Paternity - rights vs. responsibilites

uberwolf

I was reading about the case Natalie Evans brought to the appeal courts in Britain following upon their (Lorraine Hadley was involved in the original case as well) unsucessfull bid in the high court to allow them use their fertilised embryo, a tautology I know, against their formers partners wishes.

This notion was reminiscent of a strand of argument that had occured several times in the various abortion debates that routinely occur on Boards. I have no wish to stage another abortion debate per se - more to discuss the rights of both parents in any decision that has to be made. To avoid moralising or high horses any decision that both parents agree to should be taken as a 'good' one.

The interesting part for me is what should happen if there is disagreement between the partners. I read last week about this woman who'd had three abortions all by the same man (in terms of paternity) - the first they had agreed to - so all clear for our purposes, but the second two occured within their marriage and she unilaterally decided to have abortions and not tell her husband because she feared he would pressure her into going full term and starting a family - thus hampering her career.

While I can't understand that lack of communication in an otherwise healthy relationship - I certainly can't understand how a woman feels she has the right to terminate a child without consent from the father.

In rape cases, incest, etc, some kind of proviso like expecting rights due to something which occured as a consequnce of an illegal act could be agreed upon.

In the case I mentioned the judge(s) decided that the man should not have a child "forced" upon him - in so far as before the embryo was implanted he had the right to withdraw consent as there was no way he could legally not be obliged to pay maintenance for the resulting child.

My question/quandry is this - how is it a woman can keep or abort her child at will, but the father has no say and and must either accept the removal of his right to parenthood or pay up as per the mothers wises. How can it be both ways?

If a man were raped by a woman and a preganancy resulted she could abort the child.


http://www.tltsolicitors.com/legal-update/Family-Newsletter/P4690.asp - comment

http://www.hardwickecivil.co.uk/resources/articles/04030101.htm

http://www.medneg.com/news/news.cfm?month=August&year=2002 - removal of legal liability

Zulu

Unfortunatly equal rights sail out the window on this one.
While women are equal to men in everyway, she is the one getting pregnant, so you my friend, as a man, have no right what-so-ever, to tell the woman what to do.

...I mean - you're only the father.

Batbat

under the law in some countries the woman is allowed legally murder her own child, this is the logic their society follows so is it any wonder the fathers equality is mishandled

uberwolf

Originally posted by Batbat
under the law in some countries the woman is allowed legally murder her own child, this is the logic their society follows so is it any wonder the fathers equality is mishandled

Is that a comment on abortion or is some cultural oddity that you're sheding light upon?

so is the moral of the story - screw for 5 mins, et screwed for 20 yrs?

Zulu

Originally posted by uberwolf
so is the moral of the story - screw for 5 mins, et screwed for 20 yrs?

It's more like she decides if you screw for 5 mins, and she decides if you get screwed for 20yrs.

Syth

My question/quandry is this - how is it a woman can keep or abort her child at will, but the father has no say and and must either accept the removal of his right to parenthood or pay up as per the mothers wises. How can it be both ways?

It's increadably unfair indeed. One problem used is the language. Women who are pro-abortion will say that it's their bodies and you can't force them to go through with the pregnancy. Unfortunatly once the baby comes out of their womb, suddenly it's not totally their responsibility, suddenly the father must shoulder his responsibility, despite the fact that before many said it was fully the woman's body.

They want it all.

Capt'n Midnight

Then there is the other anomoly - if you were to punch a woman entering an abortion centre in the stomach and she miscarried as a result you could be done for murder.

Whatever about other ethical issues the development of embryo & womb transplants (perhaps dead organ doners) raises interesting possibilities a rapist could be made complete the pregnancy..

All boils back to needing a license to have a dog , but anyone can have a child.

simu

Then there is the other anomoly - if you were to punch a woman entering an abortion centre in the stomach and she miscarried as a result you could be done for murder.

Are you sure about this? Got any links?

Back to paternity, what I find strange is that you never hear of men demanding that a male contraceptive pill be created that would allow them to be certain of not impregnating any woman they have sex with (or at least, more certain - no contraceptive is 100% secure).

In my experience, many men would rather leave the contraception worries to the woman. Parents and teachers tend not to teach boys about contraception as much as they teach girls too, I've noticed.

Typedef

The fact is, despite all the diatribe about equality in society.

As a white male you are wrong by default. Once you come to terms with being a hate figure, it's all good.

For example.

White men can't dance.
White men have small penises.
Black men are better lovers, but are just as smart as white men.
Similarly women 'understand' relationships, while men are bungling.
Women are just as smart/capable as men, while men can't cook, smell, drink too much, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Men in general have no say over whether or not a foetus gets aborted.
Men are expected to pay maintenance for a foetus he has 'no legal right' to oppose or grant life to, in equality to a woman.
As a man, you are far less likely to be awarded in court and thus are far less entitled to custody rights to your children.
All men are violent.
Men on television, especially white men, are generally depicted as being ordinary looking/out of shape, whilst women are depicted as super models.

Not only that, but, these days guys have these self images so firmly drummed into them, that, these commonly held, sexist, racists images are accepted as normal. It's a fact of life.

Be sure, that if you step outside of the box and question, the validity of abortion, you will be labelled as that ignorant/impotent/fat/stupid/white/male/rapist/who_can't_get_laid, that is what society teaches us about ourselves as men and unless you extoll the McMedia sanctioned politically correct (read self effacing) ideology , you are labelled as one of 'those' oppressors.

Essentially what is boils down to is, consumerist media, is the new religion and dissenters are heretics, and while church and state may be seperate, McMedia and State are not, hence laws come to reflect the new gospel.

Praise Jesus!

simu

Originally posted by Typedef
White men can't dance.
White men have small penises.
Black men are better lovers, but are just as smart as white men.
Similarly women 'understand' relationships, while men are bungling.
Women are just as smart/capable as men, while men can't cook, smell, drink too much, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Men in general have no say over whether or not a foetus gets aborted.
Men are expected to pay maintenance for a foetus he has 'no legal right' to oppose or grant life to, in equality to a woman.
As a man, you are far less likely to be awarded in court and thus are far less entitled to custody rights to your children.
All men are violent.
Men on television, especially white men, are generally depicted as being ordinary looking/out of shape, whilst women are depicted as super models.

Avoid TV and "lifestyle" articles in newspapers. Life isn't that bad for a white male in Ireland, unless you come from a disadvantaged background, in which case social exclusion and bad policy are far greater culprits than sexism.

As for the whole area of family law, women do tend to fare better in custody cases and so on but it also reflects the fact that mothers more than fathers tend to get saddled with the less glamorous aspects of parenthood (when will we see a nappy ad with a man caressing a child's bottom?:D). I don't think this is a good thing for women, though, and it's also true that there are very devoted fathers out there who do suffer at the hands of the courts. This area needs reform but we also need some sort of debate about what it means to become a parent, what rights and responsibilities are involved - I find it very strange that people are willing to leave as huge a decision as having a child to random factors like a burst condom etc.

As for men having no rights over a foetus in the womb - that's never going to change unless an artificial womb is invented (which would be very handy!) or society changes into one in which women's freedom of movement is severely curtailed (No "holidays" to England whilst pregnant, pregnancy tests at the airport - etc).

Syth

You fequently hear people saying that currently women are discriminated, and that men oppressed women for a long tim up unti recently, but I think that point of view is misguided. I don't think it was the men that oppressed the women (or the men that are opressing the women), I think it's the rich oppressing the poor.

For example people think that if you were a woman in 1950s Ireland you weren't going to get any sort of education except how to cook dinner (barefoot). Not always. My Granny is a doctor. She is in her 70s. She went to college in UCD to study medicine in about 1947. She had her 50 year reuninion a few years ago. In other words, she was able to study medicine in 1950s Catholic Ireland. Why? Her father was a judge. ie rich. Her only other sibling, her sister is also a doctor. However I'm pretty sure that if you were male and had a innner city accent, you wouldn't be able to go to college at the time. So back then it wasn't important what you had between your legs, just what you had in your wallet, and what class you belonged to.

I don't think this has a lot to do with paternal rights and responsibilities, it just seems to be developing into a general sexism thread.

uberwolf

Originally posted by simu

As for men having no rights over a foetus in the womb - that's never going to change

That's just the crux of it though - your body your decision. But having made that decision the male has then rights removed from him or responsibilities foisted upon him.

If he objects to the abortion - on moral grounds or simply that he wishes to be allowed become a father of a child which many would argue he already 'has' (foetus) - then he gets no say, woman doesn't want it woman does as she wishes.

If he wants her to abort - and she refuses, he has to pay out. I find this a little more acceptable because forcing an abortion on someone is not right. But it's kind of like a contract the male enters into on conception that the woman can tear up or hold him to as long as she desires. Why should the male have less flexibility on the issue.

And what if a one night stand occurs, resulting baby, mother wants to give it up for adoption. Does the father have a legal right to a first refusal (crude sporting terminology)?