Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Risk to life, including suicide?

Options
24567…15

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,504 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #33
    GarIT
    Registered Users Posts: 8,671 ✭✭✭GarIT


    awec wrote: »

    If the mother doesn't want the child and the father does, and the mother dies whilst giving birth, should the father be charged with anything for forcing her to go through with it (extrapolating your logic here) ?

    You cannot practically legislate for fathers rights in abortion. If the mother doesn't want it then ultimately it's her body and it's her who will be taking the risks.

    Fathers shouldn't be able to have a "legal abortion" either. IMO that's total nonsense. Possibly one of the most ridiculous things I've heard on this subject. Get a girl pregnant and then run off? No chance should there be laws put in place to facilitate that. Should a mother be able to do the same after giving birth?

    I already said that the father shouldn't have any say if there is a medical need for an abortion.

    Yes the mother should equally be able to give up her rights to the child, its like adoption with only only one side giving up the child then the other side can keep it.


  • Options
    #34
    GarIT
    Registered Users Posts: 8,671 ✭✭✭GarIT


    awec wrote: »
    Why? :confused:

    If abortion is legal then it's not murder. These people can see it however they want, in the eyes of the law it won't be murder and the eyes of the law is what matters.

    That if abortion is legal. What I'm saying is abortion should only be legal in a case where both parents want it, abortion shouldn't be legal where one parent wants the child.


  • Options
    #35
    LeeHoffmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,770 ✭✭✭LeeHoffmann


    I don´t think awec was talking about ´medical need´ as you see it. Doctors can´t foresee all circumstances. It´s can happen that an apparently healthy mother can die or be seriously physically injured during childbirth. Many women suffer post partum depression. This can lead to suicide (I know somebody who committed suicide after suffering for years with post partum depression).

    You really see no moral problem with a father having the power to force a mother to take on all the risks and disadvantages of pregnancy and childbirth?
    I´m glad that your opinion here is in the tiny minority and so will never be enforced in law.


  • Options
    #36
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,504 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Piliger
    Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    GarIT wrote: »
    Many people still see abortion as murder and for that reason I think abortion should only ever be ok if both parents agree to it.

    While what you say, and the thinking behind it, may be logical and fair .. what you miss is the difference between what may be right and wrong, and what the law can actually deal with.

    Clearly there is something unfair about a woman having an abortion when the father wants the child, and vice versa. However the Law cannot always be expected to be able to deal with every aspect of life. And in this case it cannot be expected to deal with the simple biological fact that it is the woman's body, not the mans.

    It is unacceptable that a woman could be forced to carry a baby she does not want, for 9 months. and deliver it, whatever we as fathers may want.

    It is also unacceptable that a woman be forced to abort a child because the father does not want it.

    We as men do need to fight unfairness and injustice wherever we possibly can - but there are some situations where we just have to accept the physical world.


  • Options
    #38
    Stereomaniac
    Registered Users Posts: 6,166 ✭✭✭Stereomaniac


    I agree with you on that. I got a girl pregnant 3 years ago (we were in a relationship). She decided not to keep it. That was heartbreaking for me, as I would have chosen to have the child. However, far be it from me to insert my opinion forcefully into things when she knew what she had to do for herself. I supported her all the way through it, and I did not agonise over it too much initially. In these situations, the rights of the mother are bigger than anything else. Far be it from me to say, "Well, I think that's not what you should do, so don't do it" Unfortunately however, not all cases are like my situation and you have people trying to contact each other after one night stands and men trying their best to evade women. That problem with men has been, and will go on years.


  • Options
    #39
    Maguined
    Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    awec wrote: »
    Fathers shouldn't be able to have a "legal abortion" either. IMO that's total nonsense. Possibly one of the most ridiculous things I've heard on this subject. Get a girl pregnant and then run off? No chance should there be laws put in place to facilitate that. Should a mother be able to do the same after giving birth?

    Well actually a mother can. If a woman learns she is pregnant she has no legal obligation to inform the father. Then after giving birth she can give the child up for adoption without informing the father as she does not need to get his consent as he is not awarded guardianship unless she wants to tell him.

    So yes legally a mother is able to.


  • Options
    #40
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,504 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #41
    Piliger
    Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Stereomaniac wrote: »
    I agree with you on that. I got a girl pregnant 3 years ago (we were in a relationship). She decided not to keep it. That was heartbreaking for me, as I would have chosen to have the child. However, far be it from me to insert my opinion forcefully into things when she knew what she had to do for herself. I supported her all the way through it, and I did not agonise over it too much initially. In these situations, the rights of the mother are bigger than anything else. Far be it from me to say, "Well, I think that's not what you should do, so don't do it" Unfortunately however, not all cases are like my situation and you have people trying to contact each other after one night stands and men trying their best to evade women. That problem with men has been, and will go on years.

    I sympathise enormously. Your feelings about this are grossly under estimated by society, sadly.

    I believe you were entitled to your input, and it seems that you did so in a caring and responsible way. I commend you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Gauss
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 550 ✭✭✭Gauss


    LeeHoffmann wrote: »
    I don´t think awec was talking about ´medical need´ as you see it. Doctors can´t foresee all circumstances. It´s can happen that an apparently healthy mother can die or be seriously physically injured during childbirth. Many women suffer post partum depression. This can lead to suicide (I know somebody who committed suicide after suffering for years with post partum depression).

    You really see no moral problem with a father having the power to force a mother to take on all the risks and disadvantages of pregnancy and childbirth?
    I´m glad that your opinion here is in the tiny minority and so will never be enforced in law.

    Well at the moment the government forces women to take on the risks of pregnancy even if she doesn't want the baby.


  • Options
    #43
    Maguined
    Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    awec wrote: »
    That's different.

    If a mother and father have a child, can the mother one day decide to legally dissolve her responsibilities to the child and leave it all on the father? I say no.

    How is it different? The mother has the choice of pursuing that option while the father does not.


  • Options
    #44
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    LeeHoffmann wrote: »
    I´ll post the same here as in the other thread...
    May as well do the same:

    'Without any need to mention abortion or risks to life etc.. as it stands a woman can place her child up for adoption when it is born, relieving her of her rights over and responsibilities to that child. I struggle to see a reasonable justification for why women should be able to do this legally but men shouldn't.'


  • Options
    #45
    LeeHoffmann
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,770 ✭✭✭LeeHoffmann


    Well at the moment the government forces women to take on the risks of pregnancy even if she doesn't want the baby.
    Yes and no. I think a significant part of the reason Ireland/Irish politicians can afford to dodge the issue of abortion is because there´s a very conveniently placed country nearby in which abortion is legal. The government doesn´t stop women from obtaining abortions (elsewhere) - it just doesn´t provide that option here.

    Also, the government doesn´t have a personal interest in an individual pregnancy. The laws at least aim at the common good and are objective and universally binding. That´s very different from placing total control in the hands of one person - a person who would risk absolutely nothing himself, but could force another person against her will into risking her physical and mental health for his own gain. It doesn´t seem right Ted


  • Options
    #46
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,504 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #47
    Piliger
    Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    strobe wrote: »
    May as well do the same:

    'Without any need to mention abortion or risks to life etc.. as it stands a woman can place her child up for adoption when it is born, relieving her of her rights over and responsibilities to that child. I struggle to see a reasonable justification for why women should be able to do this legally but men shouldn't.'

    The whole truth is not as you portray it though, is it. If the mother acts to put the child up for adoption, the father, if known and if he knows of the action, can block the adoption and apply for custody. even if the adoption goes through, the father can apply to have it reversed if he can show he was never informed of the adoption.


  • Options
    #48
    jaffacakesyum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭jaffacakesyum


    Piliger wrote: »
    The whole truth is not as you portray it though, is it. If the mother acts to put the child up for adoption, the father, if known and if he knows of the action, can block the adoption and apply for custody. even if the adoption goes through, the father can apply to have it reversed if he can show he was never informed of the adoption.

    Good point.

    There really should be a legal obligation for the mother to inform the father of her pregnancy and that it is his.

    Secondly, there really should be a legal obligation for both parties to agree to adoption. However, in practice, I assume that if a mother doesn't want the child and wants to give the baby up for adoption, but the father doesn't, than why wouldn't she give custody over to the father instead of going through the process of adoption? :confused: Unless, in cases of rape, or in cases where the father is abusive and the baby would be better off being put up for adoption. In which case this would need to be brought to court.

    The issue with both parties having to sign agreement to put the baby up for adoption is in the case of estranged fathers where the man has left and is no longer around. It would be unfair to refuse a mother the adoption process just because the father has done a runner.


  • Options
    #49
    MaxWig
    Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭MaxWig


    jaffacakesyum wrote: »
    Good point.

    There really should be a legal obligation for the mother to inform the father of her pregnancy and that it is his.

    Secondly, there really should be a legal obligation for both parties to agree to adoption. However, in practice, I assume that if a mother doesn't want the child and wants to give the baby up for adoption, but the father doesn't, than why wouldn't she give custody over to the father instead of going through the process of adoption? :confused: Unless, in cases of rape, or in cases where the father is abusive and the baby would be better off being put up for adoption. In which case this would need to be brought to court.

    The issue with both parties having to sign agreement to put the baby up for adoption is in the case of estranged fathers where the man has left and is no longer around. It would be unfair to refuse a mother the adoption process just because the father has done a runner.


    That is to assume that estranged fathers have done 'runners'. That is to badly misunderstand the truth of family courts today


  • Options
    #50
    jaffacakesyum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭jaffacakesyum


    MaxWig wrote: »
    That is to assume that estranged fathers have done 'runners'. That is to badly misunderstand the truth of family courts today

    Exactly. How would it be proven? In the majority of cases, the mother would have no reason to lie and it is probably true that the father ran off and wanted nothing to do with the pregnancy. In which case, how is it fair to refuse the mother to give up the child for adoption over a signature she simply can't get. In the, presumably, less common cases of a mother wanting to give birth, put the baby up for adoption and not have the child in custody of the father, how would it be proven that the father is indeed estranged. Give a name/address for the agency to track down? Mother could be lying.

    In the worst case scenario where that happens though, I'd imagine it's easy enough for the father to track down the baby through details of the mother? That is, if the father is told. Which leads me back to my original point that the mother should have legal obligation to inform the father.


  • Options
    #51
    Honey-ec
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,844 ✭✭✭Honey-ec


    I'd love to know the figures on how many children are actually being given up for adoption at birth in Ireland in recent years. I would imagine it's fairly negligible, making calls for a change in legislation in this area a bit of a pointless exercise, imo.

    I'm talking specifically about the last few posts there, btw.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    jaffacakesyum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭jaffacakesyum


    Honey-ec wrote: »
    I'd love to know the figures on how many children are actually being given up for adoption at birth in Ireland in recent years. I would imagine it's fairly negligible, making calls for a change in legislation in this area a bit of a pointless exercise, imo.

    I'm talking specifically about the last few posts there, btw.

    Oh, I agree the figures are probably quite low.

    The only call for legislation I would see as important would be the obligation for all women who get pregnant to tell the father of the child.

    Also for the record, I am hugely against the idea that a man should be allowed force a mother to continue with a pregnancy, which some poster (?posters) have suggested.


  • Options
    #53
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    jaffacakesyum wrote: »
    The only call for legislation I would see as important would be the obligation for all women who get pregnant to tell the father of the child.
    As a principle of common decency and generally doing the right thing, this obligation is unquestionable. As a legal requirement, I think it is unworkable unfortunately. Who pays for the paternity testing if there's a dispute or the woman is unsure?


  • Options
    #54
    Agent Smith
    Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 21,502 Mod ✭✭✭✭Agent Smith


    jaffacakesyum wrote: »

    The only call for legislation I would see as important would be the obligation for all women who get pregnant to tell the father of the child.

    As a male, I'd like to see this,

    However it's almost completely impractical, say you meet a girl one night, have a one night stand, then 3 months they are ment to inform you they are pregnant. What if the woman enjoys one night stands, and say there's 5-6 men it could possiably be, what happens then? Tell all 6?


  • Options
    #55
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Piliger wrote: »
    The whole truth is not as you portray it though, is it. If the mother acts to put the child up for adoption, the father, if known and if he knows of the action, can block the adoption and apply for custody. even if the adoption goes through, the father can apply to have it reversed if he can show he was never informed of the adoption.

    I hope the wording there in bold isn't a suggestion that I'm attempting to be deliberately misleading, hmm?

    Anyways, after doing a bit of research it does appear that I may be a little out of date on my info and that the Adoption Act 2010 does provide for what you have mentioned above. Mea culpa.
    awec wrote: »
    Is your issue that men can't do this or that women can?

    Do you think therefore that men should be allowed to put the child up for adoption without the mothers consent, or do you think the mother shouldn't be allowed to do it without the fathers consent?

    As Pilinger suggested above, it appears I was wrong and that the Abortion Act 2010 (if I'm reading it right) provides for the state to seek out the identity of the father and to allow him to potentially block or overturn an adoption order.
    Macha wrote: »
    As a principle of common decency and generally doing the right thing, this obligation is unquestionable. As a legal requirement, I think it is unworkable unfortunately. Who pays for the paternity testing if there's a dispute or the woman is unsure?
    Agent Smith wrote: »
    As a male, I'd like to see this,

    However it's almost completely impractical, say you meet a girl one night, have a one night stand, then 3 months they are ment to inform you they are pregnant. What if the woman enjoys one night stands, and say there's 5-6 men it could possiably be, what happens then? Tell all 6?

    My possibly contentious solution would be for a national DNA database to be compiled and for paternity testing to be carried out on every child born in the state as standard. Would also have the effect of eliminating 'paternity fraud'.


  • Options
    #56
    Honey-ec
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,844 ✭✭✭Honey-ec


    strobe wrote: »
    My possibly contentious solution would be for a national DNA database to be compiled and for paternity testing to be carried out on every child born in the state as standard. Would also have the effect of eliminating 'paternity fraud'.

    The cost of setting up the database in the first place and then carrying out the ongoing testing of every child born in the state would be prohibitive. It will never happen.

    Plus, what about women who got pregnant while out of the country? Got pregnant by tourists/non-nationals? Such a database would only be as useful as the base (parents') data in it and in those cases the father's DNA wouldn't be on file in the first place.

    Plus, you would have massive opposition to a national DNA database from a huge section of the population on privacy and state interference principles. Jesus, people in this country go mad whenever just a national identity card is mooted...


  • Options
    #57
    banquo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    I love Boards.ie.


  • Options
    #58
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Honey-ec wrote: »

    The cost of setting up the database in the first place and then carrying out the ongoing testing of every child born in the state would be prohibitive. It will never happen.

    Plus, what about women who got pregnant while out of the country? Got pregnant by tourists/non-nationals? Such a database would only be as useful as the base (parents') data in it and in those cases the father's DNA wouldn't be on file in the first place.

    Plus, you would have massive opposition to a national DNA database from a huge section of the population on privacy and state interference principles. Jesus, people in this country go mad whenever just a national identity card is mooted...

    In 'the current economic climate' cost is an obstacle but it's a leap to claim it'll "never happen" due to financial constraints.

    No system for anything is catch all, tourists fathers would slip the net, but even in those cases it would mean things would be narrowed down significantly. It's a negligible issue. Births abroad wouldn't be much of an issue either, an Irish citizen born abroad would be added to the database if and when they take up residency in the state.

    Meh, some people are idiots. But thankfully not most of them are all of the time. The pro arguments for ID cards are fairly flimsy and plastic (ehh? See what I did there? Huh?... No..? Hey, screw you, I'm not here to entertain you people. :pac:) the arguments pro a DNA database are very tangible and demonstrable. The majority could be brought on board.

    It's an idea for the future, one that's benefits out way it's cost significantly imo.


  • Options
    #59
    Honey-ec
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,844 ✭✭✭Honey-ec


    strobe wrote: »
    In 'the current economic climate' cost is an obstacle but it's a leap to claim it'll "never happen" due to financial constraints.

    I don't think it'll never happen merely due to financial constraints, I think it'll never happen due to a host of reasons, financial constraints being just one. I don't think there is any political or public appetite worth speaking of for such a database.
    strobe wrote: »
    Births abroad wouldn't be much of an issue, an Irish citizen born abroad would be added to the database if and when they take up residency in the state.

    I didn't mean births abroad, I meant pregancies that occurred abroad but where the children were born here.

    Look, I can agree with you that, on paper, a national DNA database seems like a bit of a no-brainer. But I can guarantee you that it will not happen in our lifetimes, for a myriad of reasons - cost, impracticality, ethical issues etc. being but a few of them.


  • Options
    #60
    Piliger
    Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    strobe wrote: »
    I hope the wording there in bold isn't a suggestion that I'm attempting to be deliberately misleading, hmm?

    No sweat !! my use of the word truth was misleading and not aimed at you, sorry. I should have used the word "story"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Piliger
    Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    strobe wrote: »
    My possibly contentious solution would be for a national DNA database to be compiled and for paternity testing to be carried out on every child born in the state as standard. Would also have the effect of eliminating 'paternity fraud'.
    Sledge hammer ... nut. :rolleyes:


Advertisement