Should a father have a choice?

[Plucky19]

I think you and CC are saying about the same thing and I'm just gonna go ahead and agree here.

and I'm in the same boat as Plucky. I don't have sex with people I can't see myself having kids with. a pregnancy right now would be unwanted, but I know that boyfriend would support me and he knows I'd never be able to abort or give it up. that's one of the reasons we waited so long to have sex. we had to come to an understanding about what we would feel and do if an accident happened. that being said, we use two forms of birth control EVERY TIME.

the best thing to do is to avoid being in that situation at all. use birth control, fuck people who have similar opinions and who you would have children with.

Well said *Hugs* You're good people and I was impressed you didn't go get the dog the other day. Most people would have gotten it THEN realized that it either wasn't a good time or they didn't have the space or didn't really want it... It says a lot about responibility...

 

[Scouse B'stard]

Lets back up a bit and what if the woman who gets your sperm decides to seek support?

Imagine the sperm banks / IVF Clinics allowing paternity lawyers to advertise on their premises or offering advice and guidance on how to get the father to pay supprt.....

 

[isthisdesire]

Despite your attempts at responsibility, (birth control can and does fail) (this includes tubals and vasectomies) So despite this, if you were to get pregnant should your boyfriend have a say in whether to abort or not? Yes, you've made sure that he is on the same level as you in regards to children but people change their minds when it's actually on your plate.

he's not the kind of person that would attempt to force anything on anyone. he wouldn't presume to tell me what to do. another one of the things I love so much.

but, hypothetically, should he be able to have a say? legally? no. I agree with CC. but because he's someone I love and respect, I would listen to how he feels and take it into consideration. I think every woman in that situation probably should do that (except in cases where the guy's an irrational douche that just wants to shirk responsibility), but I certainly don't think there should be a law telling her she has to.

 

[isthisdesire]

Well said *Hugs* You're good people and I was impressed you didn't go get the dog the other day. Most people would have gotten it THEN realized that it either wasn't a good time or they didn't have the space or didn't really want it... It says a lot about responibility...

ha, I suppose so. I wouldn't want to get her and then realize that I couldn't keep her and have to take her back. that would break my heart.

 

[morewickedfun]

he's not the kind of person that would attempt to force anything on anyone. he wouldn't presume to tell me what to do. another one of the things I love so much.

but, hypothetically, should he be able to have a say? legally? no. I agree with CC. but because he's someone I love and respect, I would listen to how he feels and take it into consideration. I think every woman in that situation probably should do that (except in cases where the guy's an irrational douche that just wants to shirk responsibility), but I certainly don't think there should be a law telling her she has to.

Ok that being said you want the baby and he doesn't. Do you still have the right to seek support?

 

[Plucky19]

ha, I suppose so. I wouldn't want to get her and then realize that I couldn't keep her and have to take her back. that would break my heart.

That's how I got my pug. The girl didn't think it through and made her suffer until I finally took her and gave her a home. Now she owns this place

 

[SleepingWarrior]

No, but if he says he doesn't want the child while there's still time to abort (and signs a legal document to that effect), then he shouldn't have to pay child support.

Thats about the best way I can see to have any sort of balance without violating a woman's right to abort.

 

[isthisdesire]

Ok that being said you want the baby and he doesn't. Do you still have the right to seek support?

I think I'm with dolf on this. in order to be free of support, he has to give up all parental rights. permanently. which sucks, actually, because you're basically saying that if I want it and he doesn't, we're done. I'm not sure that's true in every case. maybe it should be, though. I don't know.

like I said, the whole thing is so complicated that it's best to just avoid it. I know it can't always be avoided, but I tend to agree with ksmybuttons here:

"Accidents aren't. It's just another word for carelessness."

 

[morewickedfun]

I think I'm with dolf on this. in order to be free of support, he has to give up all parental rights. permanently. which sucks, actually, because you're basically saying that if I want it and he doesn't, we're done. I'm not sure that's true in every case. maybe it should be, though. I don't know.

like I said, the whole thing is so complicated that it's best to just avoid it. I know it can't always be avoided, but I tend to agree with ksmybuttons here:

"Accidents aren't. It's just another word for carelessness."

So when things are too difficult we simply avoid it?
Avoidance of saying anything real on real issues.

 

[isthisdesire]

So when things are too difficult we simply avoid it?
Avoidance of saying anything real on real issues.

um. I answered your question.

 

[morewickedfun]

um. I answered your question.

I saw that.

 

[isthisdesire]

I saw that.

so how was it "Avoidance of saying anything real on real issues"?

 

[Never]

Sort of like how mwf has avoided the question MechaBlade asked her about whether a "father's rights" include forcing a woman to bring a child to term when she doesn't want to.

 

[ksmybuttons]

Despite your attempts at responsibility, (birth control can and does fail) (this includes tubals and vasectomies) So despite this, if you were to get pregnant should your boyfriend have a say in whether to abort or not? Yes, you've made sure that he is on the same level as you in regards to children but people change their minds when it's actually on your plate.

Attempts at responsibility. You either are or you aren't.

I totally disagree with birth control failing. If a man has a vasectomy, he goes back and has sperm counts until there are none before he has unprotected sex. That's the 1% failure rate. If a woman wants permanent sterilization, she has a hysterectomy, not a tubal and if she chooses the tubal then she continues to use birth control every time -- it's the layering.

There are no accidents.

 

[morewickedfun]

Sort of like how mwf has avoided the question MechaBlade asked her about whether a "father's rights" include forcing a woman to bring a child to term when she doesn't want to.

I had to go back and look.
I don't avoid.
My answer to mecha is yes.

Men and women create children. And when it happens either both of them have a choice, or neither of them has a choice.
All because she has to carry the child to term? Come on. She had sex didn't she? so shouldn't she be held accountable?
Abortion rights were invented to protect women from the economic, social, and emotional consequences of unwanted pregnancies. Im saying he wants the baby. Sadly, he has no rights. It's a difficult call to be sure. She does have to carry the baby to term. Men just weren't given a uterus nor a choice apparently.

 

[morewickedfun]

so how was it "Avoidance of saying anything real on real issues"?

You said: the whole thing is so complicated that it's best to just avoid it. I know it can't always be avoided, but I tend to agree with ksmybuttons here:

You answered my question. The subject of avoidance irked me.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Avery_Chisholm]

Ok that being said you want the baby and he doesn't. Do you still have the right to seek support?

yes i think so

 

[yevkassem72]

I had to go back and look.
I don't avoid.
My answer to mecha is yes.

Men and women create children. And when it happens either both of them have a choice, or neither of them has a choice.
All because she has to carry the child to term? Come on. She had sex didn't she? so shouldn't she be held accountable?
Abortion rights were invented to protect women from the economic, social, and emotional consequences of unwanted pregnancies. Im saying he wants the baby. Sadly, he has no rights. It's a difficult call to be sure. She does have to carry the baby to term. Men just weren't given a uterus nor a choice apparently.

Well, you actually have a relevant point.

 

[Gord]

I had to go back and look.
I don't avoid.
My answer to mecha is yes.

Men and women create children. And when it happens either both of them have a choice, or neither of them has a choice.
All because she has to carry the child to term? Come on. She had sex didn't she? so shouldn't she be held accountable?
Abortion rights were invented to protect women from the economic, social, and emotional consequences of unwanted pregnancies. Im saying he wants the baby. Sadly, he has no rights. It's a difficult call to be sure. She does have to carry the baby to term. Men just weren't given a uterus nor a choice apparently.

The thing about creating laws is someone then has to enforce them . If it became law for the sire ( se Riles for that word ) to demand that the mother carried to term and went through birth the teh enforcement part becomes aboherrent . What you gonna do - imprison any woman who refuses to accept the pregnacncy - lock her up till she gets past 20 weeks - what happens if she wants to travel - do you take her travel rights away , incase she aborts abroad

It would be unenforceable

 

[Ishmael]

There are four possible decision points in the discussion.

1. Both want the child.

2. Neither want the child.

3. She wants the child, he doesn't.

4. He wants the child, she doesn't.

Obviously the first two are non-issues in that both parties agree. It is in the next two decision points where the conflict arises.

By law, and it doesn't matter whether you agree with the law or not, a woman is given dominion over her own body within reason. There is compelling arguments why this should be so, it is she that suffers the changes in her body that are part of the birthing process and it is she that risks her life in that process. To deny her a voice in the assesment of that risk is irrational.

This is counter-balanced by the mans right to have a certain dominion over his own wallet.

I think it's wrong for either party to force the other into a situation that puts at risk their lives or their financial well being.

One possible solution would be to return to the Roman practice of 'exposure.' Within tens days of live birth the man has the right to 'expose' the child. Should the woman decide that she wants to keep and raise the child certain legal arrangements could be made whereby the man is absovled of financial responsibility thus sparing the life of the child.

While I agree with and support a womans right to choose, I don't delude myself that abortion is anything but murder. So is exposure. If one is deemed acceptable, why not the other? Both are moral delimmas. In both instances the infant, whether in the womb or out, is an unviable tissue mass without the continued support of some third party, meaning that an uncared for infant is just as surely dead as an aborted fetus. They can't take care of themselves in either instance. Both are to an extent parasites on the bodies of the care givers the only difference is the nature of the parasitism.

I make this proposal in a somewhat satirical vein. I agree to an extent with CC's observation. If you don't want to pay for a child, keep your dick in your pants. I also acknowledge that that can be damned hard to do with hormones rushing through your viens and a determined female plotting your demise from abstinence. But it is fodder for discussion.

One can only wonder what the effect of a legal system based on the above would be?

Ishmael

 

[isthisdesire]

You said: the whole thing is so complicated that it's best to just avoid it. I know it can't always be avoided, but I tend to agree with ksmybuttons here:

You answered my question. The subject of avoidance irked me.

it irked you that I think people should avoid the situation? that makes very little sense.

 

[morewickedfun]

it irked you that I think people should avoid the situation? that makes very little sense.

Why does it not make any sense?
If we avoided things that were too hard to figure out, or just avoided thingsin general, tell me how anything would get solved?

 

[isthisdesire]

Why does it not make any sense?
If we avoided things that were too hard to figure out, or just avoided thingsin general, tell me how anything would get solved?

I never said, "let's not solve this, it's too hard." I answered all the questions that were asked of me and agreed with solutions other people suggested.

saying, "be smart enough to keep yourself from having to make these hard decisions," is not the same as avoiding talking about it. obviously, as I've been posting about it. it's not the same thing as saying don't solve it.

 

[morewickedfun]

It is definitely a tough topic.
Any attempt to force a decision on a woman represents a diminution of womens ability to control her own body.And then having the father have a say in it could give any third party with a connection to the pregnancy a say in whether a woman has an abortion. This removes whatever little control women have now over the decision to abort and dilutes that control to the extent that others, even those remotely related can have a say over the decision to terminate a putative cousin, relative, friend or neighbour. Like anything else it will be taken too far.
*ponders.