Abortion - Should the Father Have A Say?

[Stoic Hero]

As far as I'm concerned, I consider the woman a murderer if she willingly has an abortion if the man says he is willing to raise the kid.

And this whole "it's her body so she gets to choose" argument is bullshit. You would stop someone from cutting themselves, right? Just because it's her body doesn't give her the right to cut herself. Same with murdering her baby. Just because God saw fit to have a woman be the one to carry the child doesn't give her the right to kill off the child.

 

[Six]

I think that is really different. She's not inflicting pain on her self because she 'wants to feel the pain', either the woman feels incapable of going through with the pregnancy, or for different, maybe even physical reasons, so I think it's bullshit to say that 'that' argument is bullshit. You don't know what goes on in a woman's head during that, I don't, and neither do other women. It's that person alone because everyone is different. =/

I thought this topic was about couples btw. I'm completely supportive of rape victims who want to get an abortion. =/ And if the "rapist" wants to get in contact, the first thing they can get is a foot to the face. They have nothing, NOTHING to say about that woman at all.

Ps. You are only allowed to say something so many times before it's only disrespectful, and you have to back off, it's THEIR life after all. Same for cutting. Can't control someones lives if that's what they want to do. =/

 

[Marquis of Granby]

Just because it's her body doesn't give her the right to cut herself.

yes. it does.

we just dont necessarily understand why someone would want to hurt themself, thats why we would try to stop her.

 

[moogling]

As far as I'm concerned, I consider the woman a murderer if she willingly has an abortion if the man says he is willing to raise the kid.

And this whole "it's her body so she gets to choose" argument is bullshit. You would stop someone from cutting themselves, right? Just because it's her body doesn't give her the right to cut herself. Same with murdering her baby. Just because God saw fit to have a woman be the one to carry the child doesn't give her the right to kill off the child.

Typical. Just because you believe in God and therefore that suicide is a sin and abortion is murder doesn't mean everyone does. If someone is in so much emotional pain that they decide to harm themselves, it IS their body. People don't want them to continue doing so because they care about that person, and because they want them to get help. Are you going to make cutting illegal? What next? Can't masturbate because who cares if it's my body, God doesn't like it?

Again. As noticeable in Toni's post. There are way too many circumstances so it's best to just leave it alone to the couple.

Not all rape cases end happily. Sometimes there isn't enough to win a case against a rapist and then what? Since legally he's not a rapist, he can say that that baby shouldn't be aborted.

 

[Big Casino]

cali your a bit crazy tbh

Ultimitely its her body and whatever she wants is whats gunna happen. You dont often here of stories when the father has wanted the child but the mother hasnt. Not that it doesnt happen but you dont here of it much.
double wrap it kids.

 

[Mermaid]

As far as I'm concerned, I consider the woman a murderer if she willingly has an abortion if the man says he is willing to raise the kid.

And this whole "it's her body so she gets to choose" argument is bullshit. You would stop someone from cutting themselves, right? Just because it's her body doesn't give her the right to cut herself. Same with murdering her baby. Just because God saw fit to have a woman be the one to carry the child doesn't give her the right to kill off the child.

What about her health (physically or mentally?) What if the birth is particularly traumatic for her? In my opinion, sorry it differs to yours, but God does not see fit for women to have children, people who don't want pregnancies/babies are just sometimes dumb enough to not use a condom/protection. Not saying your opinion is not true because it may well be, I have just seen many occasions (with myself, and others) that show me it is not the case in my eyes. I'm afraid I'm agnostic btw.

All in all, I feel personally it is the woman's decision as she has to go through the 9 months, the pain of birth, etcetc. Obviously if its a couple, they should try and discuss if possible.
Tbh abortion is a debate that will continue to go on - just shows people should be more careful if a partner or both partners do not want a child, in some cases anyway.

Obviously the whole rape issue is completely different, and I for one am not going into that today.

 

[Saints&Storms]

cali your a bit crazy tbh

Ultimitely its her body and whatever she wants is whats gunna happen. You dont often here of stories when the father has wanted the child but the mother hasnt. Not that it doesnt happen but you dont here of it much.
double wrap it kids.

Ultimately that thing inside of the woman is a living thing; I.E. capable of growing, developing, eventual reproduction, stimulus and maintaining homeostasis, there comes a point where its not just her body anymore and the Baby develops a heart beat and a train of thought and with that feelings.

So, in your opinion, what is the reason a mother can't slaughter her 4 year old child or even her 27 year old kid? What's the difference between that living, feeling, breathing and capable being and the one that is developing in the mothers womb -- now, yes, there is a point in its growth where it is just simply an egg cell, sperm or a zygote -- the unborn Baby already has a heart beat at 18 days after conception, that's a pulse of life, what separates living things from rocks and dirt.

At little over 5 weeks there are brainwaves being detected and little more past that about 10 weeks or less, pain can be felt and at this time the Baby is sucking its thumb and would you have the guts to look it in the eye as you would any other living being it would and could hold your hand; would you or do you want to be the doctor pulling that developing baby or whats left of him/her from the mothers womb after having used your forceps to grab him/her by any random limb, pulling the limbs off mind you and then watch as its head is crushed with that very tool? or perhaps lets go with the alternative which is Suction Aspiration where the Baby is sucked out by a tool (the curette) more powerful than all the vacuums you could think of COMBINED as it tears the baby to pieces and this one is the most common method among abortionists. But don't worry Mom got her anesthesia beforehand.

At 23 weeks the baby is giving rapid eye movemnts, REM, a typical usually diagnosing dreams in any other organism, so why is a baby different? If I or you dream, and its a crime to kill you or I; why is that innocent child any different?

Or how about something just as quick; Dilation and curettage basically the same as the latter a hook fashioned object is used to tear the baby or "fetus" as someone might call it to make themselves feel better, to pieces and then the remains are quickly discarded -- OR we could go with the worst of them Partial Birth Abortion, the 32 week old baby is delivered just through the cervix leaving its head in the birth canal as Scissors are used to cut into the Baby's back skull and then the catheter is inserted to suck the Baby's brain out, now, the brain is the "Control System" the Center of the Nervous system and home to all of our senses Vision, taste, smell you name it, as well as the cerebral cortex, which is home to billions and billions of neurons,makes up the largest part of the organ, this contains everything an organism needs to maintain thought, consciousness, memory and last but not least; awareness and attention.

The abortion sucks all of that out, along with cerebral cortex, the neurons going with it (A similar process to a full grown human, would have to be the Stroke in which neurons are also destroyed, resulting in pain and likely death).

I wouldn't wish that torture on the devil himself, and that's saying a lot, being I am a Christian.

Defending that murder, that torture...its as bad as if I created a baby with my own technology, piece by piece, building it and because it was completely mine and no one else's, I could do to it or with it what I please, and no one had a say in it.

Do you honestly believe there is a difference between the day before a woman goes into labor and the very next day when she delivers the baby? If a baby feeling, breathing, dreaming, being aware of its surroundings, sucking its thumb, recognizing its name from within the womb, getting scared when the mother does from with in the womb and hell even touching themselves because it feels good doesn't make it alive why are you or I any different?

Its not like when you cut yourself, or when you do something to yourself, because it not you, its a baby, it might need help from you to grow but in no way does that give you authority to take its life away.

If a woman doesn't have the common brains to check the next day or so, then its her fault as well as the mans, that the pregnancy occurred, its not about having sex or even safe sex its about being responsible while having sex.

And honestly this sex is only for fun and Babies are a sad byproduct business is ridiculous, its like saying Cells do Mitosis or Meiosis for fun and its just plain wrong.

The only way it can be explained is the bees, they Pollinate because; it taste good, yes, but the Flower/Plants evolved that way so as to pollinate and germinate itself, its more of evolution giving us a symbiotic relationship as opposed to parasitic, evolution doesn't favor "fun" it favors progress.

@Psalm 14:1 This thread isn't about the legality/morality of abortion. There are other threads for that, and if you want to argue your points on that topic, do it there. This thread is specifically about whether the man should have a say in terms of the abortion process. Please remain on topic from this point onward. -TTT

 

[CassinoChips]

Knock it off. All of you.

 

[Marquis of Granby]

][/I]And honestly this sex is only for fun and Babies are a sad byproduct business is ridiculous, its like saying Cells do Mitosis or Meiosis for fun and its just plain wrong.

The only way it can be explained is the bees, they Pollinate because; it taste good, yes, but the Flower/Plants evolved that way so as to pollinate and germinate itself, its more of evolution giving us a symbiotic relationship as opposed to parasitic, evolution doesn't favor "fun" it favors progress.

no. its not wrong, its not even wrong. sex is for fun. it can be for reproducing but since we're humans and we can say "i like this" "i like that" and dont JUST do things because its in our nature.

it might be wrong by your standards and by the standards of your god, but thankfully we dont all believe in that, we are capable of thinking for ourselves and while it might be extinguishing a life, thats part of life. people die all the time and when you dont have a god to tell you "death is terrible even tho you all go to heaven" its actually pretty fucking great.

 

[Lirael]

I've had a read over everyone's posts and they really do give a lot of food for thought! When I think about my viewpoint in debates like this, I try to put myself in the shoes of the people affected.

It's very easy to put myself in the shoes of a woman who's pregnant and doesn't want a kid. I'm only 21 and I'm not ready to be pregnant. Raising a kid isn't the major problem - though I admit it would be hard. Primarily, I fear my body changing. Throughout my teenage years I hated my body and consequently felt so low and worthless - I don't want to feel like that again so the idea of being taken back there by pregnancy is a rather distressing thought. I may feel differently when I reach my 30s.

I can understand the woman not wanting to tell the father. I wouldn't call a woman a bitch if she chose to make the decision alone and in secret. :/ In one scenario, the couple are in their early 20s. How does the woman break news like that to a father who's really too young to raise a child? Neither of the parents have made their own way in life yet. Telling the father could be like throwing a spanner into the works... In another scenario, the woman may worry about putting the father in a difficult situation. If the father dislikes the idea of abortion but doesn't want to see his loved one in pain, he may feel he has to choose between two ideologies. Does he support his loved one as she makes a decision he regards as immoral, or does he ask her to go through with the pregnancy and risk her happiness? The woman may worry that if she and her partner aren't on the same page, there is going to be some degree of difficulty and pain, which could last a lifetime. :/

It's harder to put myself in the shoes of the man. I suppose this is because I've been thinking about women my age. At 21, few people are in lifelong relationships and even fewer are married. It's therefore difficult for me to say that the man has rights, because he may not be in the girl's future. Why, then, should he be given the chance to affect her decision when it will change her future? (I don't mean to be harsh. )

If we're talking about married couples or couples who plan to spend the rest of their life together, then I do think the man should be told. These people are commited to one another and the whole point of spending your life together is making life-changing decisions together. If the woman doesn't tell the man she's pregnant, she is missing the whole point. Furthermore, the relationship becomes based around a lie. Their future could have been very different had she gone to her partner... Even if they had chosen to go through with an abortion, they would have made the decision together. They would have been a team.

 

[Lirael]

My main rebuttal to that is that the man will have to pay child support for that child as long as it lives by law. Depending on his job that can range from hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions of dollars over 18 years. That alone should give him the right to be involved in the decision.

If the woman chooses not to involve him then she should also forfeit the right to that money, IMO.

I agree with that. The mother can't have it two ways. If the father says he really doesn't want the child but the mother goes ahead despite his decision, or the mother has the child without telling the fathe, then the mother shouldn't later demand his money. :/

A problem does arise, however, when a woman isn't sure she's pregnant until it's too late to abort, which I am pretty sure CAN happen, albeit rarely. If a woman's size doesn't change much in the first few months and she has no major side effects, she may not realise. A woman's period doesn't always stop when she's pregnant, and not all women do feel sick. Should the father support her then? I suppose she could tell him when he does find out and they could discuss it reasonably and come to a compromise... Maybe...

Anyway, that's just me mulling over. That's going a bit off topic.

 

[Will Graham]

That's true. But contraception can fail though. The only guaranteed way to avoid pregnancy is to not have sex.

Try telling that to the Virgin Mary

When I first read the title, I was certain my answer would be "yes absolutely, no doubt". That would be silly however, as that is my gut reaction, and I try not to think with my gut. So I spent some time thinking about it, and here are my thoughts on the matter, which are super important and influential

Before I start, my answer is no, now you don't have to read the following paragraphs. I am so kind

There is really no comparison to a woman carrying a child, not one in the world, at least in relation to humans. If you have a woman who wants to abort and a man who wants to keep the child, it is ridiculous to assume you could force a woman to carry to term. Also if both parties have an equal say, then an impasse would be reached. This is impossible as there are only two states a foetus can be in.

Yes it would be incredibly heartbreaking if a woman is going to terminate a child the man desperately wants to keep, but those cases cannot be weighed against the rest. People have covered why that is in more depth than me, namely hallybbz, so I'll leave that part alone.

After the nipper escapes the vaginal Alcatraz of their mother's womb, then I think the playing field should be equalised. Legally they should not be seen as mother and father, but as Parent A and B. Not for some politically correct reason, but because it would allow courts to be more impartial later on.

 

[AerithG]

Putting my religious views aside (I'm Christian, so you know how I feel about abortion, no need to preach it), but even if I weren't, I believe that the father should have a say in the abortion. The child contains both of their DNA, and if he wants to take care of the child, he should be able to. I know the mother is having the child, but I'm sure that a loving father would take that role if they had the ability to do so. Both people chose to have sex, so they both have a say (though I personally believe nobody has the right to choose another being's fate, and that abortion is doing an injustice to the right's of another being). However, Nathan Drake is correct. The man just can't really control what a woman does with their body, plain and simple, so while I think that both parents should compromise on a solution, it just isn't always that way.

 

[Ethics]

Well, people would have to be generally reasonable to reach a compromise most of the time, however most people are not very reasonable when abortion is looking like an option. It's also a very "case by case" basis for this subject I think as there is no direct answer that applies to every individual couple's situation.

I have no statistics, but I'm going to go out on a wing and say that most abortions take place when there is not a willing father involved leaving the mother alone or financial reasons. Perhaps it is even a mutual agreement between two people who are not ready for the child.

However, bearing a child is something you know that can happen when you have sex. If you're unprotected, you can expect that to happen. If you are and it still happens, then it really is just an accident and I can agree with the option for an abortion. If you knowingly have unprotected sex, however, and then want an abortion, then I really think you brought the child onto yourself.

Now, this is where the father's say comes into play, if you both knowingly had unprotected sex, then the mother wants to have an abortion while the father wants to raise the child I don't think you should have quarter to say no. You birth the child, an extremely painful process, yes, however maybe next time you'll know what it feels like and will be less likely to conceive a second child on "accident". Father raises the child with the mother who didn't want them out of the picture.

tl:dr: If the mother takes steps to prevent the child, then she should have the final say on the abortion. If not, then it needs to be a mutual agreement.

 

[Pajama_Pants]

If there is a no to having a kid out of the two parties, then it's a no. Like others have stated, if the person has the child against the other's will, the one who pressed for the child should at the very least support the child, as the child does not even get a choice of being terminated or being brought into the world, that is the responsibility of the people who created the child in the first place.

 

[L]

Just like you cant force a woman to keep a child, you cant force her to get rid either, as a man, its the risk you take and if you really dont want to face up to your responsibilities then take extra care with your contraception, or just dont have sex at all

while it does make sense...

i mean, what are you supposed to do? go into the bathroom, bend her over and like... you know clean out her vagina?

scrubba-dubdub! bathtime buddy alliance!

 

[Six]

Well, people would have to be generally reasonable to reach a compromise most of the time, however most people are not very reasonable when abortion is looking like an option. It's also a very "case by case" basis for this subject I think as there is no direct answer that applies to every individual couple's situation.

I have no statistics, but I'm going to go out on a wing and say that most abortions take place when there is not a willing father involved leaving the mother alone or financial reasons. Perhaps it is even a mutual agreement between two people who are not ready for the child.

However, bearing a child is something you know that can happen when you have sex. If you're unprotected, you can expect that to happen. If you are and it still happens, then it really is just an accident and I can agree with the option for an abortion. If you knowingly have unprotected sex, however, and then want an abortion, then I really think you brought the child onto yourself.

Now, this is where the father's say comes into play, if you both knowingly had unprotected sex, then the mother wants to have an abortion while the father wants to raise the child I don't think you should have quarter to say no. You birth the child, an extremely painful process, yes, however maybe next time you'll know what it feels like and will be less likely to conceive a second child on "accident". Father raises the child with the mother who didn't want them out of the picture.

tl:dr: If the mother takes steps to prevent the child, then she should have the final say on the abortion. If not, then it needs to be a mutual agreement.

I disagree. 'An extremely painful process', I'm not just saying this because in this case I "am" the woman, but in all honesty, I would let the dad know, I would talk to them, I would want their input, but in all honesty, if it's gonna turn in to a push for a child I don't want, or something happened, I don't think the 'father' has a say for me to continue a pregnancy. Shit can go wrong with pregnancies too, tbh. If I were in a different position (lol) and say I were the dad? My opinion really wouldn't change, considering the fact I'm not the one going through the delivery, and carrying the baby.

I think if you can do this, and you yourself can deliver, sure, you can have all the last words and decisions you'd want. =/

Once again though, I'm completely for letting the dad know IF he is your partner, even if you split up I'd still tell them.

I also don't support half assed people that can't be bothered to use a condom or whatever because either "it doesn't feel the same" or forget to take their pill 'cause they're actually being lazy. ....Yeah. If you're one of those people, you, like Jeff said, brought this on to yourself. I hate it when people take the easy way out, stand up for your own decisions.

"Well it rarely happens right away the first time!" you should not be having sex. Period.

 

[Toshiya]

I don't think the dad should have a say, no.
Not that I'd be daft enough to get pregnant at my age anyway (obviously not saying anyone who gets pregnant is daft, but I'd be pretty daft to because I don't want children at all) but if I did, I really really don't want kids and nothing the guy could say would make me change my mind.
Obviously I would tell them and discuss it but at the end of the day, my mind is made up, I would not have a kid. Even if they said to me, have the child and I'll take it and raise it myself, no way would I go through that. Being pregnant with a child I don't want would be such an inconvenience to me, especially at my age and for the next few years of my life. It's not just a case of having a baby and giving it away, the 9 months carrying it would disrupt my life and delay all my plans.
As someone's already said, if a guy wants a baby he needs to find a woman that wants one too. Likewise if a woman wants a baby it's more beneficial for her to find a man that wants one too or she'll end up raising it alone.
At the end of the day, like most people have said, even though the dad should have equal rights to the kid when it's born, there's no way a guy can force the woman by law to carry and have a child she doesn't want. If by law a woman having an abortion was illegal if the man wanted the child, I guarantee a lot of women would find another way of getting rid of the child and that's not safe for the mother or the baby.
Likewise, if the guy really doesn't want it he can't force her to abort. If she chooses to have the kid when the guy has already said he doesn't want it, it's her choice and she can raise the child on her own, it's her call.
There's also the slight problem that, if a woman has slept with more than one man and isn't 100% whose baby it would be, how does the father then have a say? You can hardly do a DNA test on an unborn baby.

Ultimately, since it's the woman that has to carry and have the child, the choice can never be equal.

 

[Gingerbread Lesbian]

The woman would never be forced to carry the child by law simply because there must be a wrongdoing between two parties, the woman not carrying the child may or may not be morally correct depending what stance you take but isn't a 'wrongdoing'. Neither would it be practical to go through court since by time the case is heard and a verdict given the woman would almost certainly be past the legal abortion limit. Nor is the unborn child actually considered a 'person' until it has been born in the eyes of the law, which would probably pose problems somewhere along the line in court.

I don't believe that the mother should be forced to carry the child because the father wants the child to be born, however, I also don't believe that the father's opinion should be neglected simply because he is not the one who is carrying. Ultimately there can be no legal obligations or sanctions if the mother chose to abort the child, and correctly so, so she is free to abort the child within the legal limit unless there would be serious medical consequences should she choose to give birth, again, correctly so. The mother is carrying the child for nine months so she rightly has the say as to whether the abortion is to take place. However, it takes two to make the child and regardless of whether it is by accident or not each parent is half responsible for the child being conceived so the father should have an equal say as to whether the child ought to be aborted or not, but not to whether the child is aborted, or not if the case may be. Personally I think it's completely ignorant not to at least let the father have his viewpoint, unless the mother is absolutely certain she does not want a child then the reality is opinions can change. I know at this very moment in time I do not want a child, I'm young, I'm at university and consequently I have no significant means of supporting a child and as far as I'm concerned right now, that is that. But if I were to be put in the situation where my current girlfriend tells me she is pregnant I know for a fact I wouldn't know how to react or whether I would hold the same opinion. I don't believe for one minute it has anything to do with standing up for your own opinion nor should it be, it's a potentially life changing decision and I think very few people would be able to enforce, strongly, their own original belief if they were put in that situation.

I also completely disagree that not using a condom, not taking the pill etc or using that as a reason, is the 'easy' way out. I can't bring myself to believe having to choose whether a child should be aborted or not is remotely 'easy' or that the reason is 'easy', it's a decision that both parents have to live with for the rest of their lives and could quite easily end up regretting such a decision later on in life. Ignorant, maybe. Easy, no. Nor do I believe it's completely the parents fault for conceiving, yes the responsibility ultimately lies with both parties but the education for sexual activities certainly in this country is absolutely woeful. It's widely accepted that there is underage sex happening in this country, that it is a problem and that young teenage pregnancies is becoming a serious problem. Yet most people seem to accept that an adequate response to this is by telling the teenager to 'use a condom', 'take the pill' or simply 'don't have sex'. There's very little education on reasons to why they should be following this advice, what the alternatives are, what the consequences are and the responsibilities of being a parent at such a young age and I do believe that it will be a problem later in life if sex education is neglected when people are susceptible to having sex at such an early age, especially in regard to the decision of abortion. I'll be the first to admit my knowledge on protection is underwhelming, as far as I'm concerned I'll use a condom if my girlfriend wants me to and if I'm unaware she is using the pill. If she is on the pill then I most likely won't. I trust her to take the pill. I know fine well there is other protection, but know very little about it because throughout my education there has been very little, if any 'sex education' given and regardless of the fact I believe that I am reasonable enough to form a solid viewpoint on whether I would want a child or not it doesn't hide the cracks that I have been more or less uneducated on such matters and there will be many, many people who aren't in a position where they can reasonably have a say on an abortion.

On the other hand, if the mother has the ultimate decision to give birth to the child or not that cannot be enforced upon her then the father should have the ultimate right whether he wants to financially support the mother and/or child without it being enforced upon him.

 

[Catnip]

This is really difficult to voice a concise opinion, because there is no way generalizations fit in this discussion.

But anyway.

Should the guy have a say? Of course.

Should he be the one to make the final decision? No, and it's kind of appalling that anyone would even entertain the thought of the dude being the one to have the final say.

I think if the guy is young and still has a lot to live for, he should be allowed to not have a part of the child's life, should the girl have the stupid kid. To ditch completely though? Well, that's just stupid. Contribute a few dollars every once in a while at least, if you ask me.

However, there are cases where the guy does want to keep the kid, but the girl just doesn't. I think, since because hers is the body and mental state to go through the entire process of pregnancy and birth, then she should go ahead and abort, if that's really what she not only wants, but feels she needs.

There's no way the guy should ever have final say. In the end, the girl is the one who's going to either abort or give birth, and the guy is going to have to figure out a way to cope with her decision.