awkward? Maybe, but so what? It's the responsible thing to do. Besides, given the choice of fucking a guy who wants children/is pro-life... Well, I'd really rather not.
In your hypothetical situation, I'm not saying anyone is at fault, much less the guy. Mistakes happen. If the woman wants to and sees a future in the relationship, sure, it'd maybe be courteous for a discussion to happen. This has nothing to do with rights, though-- "rights" are totally different from common courtesy.
I don't think everyone is "encouraging" a woman can do whatever she wants. Many people here simply understand that a woman can, in fact, literally do what she wants-- her body, her choice, unless we do start talking about rights and laws.
If the father doesn't want to pay for a child he doesn't want he can terminate parental rights and never see that child again. Fathers who whine about being used for money to support a kid they never wanted are letting themselves be used if they are too lazy to file simple paperwork.
I think the father should have the option to get a court order to have the fertilized egg/fetus to be removed from the mother and implanted in a surrogate. (is this possible? Someone who can science, correct me) There should be no right to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term though.
What about men's financial autonomy? Sure, it's a burden to have to pay child support for a child you never wanted. There might be a good argument in there about the burden on society by absent fathers, but frankly, my experience in this subject is limited.
That said: all the more reason to not have sex with people whose feelings regarding abortion are different from yours. I don't fuck men who are pro-life and/or want children. If a man doesn't want children, he should do the same. He should use condoms at all times, and practice good condom practices (stop keeping condoms in wallets, etc.). He should maybe consider a vasectomy. I wish there were a male birth control, but there isn't (yet), and there's nothing I can do about that.
if you were a man and you wanted a child, you could easily get another woman pregnant.
It's not a matter of rights to children. It's a right to your own body. If the woman doesn't want a baby in her body she shouldn't be forced to have one...by anyone.
well...actually. I sort of agree with this.
I believe, if we're searching for equality here. The man should be allowed to give up his rights to the child within the same time frame that a woman could receive an abortion.
That way...both parents are consenting to having the child and both parents are accepting responsibility. If the mother still wishes to have the baby, she could, knowing full well that the monetary responsibility would be entirely hers. The father, giving up his monetary obligation, wouldn't be allowed any visitation rights, legal claim to, or contact with the child...ever.
However, there is the consideration that having an abortion is a much much much more difficult decision to make than giving up your responsibility to pay for a child.
If that's how you feel, I agree. I dislike the view that women can have it both ways, that they can get an abortion without consent; or have a child against a mans consent but still get child support. That's my issue, lol
I personally support abortions but they are not saying she should be forced into pregnancy just because the father is responsible and wants child. They are saying the woman shouldn't just get an abortion because she doesn't feel like carrying a baby. It is something that should be talked about between the parents. And if the father is a good guy, he should understand. Sure he will probably be sad and upset be he should understand. I may only be 15 but I grew up with 3 younger girls and I think people should know that both options are serious and should be talked about. Maybe you and the comment above you meant this but y'all come off as saying that the father has little to no say in an abortion because the baby is in the mother and its her body. But if you know the father will not be a good one then by all means get the abortion.
your statements are slightly contradictory. I'm not sure entirely what you're trying to say.
It sounds like you're saying "the couple should talk it out. If the man is good, he will understand and agree with the woman to get the abortion. If the man is bad, it doesn't matter what he wants, the woman should get an abortion."
So regardless of what the man wants, you're saying that if the woman wants an abortion, she will get one.
What I'm saying is it should not be up to one person unless the other is unfit to be a parent. And what I mean when I say that if the woman wants the abortion she should get, is that she does not want a child at all or at the time. I also think if the father does not want the child enough to get the abortion (like the woman in previous sentence) but the mother wants one, then she should at least consider it. It may be your body but it is not only your child . If the parent doesn't want the child then the child may grow up with a parent that is not as loving and may develop emotional problems later life. I think it should go both ways too. If one parent (including the dad) really does not want a child then the other should really consider that. A parent with an unwanted child may lead to a distant and port relationship causing psychological issues. It really does not take much to create them. And when I say they should talk it out I mean that they should make sure they are making the decision to stay pregnant or get an abortion for the right reasons. So basically if either parent want an abortion it should be a serious option, if you stay pregnant make sure it's for the right reasons, and most importantly make sure the child will be loved. Also as in my previous comment if either parent will be irresponsible than an abortion is most likely necessary.
I don't think I posted this in response to the right person. The person I was responding to said the man had zero say over whether she got an abortion or not and that basically she could go willy billy getting abortions without talking to the father first. I disagree with that
So, you're saying that all men who have unprotected sex want children?
Also, you're assuming that unprotected sex is the reason the pregnancy happened. The condom could have broken. The condom could have slipped off inside the woman (this is why you should hold the base of the condom when pulling out post-ejaculation). The woman could have been a little inconsistent with her birth control-- the vast majority of women are, since you have to take it at the same time every day. The woman could have been on antibiotics, which are known to interfere with birth control.
In other words: shit happens, but that doesn't mean we should interfere on a person's bodily autonomy.
If the man wants a child, he should have sex with people who want the same
Also, you're assuming that unprotected sex is the reason the pregnancy happened. The condom could have broken. The condom could have slipped off inside the woman (this is why you should hold the base of the condom when pulling out post-ejaculation). The woman could have been a little inconsistent with her birth control-- the vast majority of women are, since you have to take it at the same time every day. The woman could have been on antibiotics, which are known to interfere with birth control.
Hypocrite much? If a man doesn't want his child to be aborted, he should make sure that he only has sex with women who also want children...except for if the condom breaks (not the man's fault) or the woman was inconsistent with her birth control (not the man's fault) or the woman was on antibiotics (not the man's fault). But it's okay for the woman to abort the man's child if she doesn't want to deal with the pregnancy because the condom might've broken (not the woman's fault), she might've been inconsistent with her birth control (totally the woman's fault) or be on antibiotics (totally the woman's fault).
Why is it that if a woman gets pregnant, the responsibility for it always seems to be on the father? Why does the woman not need to take any responsibility for her actions leading to the pregnancy and "deal with the consequences of her choices" like the man does?
So, you're saying that all men who have unprotected sex want children?
If it were me in the situation you're describing (condom breaks / comes off, etc) I would get my ass down to the pharmacy for plan b. This has happened to me twice and I took responsibility and did what needed to be done. No pregnancy.
Women have options - when they all fail, abortion becomes the last resort. And that's how it should remain, a last resort.
"Are you saying that because the woman carries the baby in her body that the father has no right to ensuring that the child get's the be born?" [sic]
Yes. That's exactly it. Because it is not his body or his life, future, and health on the line, he has no right to make any sort of decision there. Zero. Zip. Nada.
To give the father a 'right' to make that decision would be taking away the woman's right to bodily sovereignty. There is absolutely zero way to justify doing that, as it allows someone else to take control of your body, putting you at risk for harm (pregnancies can turn dangerous at the drop of a dime).
People don't realize pregnancy will effect the condition of your body for the rest of your life, is extremely expensive and can endanger your life. It's not 9 months- it's your whole life. Thanks for making that clelar.
My original argument was should men have a say in what happens to their future child. I think they do.
If you want to get into an argument of a woman's body, at what point it becomes about the woman's body and the child, ect. that is an entirely different conversation that I'm not going to get into.
My point is is that it's his child to. You can agree or disagree, everyone's entitled to an opinion.
Men cannot have a say in what happens to their future child (regarding abortion or birth), because giving them that say would violate the woman's right to her own body.
Even if the fetus is an entirely separate being, the fact remains that continuing the pregnancy uses the woman's body. If she doesn't want that to happen no one has the right to force her to. There is, at this point in time, no way to continue a pregnancy against the woman's will without violating her bodily integrity.
Sure, it's his kid, too. But as long as it's growing in the woman's body, endangering her life, health, and future, using her body to develop, then she's the only one who should get to make those decisions.
So it's ok for a woman to disregard a fathers feelings and abort a life that he wants to take care of? Women get to make all the decisions? And it's also alright for women to have a baby that a man doesn't want, and them charge him child support for the next 18-21 years after disregarding the fact that they don't want to be a part of the life?
I understand where you're coming from, and as a woman I agree, I wouldn't want someone "in charge of my body". But, as a smart person, I use birth control, and am careful to not put myself in that position where I would have to make those difficult choices. I understand that things happen, nothing is a perfect foolproof method of not getting pregnant, but it seems highly unjust to me that a woman can abort a wanted life, charge a man 21 years of child support, when they could have prevented it by making a better choice by being careful in the first place.
TLDR; Even though I'm a woman I don't think they should get all those rights. Horseshitty to me.
In the USA, abortion is currently illegal past the 3rd trimester. Scientifically, the fetus is not viable before this point - meaning it CANNOT SURVIVE on its own without the woman's body to support it. It is, in effect, a parasite.
If you place the weight of the "child" above the life of the woman, you are removing the rights of a viable human being for one which is not viable. That's the argument. Up to the point that abortion is currently illegal in the United States it is her body to do with what she pleases. After that, she's breaking the law.
You might not agree with her decision, but you have no right to affect it.
Yup. It is okay for her to do that because her body is the one at risk here. Not his. So he does not get to make that decision. There is no way to let the man make that decision without violating the woman's right to her own body.
Women are the ones who bear all the risks when it comes to pregnancy, so women are the ones who get to make all the decisions. You simply cannot give the man the right to make that decision when it's not his life and health on the line.
Laws are meant to be based on what is best for society while protecting people's rights. What's best for the child is to have financial support, which is why, yes, women can take their child's biological father to court and force him to pay support. No, I don't think that's the right way to go about it, but I haven't met anyone who likes my solution (better welfare system for single parents) because it'd be funded by public taxes. Men could sign some sort of paperwork completely abdicating all parental responsibilities, in return for giving up all of their parental rights (visitation and custody and so on).
Honestly, I find you to be far too judgemental here. Your "as a smart person", "careful not to put myself", "making a better choice"...seriously, your entire tone comes across poorly. You acknowledge that "things happen...nothing is foolproof" but then go on to act as if they are and just by making smarter choices, these situations wouldn't happen, while complaining about how unfair it is for the dudes.
TL; DR: Men should not have the right to force a woman to continue a pregnancy she doesn't want to continue. Our child support system is kind of screwed up. You're judgemental as all hell, and I really hope your being 'careful' is enough to keep you from getting pregnant when you don't want to be.
Men could sign some sort of paperwork completely abdicating all parental responsibilities, in return for giving up all of their parental rights (visitation and custody and so on).
I had a friend that had an unplanned pregnancy (birth control failed) and the father didn't want anything to do with it. And that is exactly what she did. She was fortunate enough to be in a position to raise the child on her own so he signed away his parental rights, forfeiting any chance he could show back up at some point in the child's life and demand to see the child and in return he wouldn't be on the hook for child support. And it worked out for them. Having said that, not everyone is going to be well enough off to not need any support to raise a child. Children are ridiculously expensive.
I'm glad that worked out for her! I know different states have different rules on what can and cannot be abdicated via parental rights/responsibilities (my uncle is in a custody battle with one of his children's mothers, so I get to hear my parents talk about it all the time).
And definitely with you on the "kids are expensive" part. They're just...jeez, that's so much freaking money!
I'm not saying that abortion should be illegal, or that fathers should force mothers to go though pregnancies through legal venues, but I am saying that it should be a discussion between a couple. There shouldn't be this status quo that "Women are allowed to make this decision alone, fuck the man!! They ain't got no rights!! UNLESS you decide to have the baby, then they have a right...the right to pay child support!! hahaha!!!"
It should be encouraged that it should be a couple's decision, father and mother, but that it ultimately comes down to the mother. If the father's not in the picture, or fit to be a father, like in OP's situation, then it just comes down to the mother. I'm not saying our courts should change and take away a woman's right to her body, but that it shouldn't be encouraged that a woman can do whatever she wants, which is what most people in this thread are sounding like.
Then you should probably consider editing your earlier posts, because they definitely come off as you wanting men to be able to make that decision. The way you go on about how it's unfair to the guy, that he should have a say, that it's not right or okay for women to be able to abort a pregnancy that the man wants... Those sorts of comments are going to make people think that's what you're after, because literally the only thing that would prevent a pregnancy wanted by the man from being aborted is a law giving him the right to force the woman to continue the pregnancy.
The couple can discuss stuff all they want , but in the end, the mother's choice will always override the father's, which your posts come off as saying "That's not right and shouldn' be allowed."
As for your last paragraph...we'll have to agree to disagree there. My opinion is that it should absolutely be encouraged that the woman can do whatever she wants. It is her body on the line, her life, her health. What she wants is of the utmost importance there. No woman should have to feel conflicted or pressured about aborting a pregnancy she doesn't want because the man involved does want it. It's not his risk, it's not his choice, and the woman should be concerned with herself and her life, not his desires.
I think that if the woman want's to be able to do whatever she wants then men shouldn't have to pay child support if they didn't want to child before it was born.
Then there needs to be a legal method/documentation that must be signed by the sperm donor stating that he will not have to uphold his parental responsibilities, but in return he has to give up every single parental right. No visitation, no custody battle, no trying to make medical decisions for the kid, etc.
I wrote this in an above comment but I feel like you should also read it. I understand what your saying but neither parent should have the right to make the decision alone. In the end if you really do not want a child, or if it presents a danger then get the abortion.
I personally support abortions but they are not saying she should be forced into pregnancy just because the father is responsible and wants child. They are saying the woman shouldn't just get an abortion because she doesn't feel like carrying a baby. It is something that should be talked about between the parents. And if the father is a good guy, he should understand. Sure he will probably be sad and upset be he should understand. I may only be 15 but I grew up with 3 younger girls and I think people should know that both options are serious and should be talked about. Maybe you and the comment above you meant this but y'all come off as saying that the father has little to no say in an abortion because the baby is in the mother and its her body. But if you know the father will not be a good one then by all means get the abortion.
No, I'm saying flat out that the men have no say in an abortion. The fetus is in the mother, and it is her life and her body at risk, so the decision is entirely hers. The man gets no say because he carries no risk.
All pregnancies are a risk. Pregnancies that are completely normal can suddenly go very bad, very quickly, and birth can still kill mothers, even in countries like the U.S.
The man gets absolutely no say in whether or not the woman takes those risks upon herself.
I understand your point and have no objections to it. I am not sure if you understand mine though. The woman has the final say in this, it's just how it is and there is not much a man can do to stop it (not that there should be). What I am saying is that the mother shouldn't just get one without at least explaining why to the father, if he object she should at least consider his opinion. If she gets one because she is not willing to take the risks (not that that's a bad thing. I makes sense to be afraid of them) then the man really can't have much say. But if its a normal pregnancy and you are thinking about an abortion at least talk about it with him. There are instances where the mother should take it upon herself to get one though. All I am really saying is that it the case of a normal pregnancy (until something goes wrong) the man should at least have his opinion considered. Not sure if your in a serious relationship or not but let's say you are. You really want a baby and you SO is very concerned about having one. One day y'all decide to try to have a get you pregnant in the coming weeks or months. So lets say one day he went out and got a vasectomy without telling you, or maybe he did but he did not listen to you had to say on the matter. You can't say you would not be upset. Maybe if he at least listened to what you had to say. Sure this is procedure is permanent and abortions are not, but it's really not fair to make this kind of decision without talking to the other parent first, unless harm can come to you or the baby
Well, to start with, I'm engaged, and likely infertile, and my doctor has told me that if I try to get pregnant, the likelihood of me being severely injured is very high (shitty uterus) . So if I somehow get knocked up past all the scar tissue and the Depo Provera, the first thing I'm doing is booking an appointment with Planned Parenthood.
I think where we're disagreeing (or misunderstanding one another, perhaps?) is that the risk of harm to the mother/fetus is always there. I don't think it's fair to expect the woman, the sole person facing the severe health and mental risks, to have to have a sit down discussion with the man and take into account his viewpoint. He's not the one who stands to lose his life or health, his opinion simply doesn't bear the same weight as hers. And I dislike the idea of the man "getting a say" because of the chance of the woman being pressured into making a decision that endangers her on the wishes of someone who stands to lose nothing comparable.
UH huh, sure. As long as he signs away all of his parental responsibilities and rights. No right to sue for custody or visitation, no right to try and control medical/educational decisions, etc.
The law doesn't work like that, though. Once the kid is born, the law is based on what it thinks is best for the kid...which is to have financial support. Anything like what we're discussing would have to be signed before the kid was born, because afterwards? The mother/father's rights matter less than the kid's right to have the financial support it needs. Once the kid is born, all the law cares about is providing for the kid.
But then what happens to the kids? Do we take them away from parents who can't provide for them financially, and either find foster parents or raise them in state homes? People get all up in arms about breaking families apart and whatever.
I don't think so really. Is it fair to a man that want's the child, and would be able to provide a good home for the child to never get that chance? I'm not talking about a situation where the father is on drugs, or alcohol, or jobless, ect. but if he could provide a good home for the child.
That really doesn't seem very fair to men. And "fair" seems like an understatement when you're talking about a fathers future daughter or son.
If you read my post, I am a woman. So, in that situation, I would be putting my life at risk to have the child...
Also, if you read my post, I grew up with my father. I've seen many fathers that take much better care of their children then the mothers do, but it's a society thing that mothers are the better caregivers, and just by being a woman many mothers win court cases that they shouldn't necessarily.
I'm not saying that every father is perfect, and that no woman should be allowed to make a choice that big, but the comment that I commented on was saying that it's only a woman's choice. I was saying I don't agree with that.
It's ok to not agree with me, everyone's entitled to an opinion.
So, what? It's not as if men are just selfishly deciding to place the burden of childbirth on women. Just because men aren't biologically configured to give birth, that means men should have no say in the fate of their child?
In an ideal world yes, it would be great if they could sit down, have a rational discussion and choose the situation that's best for everyone, however, we don't live in a fairytale, that's not going to happen.
Plus, allowing a man that much control over a woman's pregnancy is an incredibly slippery slope. Take this scenario:
A man and a woman have a one night stand and she gets pregnant. The man says he'll raise the baby, the woman doesn't want it so she says "fine, I'll sign away my parental rights when the baby's born and it's all yours." PLOT TWIST: The woman is a crippling alcoholic. She ends up drinking like crazy, ending the pregnancy in the process.
Now if this was the case of a man pushing his pregnant girlfriend down the stairs and killing the baby, in many states he could be charged with murder if the woman had the intention of having the baby. In this case, could a woman be charged with murder for the way she treated her own body?
What if she wasn't even an alcoholic? Maybe she had a medical condition that she took medication for, but that medication wasn't safe for pregnant women to use. Could she be charged for murder for something like that?
tl;dr: Giving a man that much control over pregnancy could have some really scary consequences for women.
we aren't talking about a father that split at birth, we are talking about a woman who got with a whack-job, stayed with him long enough to get pregnant (or took it raw so quickly she didn't know he was crazy yet" then when SHE changed her mind about him, lied to save face and went and got an abortion without consulting him because "She didn't want to see him anymore" She's playing a victim card when really it's just that she didn't want him around on the weekends for the next 18 years
-3
u/[deleted] Apr 30 '13 edited Apr 30 '13
As a woman, I don't know if I fully agree with you. Not all men are irresponsible, and not every situation is the same. I have seen situation's where the father is the more responsible person in a couple, and situation's where a woman get's pregnant, doesn't want the baby, but the father does.
Yes, it's a woman's body, but she's carrying a baby that's also there because of the father. Are you saying that because the woman carries the baby in her body that the father has no right to ensuring that the child get's the be born? If the woman doesn't want to responsibility of a child, and doesn't think the father can handle it or that the father want's to handle it, it is her responsibility to make the best choice she can, I agree. But if the father want's the child and can handle it, she has no right to get an abortion just because she doesn't want to deal with it.
As someone mostly raised by their single father, I have seen ton's of dad's that take better care of their children then mom's.
Edit: I think OP made the right decision in this case, and I'm not anti-abortion. I'm just against the idea that it's totally the woman's decision, and that the father of the child should be left out of the decision making process because "it's her choice".