Should the man have any say in whether a woman aborts or not?

[Graffias]

I made this point in another thread, but I will recap. Though I am not anti-abortion, I believe it is extremely unjust that a woman is allowed to make a unilateral decision as to whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. Though the woman carries the fetus in her body for nine months, it is the man's fetus every bit as much as it is hers.

Men are completely powerless after a woman becomes pregnant. If the woman doesn't want to become a mother, but the man has the ability and desire to raise the child by himself, the woman can still go ahead and have the abortion without his approval. If the man doesn't want to become a parent and the woman decides she wants to give birth and knows she won't have the means to support the child alone, she can basically force the man into fatherhood and years of child support.

Even if a man is not physically invested in the birth of a child, there is often a great emotional investment. And also there is a great financial investment that he may have to make if the child is born. So considering these facts, shouldn't what he wants matter as much as what she wants?

 

[BDBoop]

I made this point in another thread, but I will recap. Though I am not anti-abortion, I believe it is extremely unjust that a woman is allowed to make a unilateral decision as to whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. Though the woman carries the fetus in her body for nine months, it is the man's fetus every bit as much as it is hers.

Men are completely powerless after a woman becomes pregnant. If the woman doesn't want to become a mother, but the man has the ability and desire to raise the child by himself, the woman can still go ahead and have the abortion without his approval. If the man doesn't want to become a parent and the woman decides she wants to give birth and knows she won't have the means to support the child alone, she can basically force the man into fatherhood and years of child support.

Even if a man is not physically invested in the birth of a child, there is often a great emotional investment. And also there is a great financial investment that he may have to make if the child is born. So considering these facts, shouldn't what he wants matter as much as what she wants?

There's no way to judge that across the boards. It truly is completely up to the female. If they are in an actual, long-term relationship, one would hope she would take his feelings under consideration.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

No. Period. It is her body, her health, her life. No. A man should not have any say whatsoever in whether a woman can abort. Of course, it is ideal if a couple can talk it out and come to an agreement. But if not, the decision defaults completely and without reservation to the woman.

However, I also believe the man should be allowed to walk away if he doesn't want a child and the woman decides she does. Since the man has no say in whether she keeps it or not (as it should be) he should get a choice about how to react to her decision. Also, if it is a woman's right to have total control over the decision of whether or not to abort, she must also accept total responsibility for evaluating the feasibility of that decision.

 

[spud_meister]

I don't believe the woman should be forced to carry it, however, the man should definitely get an opt out clause so he doesn't have to pay child support if he doesn't want the baby.

 

[BDBoop]

The law as I understand it does not allow for that 'choice'. I didn't want to name my daughter's father, nor did I want child support. But that money wasn't for me. She was entitled to it, as he was her father. Since the county was involved, I didn't get a say. And once a county has begun child support, it does not end until either the child reaches the age of majority, or the back pay has been honored.

 

[Graffias]

I don't believe the woman should be forced to carry it, however, the man should definitely get an opt out clause so he doesn't have to pay child support if he doesn't want the baby.

This is ideally the way things should be, but the state has every incentive to make the man pay. These misandric child support laws were adopted back in the 70's because of all the unplanned pregnancies that were occurring and as a way of punishing men for not "keeping in in their pants". Realistically, there is no way forced child support will stop anytime soon without intense lobbying to overturn these laws.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

How would you propose to give the man "a say" in the matter? If a woman wants an abortion and he wants to keep the child, either the child is aborted against his wishes or he's allowed to force the woman to give birth. There is no middle ground here.

 

[Graffias]

How would you propose to give the man "a say" in the matter? If a woman wants an abortion and he wants to keep the child, either the child is aborted against his wishes or he's allowed to force the woman to give birth. There is no middle ground here.

I'm basically making an argument that both the man and the woman should decide the fate of the fetus. I'm arguing that if the man has the ability to raise the child by himself, his wishes should override that of the mother. If the woman does not have the ability to raise the child without the man's financial support, then he should be allowed to overrule her choice to give birth.

 

[maquiscat]

I'm basically making an argument that both the man and the woman should decide the fate of the fetus. I'm arguing that if the man has the ability to raise the child by himself, his wishes should override that of the mother. If the woman does not have the ability to raise the child without the man's financial support, then he should be allowed to overrule her choice to give birth.

OK that I am against insofar as a woman should never be made to get an abortion even if she risks her own life in giving birth. I agree that the man should be allowed to opt out of the child support. But this can only occur prior to the birth or his being informed of the existence of the child, which ever comes latter (ie no coming to him 2 years later with "Oh this is your child, you owe child support" if she went away and never told him.) If he is part of that child's life, even for a year then he assumes responsibility. However, since he provides support for that child he should be entitled to at least a 1/2 child tax deduction on his income.

As far as whether he gets to override an abort decision for the woman, sadly I have to leave it in her court, at least until someone develops artificial wombs that will allow a man to take over development of the fetus. Then she can be forced to not abort the child as it can be removed from her to him. However, if a long term relationship can be shown and it can be shown that she never consulted the man at all, then I'm all for allowing him to sue her for emotional trauma.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I made this point in another thread, but I will recap. Though I am not anti-abortion, I believe it is extremely unjust that a woman is allowed to make a unilateral decision as to whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. Though the woman carries the fetus in her body for nine months, it is the man's fetus every bit as much as it is hers.

Men are completely powerless after a woman becomes pregnant. If the woman doesn't want to become a mother, but the man has the ability and desire to raise the child by himself, the woman can still go ahead and have the abortion without his approval. If the man doesn't want to become a parent and the woman decides she wants to give birth and knows she won't have the means to support the child alone, she can basically force the man into fatherhood and years of child support.

Even if a man is not physically invested in the birth of a child, there is often a great emotional investment. And also there is a great financial investment that he may have to make if the child is born. So considering these facts, shouldn't what he wants matter as much as what she wants?

Imagine how it would be if our present day approach was reversed and they refused to give an abortion only with the consent of both.

"Well, sweetheart, we know he cheated on you, beat you, and left you for another women when he found out he impregnated you, but until your divorce comes through we can't grant you an abortion . . . which means you'll have to have that bastard's baby anyway. So sorry, it's the law."

Hah - yeah - some justice, there.

I'm basically making an argument that both the man and the woman should decide the fate of the fetus. I'm arguing that if the man has the ability to raise the child by himself, his wishes should override that of the mother. If the woman does not have the ability to raise the child without the man's financial support, then he should be allowed to overrule her choice to give birth.

He can, if he wants - take it to court and fight for the right. :shrug:

But you'd really hope that if a married couple is MARRIED theyd discuss these situations FAR in advanced.

"Do you want to have kids/more kids?"
"yes/no"
"If you end up pregnant what will we do?"

See - discussion and communication is key to a successful relationship. If one person says yes and the other no then they should be extra careful to avoid the situation entirely - and seeing as how they're supposed to be responsible, married people that shouldn't be too ridiculous to expect or suggest.

But how often does this happen? I only know of a few situations in which it panned out that both wanted a different outcome.

And for one couple I KNOW - they were both in agreement that they didn't want more kids and when she ended up pregnant anyway spite their efforts to avoid it - he suddenly changed his mind.

 

[OKgrannie]

I'm basically making an argument that both the man and the woman should decide the fate of the fetus. I'm arguing that if the man has the ability to raise the child by himself, his wishes should override that of the mother. If the woman does not have the ability to raise the child without the man's financial support, then he should be allowed to overrule her choice to give birth.

Please reread your post. You are NOT arguing that BOTH the man and woman decide. You are arguing that the MAN can override any wish of the woman. You are saying that the MAN WILL DECIDE, then claiming that both are deciding.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Please reread your post. You are NOT arguing that BOTH the man and woman decide. You are arguing that the MAN can override any wish of the woman. You are saying that the MAN WILL DECIDE, then claiming that both are deciding.

Ah - yep - it does boil out that way, doesn't it?

Why do the finances matter as if that's the only element to child-rearing? Last I looked other things mattered - and last I looked I was just as equally important and valued in my relationship eventhough I'm a stay at home college mom and he's employed in the military.

What's the point of ever becoming a stay at home mom for the benefit of the kids if you're not going to be treated and valued as an equal?

You know - I'm not privy, by law, to be involved in HIS medical issues. He goes to his DR, gets prescribed pills and proceedures and I have no say what so ever in any of it - if I call his DR right now and ask for an explanation of his meds I'll get shunted. All I can hope is that he and I talk every now and then and he values my input and opinion and tells me what's going on with him. But all too often he doesn't do this - it is the downfall of marriage. You are NOT up in your spouse's medical **** all the time regardless of whether or not you want to be.

 

[BDBoop]

He can, if he wants - take it to court and fight for the right. :shrug:

But you'd really hope that if a married couple is MARRIED theyd discuss these situations FAR in advanced.

"Do you want to have kids/more kids?"
"yes/no"
"If you end up pregnant what will we do?"

Reminds me of an early Desperate Housewives scene. Lynette and Tom's youngest was finally out of diapers (if memory serves). Tom goes looking for some afternoon delight. Lynette is considering surrender, but asks for a condom. Tom murmurs that just once can't cause any damage. Lynette punches him square in the face.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

I'm basically making an argument that both the man and the woman should decide the fate of the fetus. I'm arguing that if the man has the ability to raise the child by himself, his wishes should override that of the mother. If the woman does not have the ability to raise the child without the man's financial support, then he should be allowed to overrule her choice to give birth.

See, that's not "a say"; that's giving the man all of the authority, despite acknowledging that the woman does all of the work. He has no right to demand this of her.

 

[sangha]

I don't believe the woman should be forced to carry it, however, the man should definitely get an opt out clause so he doesn't have to pay child support if he doesn't want the baby.

Men do have an opt-out clause. In fact they have several

Abstinence, condoms and sterilization.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Men do have an opt-out clause. In fact they have several

Abstinence, condoms and sterilization.

None of these things are 100% reliable - not even a visectomy or a tubal ligation.

nature is a sneaky bitch

 

[DashingAmerican]

No. Period. It is her body, her health, her life. No. A man should not have any say whatsoever in whether a woman can abort. Of course, it is ideal if a couple can talk it out and come to an agreement. But if not, the decision defaults completely and without reservation to the woman.

However, I also believe the man should be allowed to walk away if he doesn't want a child and the woman decides she does. Since the man has no say in whether she keeps it or not (as it should be) he should get a choice about how to react to her decision. Also, if it is a woman's right to have total control over the decision of whether or not to abort, she must also accept total responsibility for evaluating the feasibility of that decision.

I don't agree with this. I know you will disagree, but it takes two to make a child, so the father should have a say. When I say father I mean a man who has been in a long term comitted relationship, not the baby daddy. Look at it this way, say the father wanted to abort the child but the mother decides to keep it...9/10 the man is going to have to pay child support on this child.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I don't agree with this. I know you will disagree, but it takes two to make a child, so the father should have a say. When I say father I mean a man who has been in a long term comitted relationship, not the baby daddy. Look at it this way, say the father wanted to abort the child but the mother decides to keep it...9/10 the man is going to have to pay child support on this child.

Amazing - again - another post in which the subject of caring for another human being for 18 years rests on finances.

Is money really that important? More so: is it THE most important element in raising a child?

 

[The Baron]

Should a man have any say in whether or not a woman slaughters his child?

Well, hell ya!

 

[sangha]

None of these things are 100% reliable - not even a visectomy or a tubal ligation.

nature is a sneaky bitch

Abstinence isn't reliable?

Only if you think abstinence allows for an occasional bout of sex

 

[BDBoop]

And I'll go with "hell no." Oh look. We cancelled each other out. Additionally, the law sides with me.

 

[sangha]

I don't agree with this. I know you will disagree, but it takes two to make a child, so the father should have a say. When I say father I mean a man who has been in a long term comitted relationship, not the baby daddy. Look at it this way, say the father wanted to abort the child but the mother decides to keep it...9/10 the man is going to have to pay child support on this child.

I know what you mean. I ordered a book from Amazon on my credit card at the beginning of last month. I received the book 2 days later and finished reading it by the end of the week. At the end of the month, I received my CC bill and decided that since it takes to to make a financial transaction, I should have a say, so I sent the book back with a letter saying I refused to pay. Bastards wouldn't take it off my bill.

They told me "You should have thought about that before you read the book!!"

 

[LuckyDan]

Yes. He should.

 

[DashingAmerican]

Amazing - again - another post in which the subject of caring for another human being for 18 years rests on finances.

Is money really that important? More so: is it THE most important element in raising a child?

Not at all, but it is definitely a big part of it because you certainly can't raise a child without it. The most important thing in raising a child is a caring and stable household.

 

[Ockham]

A man does have his say... it's before he ejaculates into the vagina without a contraceptive. A small percentage of pregnancies occur even though pregnancy protection is provided and that's unfortunate.