Gyno-centric Reproductive rights

The Corinthian · 06-02-2009 04:25PM #1

The single mother or six who recently gave birth to octuplets, for a grand total of 14 children, raises some interesting ethical questions about the rights and interests of those involved in reproduction.

It's pretty much accepted that men have pretty much no rights whatsoever, however one needs to ask whether the rights of children are taken any more seriously. After all, while this is a more extreme case, the principle is that she chose to have a such a large family, that - medical dangers aside - she may not be able to afford, which would not be in the best interests of the children involved.

Similarly a single woman, with a drug or alcohol problem, may choose to keep a child, with no financial means of support - even though most would have to concede that adoption would almost certainly be in the best interests of the child.

Of course, the other side of the coin is that allowing the state to control our reproductive or parental rights could easily be abused or otherwise get out of control.

However, it does beg the question as to whether the emphasis on parental/reproductive rights is too centred upon the mother, to the detriment of everyone else.

madser · 06-02-2009 08:02PM

The use of such an extreme case does little to further your argument about mens rights or the lack there of, people wanting to push there own agenda alway use extreme cases to do so, as for women chosing to keep babies that they cannot afford to have the other side of the coin is that men have the right to leave these women and get on with there lives without a backward glance........wherever there is a single mother there is a father whose gone off and got on with.

The Corinthian · 06-02-2009 08:17PM

madser wrote: »

The use of such an extreme case does little to further your argument about mens rights or the lack there of, people wanting to push there own agenda alway use extreme cases to do so

Actually, I was really only referring to men's rights in passing, most of my opening post referred to the rights or best interests of the children. Additionally I conceded that this is an extreme case and also conceded that it's a complex issue as giving, for example, the State the final say in these situations could simply shift abuse of this power from one person to another.

as for women chosing to keep babies that they cannot afford to have the other side of the coin is that men have the right to leave these women and get on with there lives without a backward glance........wherever there is a single mother there is a father whose gone off and got on with.

Given the laws regarding child support in the West, especially in the US, I find it a little bizarre that you would think that men can "get on with there lives without a backward glance".

Nonetheless, this is not really meant to be a thread on men's rights.

Gyno-centric Reproductive rights

Comments