Men's rights on Abortion?

Pejayzuz · 31-01-2018 11:58AM

Skedaddle wrote: »

My view of this is very firmly pro-choice.

Unless we're at a technological stage where pregnancy occurs in an artificial womb in a gestation centre, there's absolutely no way you can divorce someone's right to bodily integrity and control over her body from pregnancy.

What I find with all of these arguments is that they get to incredible levels of abstraction, moralising and theorising. The reality is that pregnancy and childbirth is far messier as it's a complex biological process and it doesn't always work particularly well and there are all sorts of risk and pragmatic issues to consider.

A chunk of Irish society and a lot of right-wing catholics and other christians have jumped on this notion about life starting at conception. However, when you look at it in terms of reality you're looking at life beyond a particular stage vs what is just potential life that could just fail to flourish anyway and end in miscarriage.

I think the Irish position at present is ludicrous, dogmatic and totally impractical and completely out of line with all of our European neighbours, very few of whom actually take a particularly liberal view of it either. The majority of EU countries have limits of 12 weeks (including France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg. Even the Netherlands has a gestational limit of 13 weeks. The UK is actually unusual with the 24-week limit.

I think moving Ireland to what is a fairly conservative but normal position of having abortion available up to 12-weeks is pretty sane and reasonable. Oddly, despite all the ultra-conservative points of view in the USA, the majority of states seem to be a lot more open to late term abortions than European countries are. So, perhaps we would be better off looking at how our European neighbours handle these issues than engaging in the extremities of the US debates which are just utterly toxic and divisive.

I think however, when it comes to abortion choices - it's up to the woman. You're getting back into magdalene laundries and crazy situations if you're forcing people to carry a pregnancy through. I mean, what are you proposing? Some kind of authoritarian far-right state that locks women up for moral reasons? We've been down that particularly horrific road in the past and it's one I'd never like Ireland to travel on again!

That is by far the most reasonable, sane, concise way that it could be put, nice one.

Calhoun · 31-01-2018 12:01PM

Pejayzuz wrote: »

Tough, kids who are born and alive need care, this situation is never going to be entirely "fair" because women get pregnant and not men, it may not be fair, but it's nature and it's nature we can't avoid just yet, we don't have the tech for men to get pregnant, but we do have the tech to conduct an abortion, so without variation it's always going to be their body and the decision what to do with their body is their choice, no one's forcing vasectomy on you so don't try force pregnancy on them, you just have to accept that, the alternative is you controlling a woman's body, which if you think is an OK thing to do, then you're seriously disturbed.
AFTER the child is born is an entirely different situation, as there's then a living child who needs financial care at the very least, which a single mother may not be able to provide alone, also there's the strong likelihood of instances of a man getting several women pregnant with several children and just legally abandoning the responsibility of living children with the stroke of a pen, if that's your idea of fairness and equality then you're sick.

What if the man doesn't want the woman to go ahead and would like them to abort? but the woman wants to have the child.

I don't see how its sick to ask these questions when we are going to legislate for a way out of unwanted pregnancy. If you cannot debate and tease these arguments out your exactly whats wrong with campaign on both sides. Also are you a pro-choice shill who joined up just to battle against the patriarchy?

Seemingly the only way a man can protect themselves is by being careful in the first instance but then breaking the law if they dont want to contribute to an unwanted child.

MayoSalmon · 31-01-2018 12:08PM

If women’s partial responsibility for pregnancy does not obligate them to support a fetus, then men’s partial responsibility for pregnancy does not obligate them to support a resulting child.

Really as simple as that and pro-choicers can't have it both ways

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 12:09PM

Calhoun wrote: »

What if the man doesn't want the woman to go ahead and would like them to abort? but the woman wants to have the child.

I don't see how its sick to ask these questions when we are going to legislate for a way out of unwanted pregnancy. If you cannot debate and tease these arguments out your exactly whats wrong with campaign on both sides. Also are you a pro-choice shill who joined up just to battle against the patriarchy?

Seemingly the only way a man can protect themselves is by being careful in the first instance but then breaking the law if they dont want to contribute to an unwanted child.

In principle the idea that a man can waive his parental rights and obligations, seems like a fine idea. I'm just not sure how it works in practice. As when the child is born (and old enough) it also has a right to know where it came from. practically speaking the tax payer will be picking up the financial slack, through the provision of creche facilities etc.

Pat Mustard · 31-01-2018 12:10PM

Mod:

Pemay, you had been given leeway in a previous on-thread mod warning. You have not paid attention to that warning.

The red card that you now receive is a rolled up infraction for your behaviour in this thread, which includes condescending and patronizing remarks and trolling. If you continue to post like this, you will receive a ban.

Please do not post in this thread again.

ancapailldorcha · 31-01-2018 12:10PM

MayoSalmon wrote: »

If women’s partial responsibility for pregnancy does not obligate them to support a fetus, then men’s partial responsibility for pregnancy does not obligate them to support a resulting child.

Really as simple as that and pro-choicers can't have it both ways

Meaningless soundbytes.

There's no choice in who carries the baby. It's always the mother. It's her body so it has to be her choice. Both parties are responsible for getting her pregnant in the first case. However, once the child is born both parents have an obligation to support it. There's no reason why it should just be the mother as with the pregnancy. Your claim otherwise is a simple false equivalency.

Mr.H · 31-01-2018 12:16PM

baylah17 wrote:

The right of a woman to control and regulate her own body, the right NOT to be compelled to carry and unwanted fetus , the right to choose what contraception if any to use.

Except abortion is not contraception. If you don't want a child and don't use protection you are immature and have absolutely no right to have a kid or an opinion. People that fall into that category need to grow up.

Not wanting a kid means you should use protection simple as that.

Calhoun · 31-01-2018 12:16PM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

In principle the idea that a man can waive his parental rights and obligations, seems like a fine idea. I'm just not sure how it works in practice. As when the child is born (and old enough) it also has a right to know where it came from. practically speaking the tax payer will be picking up the financial slack, through the provision of creche facilities etc.

Would you say the same if it was an anonymous sperm donor ?

As for the tax side of it , if one person is deciding to go ahead without support then should they not carry that burden ?

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 12:22PM

Calhoun wrote: »

Would you say the same if it was an anonymous sperm donor ?

As for.thr tax side of it , if one person is deciding to go ahead without support then should they not carry that burden ?

It's not me saying it, I believe there are laws that give people the legal right to find out about their biological parents.

Again a fine idea in principle but that's not how our society works, we don't place all the financial burden for their choices on people who don't work and choose to stay home with their kids, we don't place all of the financial burden for their choices on people who smoke and subsequently get cancer, I could go on. If we lived in a different society it could be a valid point, but this is the society we live in.

MayoSalmon · 31-01-2018 12:24PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Meaningless soundbytes.

There's no choice in who carries the baby. It's always the mother. It's her body so it has to be her choice. Both parties are responsible for getting her pregnant in the first case. However, once the child is born both parents have an obligation to support it. There's no reason why it should just be the mother as with the pregnancy. Your claim otherwise is a simple false equivalency.

Men should be given the opportunity to decide whether or not to accept the rights and responsibilities of fatherhood the same way women are.

Just because the woman carries the child should not supercede this.

Women have control of their lives after an unplanned conception but men are routinely forced to give up control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice.

Calhoun · 31-01-2018 12:26PM

Also don't take me wrong here I am actually really for father's paying for their own kids and owning up to their personal responsibility.

I just cannot understand the society we are in which basically treats father's as second class citizens when it comes to children's rights. There was a poster on Irish reddit before Christmas a guy who's wife cheated on him with his best mate , wasn't able to have his kids over at Christmas because he had to pay off the mortgage for the house his ex was living in, on top of maintenance fees and she then took him to court to say how accomodation was sub standard.

We as a society say to men open your wallet then **** right off. The only way you can protect yourself is by being sly and hiding your money.

ancapailldorcha · 31-01-2018 12:26PM

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Men should be given the opportunity to decide whether or not to accept the rights and responsibilities of fatherhood the same way why women are.

They are. It's called contraception.

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Just because the woman carries the child should not supercede this.

Yes, it should.

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Women have control of their lives after an unplanned conception but men are routinely forced to give up control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice.

Concurrently, men don't have to worry about the impact of a pregnancy on their careers and are free to leave the mother holding the bag as it were.

eviltwin · 31-01-2018 12:29PM

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

I'm only quoting this so I can ask you a question.

Should you fall pregnant in a few years and decide you want to keep the baby, but the father says he doesn't want it. What will you do? Will you still go ahead with the pregnancy? If so, will you chase the man down for maintenance? What about trying to get him to see the child? Will you give his name and details to the child when he/she is older?

This is an open question to any woman on this thread btw.

My husband and I have discussed this. If I were unlucky enough to get pregnant then i would have an abortion. He's in agreement with that. If he changed his mind I'd still have the abortion. If he felt that he couldn't stay with me that's his choice to make. I'd still expect maintenance for our two children and expect he continued to be part of their life.

littlevillage · 31-01-2018 12:32PM

This thread has sadly (but inevitably) gone a good bit off topic.

The question originally posed was do/should fathers have any rights when it comes to abortion?

My own opinion is that if the Abortion referendum is carried fathers will have absolutely zero input and will actually be required to pony up the cash should the woman request an Abortion, whether they agree with it or not or whether they are in a relationship with the mother or not....should the mother even deem them worthy of informing. This is Ireland, the land of the Matriarchs.

I don't aggree with this and would like some kind of input from the father, supported in law.... maybe not an outright veto in a case where there is a disagreement....but certainly something more than a casual observer.

In 99.9% cases things will be aggreed amoung the couple themselves, and worked out to everyones satisfaction, but you just know there will be "hard cases" where the law will be required.

I would support a mandatory consultation with the father in all cases where the father would be the automatic gaurdian of the unborn child...eg. married or in a long term relationship....and 'where possible' in more casual arrangements.

this is currently the law with regard to children seeking Social Welfare support, so it seems sensible to me.

I would support a full psychological wellness assessment of the mother where she requested an abortion against the wishes of the father (or indeed other members of her family). I am thinking here primarily of a mother who might suffer mood swings, depression, bipolar etc. and might be prone to making a rash out of character decision.

Malari · 31-01-2018 12:34PM

eviltwin wrote: »

My husband and I have discussed this. If I were unlucky enough to get pregnant then i would have an abortion. He's in agreement with that. If he changed his mind I'd still have the abortion. If he felt that he couldn't stay with me that's his choice to make. I'd still expect maintenance for our two children and expect he continued to be part of their life.

Virtually the same situation, except we don't have kids already. We've discussed it more than once. We are both in total agreement, although I understand actually being in that situation would be emotionally very difficult and different to stating what you would do in a hypothetical situation.

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 12:35PM

littlevillage wrote: »

My own opinion is that if the Abortion referendum is carried fathers will have absolutely zero input and will actually be required to pony up the cash should the woman request an Abortion....should the mother even deem them worthy of informing.

is the opinion that fathers will have to "pony up" based on anything?

Riskymove · 31-01-2018 12:38PM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

is the opinion that fathers will have to "pony up" based on anything?

its more likely that it will be free imo

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 12:39PM

littlevillage wrote: »

I don't aggree with this and would like some kind of input from the father, supported in law.... maybe not an outright veto in a case where there is a disagreement....but certainly something more than a casual observer.

actually on this, do you think this should apply in all situations, including ONS, or only when the mother and father are in a relationship?

nozzferrahhtoo · 31-01-2018 12:40PM

Mr.H wrote: »

If you don't want a child and don't use protection you are immature and have absolutely no right to have a kid or an opinion.

Except you are factually incorrect. They very much DO have a right to both of those things. You might not WANT them to have that right, but I trust you notice just how different that is to them not ACTUALLY having it, right?

However the moral high horsing aside, the fact is that when a woman presents with an unwanted pregnancy, we have no way to tell what contraception (if any) she actually used. Many people use multiple and STILL end up pregnant.

So judgmentally gazing into one's naval about it will bring us nowhere except backwards. The first question to ask oneself is whether we want to deal with the issue of unwanted pregnancies, or do we want to lord ourselves over pregnant women with "tut tut"ing that does nothing but massage our own ego? After all humans do love a bit of the old "Holier than thou" judgements at times.

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

It's not me saying it, I believe there are laws that give people the legal right to find out about their biological parents.

As I said to OEJ, I am myself ignorant of that specific law. So I was hoping someone in the know could point me towards it. For example if a single mother knows who the father is, and refuses to tell the child, is there any legal way to compel her to reveal?

If not, then how true is it to claim that children have a "right" to know? Or are we using "rights" to mean actual rights AND basic etiquette combined?

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 12:47PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

As I said to OEJ, I am myself ignorant of that specific law. So I was hoping someone in the know could point me towards it. For example if a single mother knows who the father is, and refuses to tell the child, is there any legal way to compel her to reveal?

If not, then how true is it to claim that children have a "right" to know? Or are we using "rights" to mean actual rights AND basic etiquette combined?

TBH I don't know enough about it, I believe it was brought in in relation to adoption cases, as it was deemed that people have a right to access that information. It doesn't seem like a big leap to me that it could be applied to other children.

nozzferrahhtoo · 31-01-2018 12:49PM

I fear it might be a bigger leap than you suspect. But I will wait and hope one of the boards.ie legal eagles clarifies it

I know when I have hit the limits of my knowledge and expertise

gozunda · 31-01-2018 12:50PM

As it currently stands women's 'rights' to abortion in this country are no better than any man's 'rights' - making the current discussion interestingly hypothetical.

If anything there exists a proportion of men (and women) who uphold the current status quo - whose 'rights' and opinions are enshrined in current legislation which prevents national access to abortion and whose stance ultimatly triumphs all women's right to bodily autonomy and the reality of the consequences of a lack of rights to such services.

We have high profile cases where women have died as a result of some hospitals failure to allow for a women's right to life or choice as a result of the standing legislation. We have women who are forced abroad as a result of the present situation.

Hypothetical points of view and the reality of pregnancy don't make good companions imo. Voting against the right to choice simply imposes a notional morality potentially robbing both men and / or women of the option of making the best decision allowing that the woman must endure pregnancy and it's direct consequences.

I personally do not wish to see any more cases of woman dying or enduring unwanted or unviable pregnancies because of the status quo.

ForestFire · 31-01-2018 12:54PM

neonsofa wrote: »

In theory I'd support men being able to sign away their rights and obligations if they wished to end the pregnancy but the woman wished to continue. However OEJ has outlined the issues with that and it wouldn't be possible really. OeJ made great points about the child's rights once it's born so in practical terms it's not feasible I don't think but in principle I'd support the general concept if that makes sense.

In terms of men voting on the issue, rather than having a say in individual cases. They are citizens of the country and therefore have every right to have a say in its constitution. Men also play a part in creating the fetus, so abortion does have an impact on them. Also,every fetus has the potential to become either a woman or a man so I think it is only fair that both genders get to have a say in abortion legislation. It is imo ultimately a woman's right to decide though.

Sorry for the novel there :pac:

Agree with this above.

I think I need to start a separate thread on the option for mens to request abortion or no involvement up to 12 weeks only.

In this case no one is forcing a woman to do anything for 9 months and could still retain the choice to continue alone with baby.

Maybe take an example.

2 Collage students at the start of a steady relationship. She is taking the pill and he still uses protection to be extra safe.

One time, she has forgotten to take pill on time, or it does not work and the mans protection fails.

Now we have 2 young college students that have a pregnancy, that neither of them planned for or expected.

If the man, who took all precautions, now does not want to have a baby in his life, does not have the means to support child and may not even be at a stage to commit long term to the relationship with this girl.

Should he be forced into Fatherhood that he does not want for over 18 years +?
Should he have an option (legal) to say no to this baby for the rest of his life?

Some women here have said they enjoy and have a right to there sex lives and should retain the right to terminate if needed.

Do men have a right to a sex life, with options to protect themselves due to failures and accidents.

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 12:54PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I fear it might be a bigger leap than you suspect. But I will wait and hope one of the boards.ie legal eagles clarifies it I know when I have hit the limits of my knowledge and expertise

I'm open to correction on it!

ForestFire · 31-01-2018 12:59PM

gozunda wrote: »

Hypothetical points of view and the reality of pregnancy don't make good companions imo. Voting against the right to choice simply imposes a notional morality potentially robbing both men and / or women of the option of making the best decision allowing that the woman must endure pregnancy and it's direct consequences.

I personally do not wish to see any more cases of woman dying or enduring unwanted or unviable pregnancies because of the status quo.

I presume the whole point of this thread is that if the referendum is passed to give the Choices to women for abortion, will men have any active say in this?

I don't think anyone is going to vote against the referendum, if they believe in choice for both men and women, but only women will get choice. They are not going to block choice for women just because they don't get it.??

The rights for men is a further step on from the referendum and women rights??

Owlette · 31-01-2018 01:09PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Do we get a look in anywhere or can a man/boyfriend/fiance/husband legally challenge a woman's decision to abort?

I've put in a poll to see what you think

I'm glad u asked this question, I was always wondering if the man wanted to keep the baby what would happen. I would b 100% in favour of the male having as much equal rights as a woman. After all women are fighting for equality on everything. I think abortion is totally wrong in the 1st place. Imagine to b able abort a baby up.to 12 weeks old just doesn't bear thinking about. I'm a mother now of a baby a week old and everytime I look at my baby I say how could someone even think about getting rid. There is other options rather than abortion it's so wrong. Our lady said and I quote "as long as there is the killing of the child in the womb there will never be peace in the world". Next they will start getting rid of the older generation. And now pubs opening Good Friday. We have gone v liberal altogether..so yes the man father /boyfriend/partner etc should have as much right as the woman to keep the child.

seamus · 31-01-2018 01:10PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

As I said to OEJ, I am myself ignorant of that specific law. So I was hoping someone in the know could point me towards it. For example if a single mother knows who the father is, and refuses to tell the child, is there any legal way to compel her to reveal?

If not, then how true is it to claim that children have a "right" to know? Or are we using "rights" to mean actual rights AND basic etiquette combined?

I don't believe a general right to know who your parents are does actually exist.

There's a lot of discussion about it, and you'll often hear reference to it, especially in the context of abortion and assisted reproduction, but to the best of my knowledge there is no overriding constitutional or human right to know who ones parents are.

The laws governing adoption and assisted reproduction compel the agencies involved to maintain records and assert the childs' rights to access those records when they reach 18.

However, outside of the laws governing these specific circumstances, there are no laws which assert any right to know who one's parents are nor which can compel a private individual* to reveal that information.

It's tricky though. The number of circumstances under which such a right could be asserted are huge. For example, any child in Ireland has the right to live with their biological family. If a child chose to live with their father and the mother refused to reveal his identity, a court may be able to issue warrants to search her personal documentation and interview friends and family to try and discover it.
Theoretically she could be held in contempt for failing to reveal it, but then her own constitutional right to privacy comes into play.

So in the broadest sense, no such right exists even though some vested interests tend to assert that it does. But there are many specific circumstances under which a child could use legal mechanisms to force that information to be provided to them.

*Under certain circumstances the data protection act could be used to compel someone to reveal it, but this wouldn't apply to a mother and child

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 01:22PM

Owlette wrote: »

I'm glad u asked this question, I was always wondering if the man wanted to keep the baby what would happen. I would b 100% in favour of the male having as much equal rights as a woman. After all women are fighting for equality on everything. I think abortion is totally wrong in the 1st place. Imagine to b able abort a baby up.to 12 weeks old just doesn't bear thinking about. I'm a mother now of a baby a week old and everytime I look at my baby I say how could someone even think about getting rid. There is other options rather than abortion it's so wrong. Our lady said and I quote "as long as there is the killing of the child in the womb there will never be peace in the world". Next they will start getting rid of the older generation. And now pubs opening Good Friday. We have gone v liberal altogether..so yes the man father /boyfriend/partner etc should have as much right as the woman to keep the child.

If he can get her to agree to go through with the pregnancy of course he should have a right to keep the child.

as for the quote, I doubt "Our Lady" said that, if she did it's irrelevant, we (in theory anyway) live in a secular state and she may or may not be real!

nozzferrahhtoo · 31-01-2018 01:22PM

seamus wrote: »

to the best of my knowledge there is no overriding constitutional or human right to know who ones parents are.

So I am/was right in suspecting that "a childs right to a relationship with one of their biological parent" is entirely fabricated then? Outside of some very specific contexts (mostly adoption) that is?

seamus wrote: »

If a child chose to live with their father and the mother refused to reveal his identity, a court may be able to issue warrants to search her personal documentation and interview friends and family to try and discover it.

If that is, or has ever, been tested I would love to see the results of it.

Triceratops Ballet · 31-01-2018 01:25PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

So I am/was right in suspecting that "a childs right to a relationship with one of their biological parent" is entirely fabricated then? That was the main issue I was attempting to get under/at.

I said I believe it's the case, I also said I don't know enough about it. I'm not fabricating truths. I was making the point that if this right exists then it would complicate the possibility of men legally signing away their right to their children. If that's not how it read, I'll cop to that. That was the intention.

Men's rights on Abortion?

Comments