Should \"fathers\" have a say if a woman has a termination?
 

For the record I do not like the idea of abortions, but it is a fact of life we are stuck with.

So having said that, when a woman gets pregnant and wants to terminate we hear the argument that it is her body and has the right to choose. If the prospective father does not want her to have the abortion, that's tough, he has no say.

But, suppose the couple are going through IVF, if the man withdraws his consent as has happened in recent court cases then the woman is not allowed to continue end of story.

So the suggestion to debate is this

Suppose a woman gets pregnant, as it could be argued that part of the foetus came from the man's sperm contribution, then it's part of the man's body as well. Should the man be legally entitled to insist that the woman have a termination if he does not want to be a father, just like he can withdraw consent on IVF.

Would this not be fair.

i dont agree with abortions either to throw a different side in when i found out i was pregnant my then partner wanted me to get have one i refused cos i dont agree with them so in that side he could have a say if say i agreed with abortions but his viewpoint was a non starter for me cos of what i believe

No the woman has to carry it, give birth...if their relationship is in such a mess that they cant both agree on what to do and the father has to go down the legal route its probably best anyway...thought I'd go extreme on this argument just for the hell...Im not really sure what I think but thought I'd say something!...also what if the woman had been raped and the father was forcing her legally to keep the baby?

As an aside, what happened in the end did he get aggressive, did he walk out? What did you have and is he interested?


I suppose this argument is really about the anomaly regarding IVF where the father can pull the plug, and there was one case where that was done and the embryos destroyed because the father withdrew consent. It was tragic because the woman had been sterilised by cancer treatment.

With a normal pregnancy the father has no say.

If a woman chooses to terminate the father has no say, but if she chooses to keep the baby, against his wishes, he is legally liable for financial support. so it could be argued that if that is the case, he should, like in IVF have the right to pull the plug and order the woman to have a termination whether she wants to or not.

At present the woman only has the right to make a decision which has long term financial implications for the man. Put that way, is that fair?

Yes. But I'm against abortion anyway unless it *has* to happen (ie health reasons)

If the mother doesn't want it she can get rid of it
If the father doesn't want it, often the mothers still make them keep in touch and pay for it anyway

Sexist.

they should have a say but at the end of the day it should ultimatley be the mothers decision as she has to carry the baby and give birth.I`m totally ani abortion anyway.

It should bea joint decision, unless theman is a complete arse then obviously a woman would make a better decision.

Well, the father should have thought about that before he stuck it in. The woman has to carry and give birth to it, so she should have the final say

I think it would be nice for the father to have a big say in the decision but the final decision should rest with the mother

Absolutely, no doubt about it. And Lewis - I suppose that the woman in that case (where you say "he shouldn't have stuck it in") is completely innocent too? There's responsibility on both sides in conception.

Life don't work like that, if a woman puts it out in front of a drunk man d'you think its all his fault then.
And what if they did use contreception but it failed e.g condom split. Or a girl says they are on the pill and they ain't. Things ain't just black and white.

I did think that could be one counter argument to the motion for debate, but then the counter to this is the woman should have considered contraception as well under "Two to tango" rule

There is still this issue with the difference between IVF and natural birth in law

Maybe the IVF issue is the one that needs looking into

For the record, suppose I got a "girlfriend" pregnant, or a wife pregnant, I would be getting them enrolled in prenatal classes and fixed up with midwives.

Definately if the couple is in a relationship or if it was a one off and the dad wants to be involved. I think a father has as much right to the baby as the mother does.

An absent father obviously shouldn't have any say.

If they used contraception and still fell pregnant then the "we were safe" rule shouldn't apply imo- if you're having sex then you should know the risk and you should know that it isn't 100% effective, and should be prepared.

I personally don't think the father should have any major say in it. They should be informed that there is a child and perhaps asked for their opinion but at the end of the day this is the mother's battle and if she chooses to abort then I don't see why she should be stopped.

well i didnt change my mind he didnt get aggresive he stayed i went onto have a daughter but then he cheated on me when she was small and left me oh and she was a accident because i was in the small percentage where contraception didnt work as it should
oh and no he isnt interested now he would rather think about himself

The man should completley have a say, just because the babys in her womb doesn't mean it's just hers, he created it with her.

So in your eyes it is 50/50.


I guess that seems fair.

This is not the scenario

The scenario is that she wants to keep the child and He wants her to have an abortion, so should he have the right by law to force her to have an abortion even if it is against her against her will.

I assume the way it would work, would be on discovering she was pregnant he would get an emergency order from the court, to arrest the woman, to prevent her leaving the country and then on the order of the court she would be made by force to have an abortion, since he has no desire to be a father. To keep things in line with the way IVF works today, where the father can withdraw consent, there would be no appeal allowed by the woman.

After all, so the argument goes, why should the woman alone determine if the man will have by law a long term financial commitment.

Returning to the real world, I do wonder how many terminations have been done, because the man insisted.

No Its her body her choice and anyway i'm pro-abortion, if you don't want a baby it your choice if you want a abortion have a abortion if you don't want one don't have one.

It should be a joint descision,but the whole thing is wrong.

"The scenario is that she wants to keep the child and He wants her to have an abortion, so should he have the right by law to force her to have an abortion"

???!!!
lol...why would this even be open for debate? Obviously he can't nor does he have any such right. Are you arguing the he ought to have the final choice Sticks?

But already in IVF he can pull the plug

I am putting the "what if" scenario of what if he also had the final say in natural pregnancies?

Also the pro-choice lobby always use the "Women's body" argument and therefore I am turning this around as the man could say part of his body went to make the child so in these days of equality he should be able to decide.

I suspect that some terminations have been done because some woman have been bullied into it by men who did not want their partner to come to term.


On personal level if I had a wife/ girlfriend - and had got her pregnant, I would wanting her to keep the child

No the your confusing the 2 examples... they aren't comparable since in your IVF example no egg has yet been fertilised. Him having the right to withdraw consent of the IVF fertilisation doesn't logically lead to him therefore having the right to choose whether she , once impregnated via IVF or otherwise, has the right to decide on the termination. You see the difference is during conception the man gave his consent ( obviously) but in your IVF example he clearly hasn't.

"Also the pro-choice lobby always use the "Women's body" argument and therefore I am turning this around as the man could say part of his body"

Again not applicable since the "body" referred to here isn't simply the genetic information but the actual human who has to go through the delivery of the baby. It's her body... she has the choice. The argument that it's part of his body too therefore he should have the choice doesn't cut it.

"I suspect that some terminations have been done because some woman have been bullied into it by men who did not want their partner to come to term." Very likely but that isn't argument enough to deny the majority of women their right to choose.

In my eyes that's just like saying 'oh, i don't want my two-year old anymore i think i'll have him killed'

In my view that viewpoint is no different to that of a cold blooded murderer!