Log In Sign Up

Father's rights


Abortion Debate

This forum is for Abortion debate only. If you are highly sensitive about this topic, read at your own discretion.

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Abortion Debate LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
April 11th, 2007, 05:39 PM
Caeden'sMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,765
Okay, i wanted to move the debate about a father's rights here, so the other thread didn't get moved.

How far should a father's rights extend? Obviously for the most part, people seem to think they have no rights, because it is the woman who is pregnant. Is that fair? It's his child too, right?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
April 11th, 2007, 06:25 PM
Cereal Killer's Avatar I'm climbin' in yo window
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: next to Chuck Norris
Posts: 7,373
Absolutely, a father has rights, after the baby is born. Since the woman has to bear the pregnancy, the sickness and swelling, and all the risks associated with it, ultimately, she has the power while she is pregnant.
Imagine what kind of possibilities giving men rights over fetuses would hold. Abusive men could use it as a means of control and further abuse. Rapists could use it to further traumatize their victims. This would give someone complete control over your body. Someone could force a woman to risk her health or even her life.

If a man does not want to make a baby with a woman who he isn't sure shares his desire to have one, he should be taking precautions (both should) to ensure that conception does not occur. Once it does, he does not, and should not, have any control over the woman's decision.
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #3  
April 11th, 2007, 06:43 PM
Caeden'sMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
If a man does not want to make a baby with a woman who he isn't sure shares his desire to have one, he should be taking precautions (both should) to ensure that conception does not occur. Once it does, he does not, and should not, have any control over the woman's decision.[/b]
See that's the thing... I think the woman should be expected to take precautions too. And even when precautions are taken, everyone should know that having sex MIGHT still result in a baby. If you can't handle that, then you shouldn't be having it...

I guess i just don't think it's fair if one parents WANTS their child, for the other to have the right to terminate it... (not counting cases where mom's health is in jeopardy.) And this goes both ways. No one forced pregnancy on the other (discounting rape here too. ) So why should either party be able to change their mind afterwards?

Applying this to the embryo case, i guess i feel it's the same way... Dad and mom conceived, it was just outside of mom's body. So for the father to now suddenly change his mind seems just as unfathomable to me as if the mother was pregnant. And i don't think it's fair of him to be able to decide to destroy those embryos when the mother DOES want the kids, ESPECIALLY since he wouldn't have the same right if she were actually pregnant.

It's bad enough when these babies are killed because no one wants them. But it is HORRIBLE to me when they're killed and they ARE wanted.

(Sorry if this doesn't make sense... having trouble gathering my thoughts, and conveying them clearly. )
Reply With Quote
  #4  
April 11th, 2007, 06:54 PM
Cereal Killer's Avatar I'm climbin' in yo window
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: next to Chuck Norris
Posts: 7,373
Quote:
Quote:

If a man does not want to make a baby with a woman who he isn't sure shares his desire to have one, he should be taking precautions (both should) to ensure that conception does not occur. Once it does, he does not, and should not, have any control over the woman's decision.[/b]
See that's the thing... I think the woman should be expected to take precautions too. And even when precautions are taken, everyone should know that having sex MIGHT still result in a baby. If you can't handle that, then you shouldn't be having it...

I guess i just don't think it's fair if one parents WANTS their child, for the other to have the right to terminate it... (not counting cases where mom's health is in jeopardy.) And this goes both ways. No one forced pregnancy on the other (discounting rape here too. ) So why should either party be able to change their mind afterwards?

Applying this to the embryo case, i guess i feel it's the same way... Dad and mom conceived, it was just outside of mom's body. So for the father to now suddenly change his mind seems just as unfathomable to me as if the mother was pregnant. And i don't think it's fair of him to be able to decide to destroy those embryos when the mother DOES want the kids, ESPECIALLY since he wouldn't have the same right if she were actually pregnant.

It's bad enough when these babies are killed because no one wants them. But it is HORRIBLE to me when they're killed and they ARE wanted.

(Sorry if this doesn't make sense... having trouble gathering my thoughts, and conveying them clearly. )
[/b]
No, I understand what you are saying. And, I agree, both parties are responsible for birth control. However, if there is a lapse or if BC fails, it is the mother who then has to shoulder the pregnancy and everything associated with it, so ultimately it is her decision.
As far as the rape exception, if this were to be a rule/law, this would be all encompassing. It would be saying that all father's have a say in the decision to carry a pregnancy. Rapists would then have this as well. Even if the law held an exception, this would force the woman to report the rape and PROVE it in a court of law. If and when she were to succeed, it would, most likely, be too late. There are just too many variables. If a pregnancy risked a woman's health and/or life, she would still have to fight for the right to make the choice regarding her body, to protect her life.
As far as the embryo case, it is sort of the same thing, in reverse. While in a committed relationship, they decided to create these embryos. At some point, they ended their relationship, and she still wanted these embryos. It is his right to say, I don't want to bring a child into this world when I am not in a relationship with the mother and no longer a willing participant in co parenting with her. He has every right to decide when and with who he brings a child into the world. It is very sad, but it is the fair and right decision.


Wanted to add:
There is the other side of this hypothetical coin too. If we give father's a say, it goes both ways. What if he wants the mother to have an abortion. If we make the law that he can force her to carry a child, there has to be some recourse for him to force a termination if he is unwilling as well.
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #5  
April 11th, 2007, 07:30 PM
Caeden'sMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
No, I understand what you are saying. And, I agree, both parties are responsible for birth control. However, if there is a lapse or if BC fails, it is the mother who then has to shoulder the pregnancy and everything associated with it, so ultimately it is her decision.
As far as the rape exception, if this were to be a rule/law, this would be all encompassing. It would be saying that all father's have a say in the decision to carry a pregnancy. Rapists would then have this as well. Even if the law held an exception, this would force the woman to report the rape and PROVE it in a court of law. If and when she were to succeed, it would, most likely, be too late. There are just too many variables. If a pregnancy risked a woman's health and/or life, she would still have to fight for the right to make the choice regarding her body, to protect her life.[/b]
Yeah... i can see how this could get sticky as far as proving things. But as far as rape, i think because you commited an illegal act, your rights would automatically be non-existent. Again, i know what you're saying about how that could be hard to actually carry out though.

As far as the medical exemption, that should be left up to the doctors, obviously.

Quote:
As far as the embryo case, it is sort of the same thing, in reverse. While in a committed relationship, they decided to create these embryos. At some point, they ended their relationship, and she still wanted these embryos. It is his right to say, I don't want to bring a child into this world when I am not in a relationship with the mother and no longer a willing participant in co parenting with her. He has every right to decide when and with who he brings a child into the world. It is very sad, but it is the fair and right decision.[/b]
But, if she were already pregnant, he would not get to change that decision. If the baby were already born, he would not get to make that decision. So i still don't see why in THIS case, he DOES get to make that decision. To me, the decision was already made when those embryos were created...

Quote:
Wanted to add:
There is the other side of this hypothetical coin too. If we give father's a say, it goes both ways. What if he wants the mother to have an abortion. If we make the law that he can force her to carry a child, there has to be some recourse for him to force a termination if he is unwilling as well.[/b]
Well, since i don't think abortion should be allowed at ALL (except in those cases where it's a medical issue) that issue wouldn't be what concerns me.

But again, i know what reality is, and see what you're saying... But i still say if EITHER parent wants the child, i don't think it should be killed. It is a wanted child then, and makes the abortion or in this case, destruction of embryos, that much sadder to me...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
April 11th, 2007, 08:54 PM
Caeden'sMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
Quote:
Okay, i wanted to move the debate about a father's rights here, so the other thread didn't get moved.

How far should a father's rights extend? Obviously for the most part, people seem to think they have no rights, because it is the woman who is pregnant. Is that fair? It's his child too, right?[/b]
Honestly, I think it has nothing to do with the parent's 'rights' so much as the child's 'right' (specifically referring to the right to life).

I don't think either parent should have a say in it (which I guess would make both of the parents are equal).

To me, it is about the child, not about the parent(s). If the parent(s) cannot afford the child, then adoption is an option.

When you refer to 'rights', I automatically think 'right to life' and since the child is the one whose life is in immediate jeopardy, that is who I think should have the 'rights'.

Hope that made sense.
[/b]
Yep, sure did make sense! And i completely agree...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
April 11th, 2007, 10:11 PM
Niamh ૐ's Avatar Green Mama Goddess
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fallbrook, California
Posts: 10,423
Send a message via AIM to Niamh ૐ Send a message via MSN to Niamh ૐ Send a message via Yahoo to Niamh ૐ
Personally, I feel that the father should have a say in it... HOWEVER, ultimately its the mother's body, therefore its the mother's decision.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #9  
April 12th, 2007, 06:37 AM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,780
No I don't think the father should have any say.

Because he could say one thing, and then change his mind. He can say he wants to be involved and then the baby gets there and he wants no part of that responsibility.
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #10  
April 12th, 2007, 07:41 AM
mommyKathyX3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Since this was moved here BECAUSE of the other post on the main forum, I'll answer that part. I just dont understand HOW someone can say "the father has no rights" in a case of abortion, but when it comes to the case of IVF, the father has JUST AS MUCH OF A RIGHT. Its contradictory. I just dont get it! He agreed in the first place to fertalize those eggs, so according to most of you, once the father has fertalized those eggs its the mother who is in ultimate control of what happens to them (abortion or not). Example, a couple says, hey lets have a baby, so she get pregant, and then he says, nope I changed my mind I dont want a baby, you know what, TOUGH LUCK! If you dont want the kid, relinquish all rights but its not your choice. (I dont even believe its the mothers choice, but thats a different story) Even in the case of the embryoes and the IVF, SHE is carrying the babies, so he has done his part, and agreed to his part, he is DONE with his part since they are seperated. If he doesnt want to have a child, then he doesnt have to aknowlege the child since they are seperated. Its like they had a contract to have a baby, and he is now changing his mind, it shouldnt be allowed.

Now adressing what I think of fathers rights in abortion, since I'm pro-life, I feel he doesnt have a right to say he wants to end it, and niether does the mother. Like CeCe said, its about the child at that point, and if you dont want to be a part of that childs life, then give it up. You signed the contract, you're not bailing out.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
April 12th, 2007, 07:51 AM
Cereal Killer's Avatar I'm climbin' in yo window
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: next to Chuck Norris
Posts: 7,373
I don't get what is so hard to understand about this. The embryos are half his, he has a say in it UP TO THE POINT OF IMPLANTATION, because at that point it becomes her body and her choice.

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. If the mother had suddenly decided, after the divorce, that she no longer wanted the embryos. The father still wants them, and finds a surrogate, but the woman says NO WAY, those are my eggs, and I am not willing to have children running around. Let's just say, she changed her mind because of the Cancer and she did not think it was right to bring children into this world with a mother who may die soon. She has every right to rethink and change her mind. IMO, the father was being pretty responsible, not wanting to bring children into a broken home just for the sake of having children. He is completely right, it is his right to decide when and with whom to have children.

As far as comparing this to abortion, apples and oranges. An abortion occurs when a fetus is INSIDE a woman, there should never be any other person allowed to make a decision about another's body or reproductive rights.
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #12  
April 12th, 2007, 08:06 AM
mommyKathyX3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
I don't get what is so hard to understand about this. The embryos are half his, he has a say in it UP TO THE POINT OF IMPLANTATION, because at that point it becomes her body and her choice.

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. If the mother had suddenly decided, after the divorce, that she no longer wanted the embryos. The father still wants them, and finds a surrogate, but the woman says NO WAY, those are my eggs, and I am not willing to have children running around. Let's just say, she changed her mind because of the Cancer and she did not think it was right to bring children into this world with a mother who may die soon. She has every right to rethink and change her mind. IMO, the father was being pretty responsible, not wanting to bring children into a broken home just for the sake of having children. He is completely right, it is his right to decide when and with whom to have children.

As far as comparing this to abortion, apples and oranges. An abortion occurs when a fetus is INSIDE a woman, there should never be any other person allowed to make a decision about another's body or reproductive rights.[/b]
Ok, I see your reasoning on UP TO THE POINT OF IMPLANTATION its half his then its hers only cause its in her body, but I'll disagree. And thats my right, right? I think that if either of them wants to have the babies, they have the right to it. I think that the father has a right to use them also, but not a right to destroy them. Agree to disagree on this one? (cause I'm stubborn )
Reply With Quote
  #13  
April 12th, 2007, 10:12 AM
Cereal Killer's Avatar I'm climbin' in yo window
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: next to Chuck Norris
Posts: 7,373
Quote:
Agree to disagree on this one? (cause I'm stubborn )[/b]
NO WAY!! (cause I am stubborn too!)
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #14  
April 12th, 2007, 11:31 AM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Add me to the stubborn list!

Quote:
Absolutely, a father has rights, after the baby is born. Since the woman has to bear the pregnancy, the sickness and swelling, and all the risks associated with it, ultimately, she has the power while she is pregnant.
Imagine what kind of possibilities giving men rights over fetuses would hold. Abusive men could use it as a means of control and further abuse. Rapists could use it to further traumatize their victims. This would give someone complete control over your body. Someone could force a woman to risk her health or even her life.

If a man does not want to make a baby with a woman who he isn't sure shares his desire to have one, he should be taking precautions (both should) to ensure that conception does not occur. Once it does, he does not, and should not, have any control over the woman's decision.[/b]
To the bolded... By having abortion outlawed or conditioned in any way, someone is risking someone else's life whether it be the fetus &/or the mom.

To so many pro-lifers they think "she opened her legs so it's her responsbility." If only it was that simple. By assuming that belief and then forcing it on every case, women are put at extreme risk. Risk of being stuck in abusive situations and forcing the child to grow up in that condition.. There are so many variables, I wish people could see how it's not only harmful to the mother but the child as well. Isn't there enough abuse and suffering out there already?

Quote:
Dad and mom conceived, it was just outside of mom's body. So for the father to now suddenly change his mind seems just as unfathomable to me as if the mother was pregnant. And i don't think it's fair of him to be able to decide to destroy those embryos when the mother DOES want the kids, ESPECIALLY since he wouldn't have the same right if she were actually pregnant.[/b]
They had a choice. They choose to fertilize those eggs with medical science. They could have just saved their own eggs and own sperm seperately if it was that important to them. Hind sight is always 20/20.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
April 12th, 2007, 06:37 PM
Caeden'sMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
Since this was moved here BECAUSE of the other post on the main forum, I'll answer that part. I just dont understand HOW someone can say "the father has no rights" in a case of abortion, but when it comes to the case of IVF, the father has JUST AS MUCH OF A RIGHT. Its contradictory. I just dont get it! He agreed in the first place to fertalize those eggs, so according to most of you, once the father has fertalized those eggs its the mother who is in ultimate control of what happens to them (abortion or not). Example, a couple says, hey lets have a baby, so she get pregant, and then he says, nope I changed my mind I dont want a baby, you know what, TOUGH LUCK! If you dont want the kid, relinquish all rights but its not your choice. (I dont even believe its the mothers choice, but thats a different story) Even in the case of the embryoes and the IVF, SHE is carrying the babies, so he has done his part, and agreed to his part, he is DONE with his part since they are seperated. If he doesnt want to have a child, then he doesnt have to aknowlege the child since they are seperated. Its like they had a contract to have a baby, and he is now changing his mind, it shouldnt be allowed.

Now adressing what I think of fathers rights in abortion, since I'm pro-life, I feel he doesnt have a right to say he wants to end it, and niether does the mother. Like CeCe said, its about the child at that point, and if you dont want to be a part of that childs life, then give it up. You signed the contract, you're not bailing out.[/b]
I agree with pretty much everything said here... So glad i'm not alone in this thinking!

Quote:
To so many pro-lifers they think "she opened her legs so it's her responsbility." If only it was that simple. By assuming that belief and then forcing it on every case, women are put at extreme risk. Risk of being stuck in abusive situations and forcing the child to grow up in that condition.. There are so many variables, I wish people could see how it's not only harmful to the mother but the child as well. Isn't there enough abuse and suffering out there already?[/b]
See, i think this is where we disagree... You see it as saving a child from abuse or suffering. I see it as CAUSING that (since isn't that what we'd call it if it was a little 3 year old, instead of a fetus?). To me, even if a person's life sucks, most people would still want to be alive... and i think they deserve that chance. No one can say that their life WILL be full of suffering, or even that it won't last forever. In fact, some of the people who go on to do great things in this world do those things BECAUSE of the suffering they've endured.

I still don't know how much sense i'm making, and i understand your point... i truly do. Believe it or not, i used to be pro-choice, and arguing that side! I've just come to see things differently as i've gotten older...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
April 12th, 2007, 07:07 PM
Cereal Killer's Avatar I'm climbin' in yo window
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: next to Chuck Norris
Posts: 7,373
An embryo or fetus is much different than a 3 year old.
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #17  
April 12th, 2007, 07:26 PM
Caeden'sMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
An embryo or fetus is much different than a 3 year old.[/b]
And a 3 year old is much different than a 30 year old... Doesn't make one okay to kill and one not, right? To me, i look at fetuses (is that the word? ) the same way... Just another stage in a developing human.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
April 12th, 2007, 07:27 PM
Cereal Killer's Avatar I'm climbin' in yo window
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: next to Chuck Norris
Posts: 7,373
Quote:
Quote:
An embryo or fetus is much different than a 3 year old.[/b]
And a 3 year old is much different than a 30 year old... Doesn't make one okay to kill and one not, right? To me, i look at fetuses (is that the word? ) the same way... Just another stage in a developing human.
[/b]
Yes, therein the debate lies.
__________________
Wife, Mother of 4, Homeschooling, and wine drinking.


Reply With Quote
  #19  
April 15th, 2007, 03:56 PM
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 210
The fact is that fathers CAN'T have rights before birth. Fist off a father isin't even a "legal" father until AFTER birth AND establishing paternity(unwed). If a man has NO legal rights to ANY child until AFTER birth/paternity then the man is not a "legal father" to any fetus. So how can a "legal stranger" have "rights" to a non-existant "child" that may or may not be his? There is no way for the law/courts to determine if a man is or isin't a legal father before birth. Paternity tests inutero are possible...but require a risky, painful, and invasive procedure that may harm the fetus. The courts can't require that a person undergo an invasive procedure agianst thier will. The health of the mother would far outweigh his "rights" to a paternity test. So what do you suggest? Should ANY man who may or may not actually be a potential biological father have the right to ownership of ANY woman's body just because he may have a vested intrest in her pregnancy? Should a man or multiple men have the right to force a pregnant woman into a medical procedure with out her consent? Should he then have the right to force her through the pain and trauma of birth for his personal satisfaction?How would you seperate actual fathers from men only attempting to controol,oppress,and abuse a pregnant woman?

I think people who say "fathers" should have rights have good intentions....but don't think through all the surrounding "issues"....like the fact that giving men rights over women's bodies would rape the women of thier personal freedoms and violate thier basic human rights.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
April 15th, 2007, 10:41 PM
Caeden'sMama's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
Should he then have the right to force her through the pain and trauma of birth for his personal satisfaction?How would you seperate actual fathers from men only attempting to controol,oppress,and abuse a pregnant woman?

I think people who say "fathers" should have rights have good intentions....but don't think through all the surrounding "issues"....like the fact that giving men rights over women's bodies would rape the women of thier personal freedoms and violate thier basic human rights.[/b]
Except where is the mother's responsibility in all this? The man didn't FORCE her to get pregnant... She made choices that led to that. (Except rape obviously.)

If a woman wants to exercise her "personal freedoms" and "basic human rights" to not give birth, then she should have done that BEFORE getting pregnant.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:56 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0