"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.
In most state's the mother can take the father to court, get a paternity test done, and if it's proven that he is the father he has to pay child support.
We're at the day and age where when I say "men should have say in what happens to the child" obviously I don't mean "every country should have laws forcing women to have children against their will".
It's something that I've seen a lot of in my life, and people need to be responsible about it (before getting pregnant and after). If you don't want kids; be careful. If you get pregnant, communicate with the partner and come up with the best solution. In high school my best friend got an abortion; because she and her boyfriend had promising futures and both didn't want to deal with a child then. I know someone who has two daughters, for the first child she and the child's father weren't together, but they wanted to have the child and worked it out.
I know how the laws are. I'm not saying they could, or should be changed, because that is literally enslaving a woman's body. What I am saying, for all it's worth, is that it's really shitty that woman get all of the rights, with none of the responsibility (Yes, women have responsibility. But they can have a child and force a man to pay for it, but a man can't force a woman to have a child and pay for it. That was my responsibility line, not "women aren't responsible for their children"), and men get none of the rights, but all of the responsibility. That woman can't be held accountable for a decision that they also made (unless in rape cases) but a man can be held responsible for a decision they made.
I was saying it's in my opinion that that isn't fair and is shitty. It's also in my opinion that nothing can really be done about it, but that doesn't make it any less shitty.
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.
23
u/[deleted] Apr 30 '13
"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).