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

Abortion For Men

1…78101213…17

Comments

  • #272
    Bafucin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭Bafucin


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    This is true but if you switch the positions where the man wants to keep the baby and the woman doesn't, should the man not have a say if he's willing to allow the woman to forego all rights?

    I'm not overly familiar with pregnancy and its effects but is asking a woman to carry a child she doesn't want to term for the father's sake a lot to ask?

    In order to be THAT unfamiliar with pregnancy I think you might have to be inhuman as in alien.

    I am male and not overly familiar with pregnancy and child labor but I hear it's a bitch.

    No he should not have a say it is her body not mine.


  • #273
    jaymcg91
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭jaymcg91


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    I'm not overly familiar with pregnancy and its effects but is asking a woman to carry a child she doesn't want to term for the father's sake a lot to ask?

    Are you out of your mind? It's probably the most stressful thing a human body can go through. It's fraught with risk of complications - from initial impregnation to the process of actually giving birth (even in the age of modern medicine, there are serious risks). Not to mention the physical and psychological effects that can affect women after birth.

    Literally the most ridiculous post I've ever read on here (and there have been some contenders!).


  • #274
    FunLover18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Bafucin wrote: »
    In order to be THAT unfamiliar with pregnancy I think you might have to be inhuman as in alien.

    I am male and not overly familiar with pregnancy and child labor but I hear it's a bitch.

    No he should not have a say it is her body not mine.

    Her body, but the child is also his and not her's alone. I'm not a pro-lifer who thinks abortion is murder but I think when discussing a father's rights it's important to remember we are talking about a child and not just the woman's body.


  • #275
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    This is true but if you switch the positions where the man wants to keep the baby and the woman doesn't, should the man not have a say if he's willing to allow the woman to forego all rights?

    I'm not overly familiar with pregnancy and its effects but is asking a woman to carry a child she doesn't want to term for the father's sake a lot to ask?

    You're not overly familiar with pregnancy? your average schoolkid with basic biology would know what effects it has on a woman's body. It changes a woman's body forever.


  • #276
    FunLover18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    krudler wrote: »
    You're not overly familiar with pregnancy? your average schoolkid with basic biology would know what effects it has on a woman's body. It changes a woman's body forever.

    I get that now, thanks. But a child can also change a man's life forever.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    jaymcg91
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭jaymcg91


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    I get that now, thanks. But a child can also change a man's life forever.

    Not in the same way. At all. Not even in a remotely similar way.


  • #278
    takamichinoku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭takamichinoku


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    Her body, but the child is also his and not her's alone. I'm not a pro-lifer who thinks abortion is murder but I think when discussing a father's rights it's important to remember we are talking about a child and not just the woman's body.
    Sure it's only 9 months, like? :rolleyes:


  • #279
    FunLover18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    jaymcg91 wrote: »
    Literally the most ridiculous post I've ever read on here (and there have been some contenders!).

    Do I get any kind of reward?


  • #280
    jaymcg91
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭jaymcg91


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    Do I get any kind of reward?

    A lifetime supply of condoms to discourage any of the suggestions in your post ;)


  • #281
    FunLover18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Hang on one minute here!! Am I to understand that a father has no legal rights over his unborn child? Paternal rights only kick in after birth or something like that?

    Sorry lads but that sounds ridiculous!! How is that a man forcing a woman to have an abortion and denying her the right to be a mother is outrageous and yet a woman having an abortion and therefore denying the father the exact same right is perfectly acceptable? Now I'm not saying that they're the exact same scenario in reverse order, I now have a better grasp on the effects of pregnancy on the female body (thanks to all above) but the difference in acceptability between these circumstances cannot be that wide, can it?

    Also I would like to add that obviously in certain circumstance such as medical conditions, incest, rape (although I doubt a rapist would want to be father), or if the mother's suicidal it should ultimately be the mother's choice, that should go without saying but just in case people think I'm THAT thick.


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    jaymcg91
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭jaymcg91


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    Sorry lads but that sounds ridiculous!! How is that a man forcing a woman to have an abortion and denying her the right to be a mother is outrageous and yet a woman having an abortion and therefore denying the father the exact same right is perfectly acceptable? Now I'm not saying that they're the exact same scenario in reverse order, I now have a better grasp on the effects of pregnancy on the female body (thanks to all above) but the difference in acceptability between these circumstances cannot be that wide, can it?

    Her body, her choice. That sums it up in a nutshell. She has to carry it, give birth and raise the child (not in all cases, but statistically she's likely to be the primary caregiver).

    If men decide to not wear a condom in this day and age, then what happens. happens. I'm a guy, and it seems that many, many men don't want to take any personal responsibility for their behaviour.


  • #283
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    My issue is more towards the double standards of pro choice people using the same arguments as pro life people use when it comes to the men being involved.

    I have to agree. Of course the man shouldn't have any legal right to decide what a woman does with her body/pregnancy. The most he can do is express his wishes, but the decision is 100% hers regardless of what he wants.

    There has to be a flip side to this coin. If she wants to remain pregnant and raise the child then that is her choice. She has several others; MAP, abortion (current Irish law creates a problem here), or adoption. He has none, zero, zilch, zip unless she decides to take his wishes into consideration, but she isn't obliged to. Nor should she be. This is how it should be. This is how it has to be.

    Now of course all of the woman's options (with exception of MAP) are potentially traumatic, emotionally scarring and likely to cause financial disadvantage. But this could also be the case for the man, he may really want to have a baby but she has an abortion and he is emotionally distressed by this. Likewise the prospect of being responsible for a child that he really dosn't want, with a woman he dosn't want a life long relationship with could tip him over the edge into depression, possibly resulting in him becoming suicidal (considered even in Ireland as grounds for the woman to abort the pregnancy).

    I think in an ideal world the man should have the option to be absolved of responsibility when the woman insists on raising the child and he absolutely does not want it. I don't think there should be a very big window of oppurtunity for him to decide this. Being totally opposed to the idea is something that would be known pretty much straight away, not something that is dithered over. It would also need to be proved that he was not living with the woman (if he was in a serious relationship he should not have this option). I think this should only be available in the case of one night stands and brief, casual relationships. Also abortion would have to be on demand up to a point without the need to travel outside the country.

    I do find it hypocritical that people who are pro choice are using arguments such as 'should have kept it in his pants', 'his problem if he didn't use contraception', 'got into situation so must face responsibilities'. I would assume that anyone making these statements in the woman requesting abortion scenario was very much 'pro life'.

    I realise this is not something that would ever be able to be satisfactorily legislated for. It is not a simple solution to a complex problem in any way. There are scenarios such as how long he has to apply to be absolved. A time limit couldn't be fairly imposed because he may not find out she is pregnant until after the deadline.

    I cannot see a way that it can be applied satisfactorily and fairly in legislation, but I think the concept is right ethically.


  • #284
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    FunLover18 wrote: »

    Sorry lads but that sounds ridiculous!! How is that a man forcing a woman to have an abortion and denying her the right to be a mother is outrageous and yet a woman having an abortion and therefore denying the father the exact same right is perfectly acceptable? Now I'm not saying that they're the exact same scenario in reverse order, I now have a better grasp on the effects of pregnancy on the female body (thanks to all above) but the difference in acceptability between these circumstances cannot be that wide, can it?

    The fact you are even asking that question proves that your grasp has a long way to go!


  • #285
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Man and woman have consensual sex. Woman gets pregnant.

    Scenario 1: man does not want a child. Requests abortion. Woman continues pregnancy. Man wants nothing to do with child. Woman compels man to pay maintenance through courts. Man is deadbeat scumbag. Woman is brave hero.

    Scenario 2: man wants child. Woman does not want child, has abortion. Tough shiite for the man. Courageous decision by the woman.


  • #286
    FunLover18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    The fact you are even asking that question proves that your grasp has a long way to go!

    Could you explain further? Being a man I know I'll never understand the true effects of pregnancy but is the idea that a woman would go through because a man wanted to raise the child she was carrying, knowing full well that she was going to leave him to it, that preposterous? I'm in no way saying a woman should be forced to do so and I know well that she has the final say but the idea that the man has no say whatsoever even though the child is his … it doesn't sit well with me and the attitude of "well, you'll just have to build a bridge" sits less well.

    What if some allowance were introduced, fathers are already subject to pay for childcare if they're not around, could a system not be put in place whereby a mother who bears a child through to term for the sake of the father receive some sort of compensation allowance from the father over a certain period after the birth?


  • #287
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Maybe try reading what I actually wrote, rather than trying to put words into my mouth to buoy up your position. I said that in normal everyday circumstances I would take responsibility, but in some circumstances I would walk away. I made it quite clear such circumstances would be rare events(contrary to some of the more paranoid out there). However for the purposes of the debate I brought such possible circumstances into play(and I have seen examples of it, albeit rare enough).

    Apparently so. Not for me in such a rare event(making sure that gets across for the possibly hard of reading) where I was "tricked" into it. In that case I would quite easily walk away and no amount of half cocked social pressure "shaming" about being a "man" would dissuade me in such a circumstance. By scratching my arse I slough off my DNA, my "flesh and blood", it doesn't mean I have an attachment to it. An attachment would be borne of connection and trust between me and the mother of such a child. In that case an "accident" would be OK. So long as it was an accident. Otherwise, no, GTFO, it's genetic rape.

    Sorry Wibbs, I did misunderstand you- wasn't realising you were just talking about you and thought you were abstracting along general lines.

    I think in the rare event of such a deception, the morality of it becomes such a quagmire for either a man or a woman and the child who did not ask for any of this.


  • #288
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    DeadHand wrote: »
    It's not unfair. As a man, if you help to bring a child into this world, whether you planned to or not, it is your responsibility to look after him/her in whatever capacity you can, no one else's. This is basic morality, basic duty, basic decency.

    The woman in that situation must make her choices as she sees fit because the burden of pregnancy and, in all likelihood, being the primary caregiver is on her. She's the one taking all the risks, suffering most of the associated pain and hardship, the person most effected by the consequences of her decisions. The attitude of her partner (if he's in the picture) is likely to have a bearing on that decision. And if his attitude is "I don't want to pay for my child, I didn't want it, that's unfair", then, brother, I'm not sure what he is but he is not a man.

    The selfish abdication of responsibilities in general and the absence of fathers or positive male role models in homes and schools in particular are key elements in the worsening social situation we are seeing in this country.

    Well, the feminists for years have been telling men and fathers they are redundant...so there ya go folks.... you got what you prayed for.


  • #289
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    I believe both parents should have the right in the early stages of pregnancy to absolve themselves of responsibility if they feel they aren't ready to look after a child. In the case of a woman she should be allowed to have an abortion in the first 8 weeks or so. The man should be allowed ask the mother to have an abortion in the early stages, if she says no he should be absolved of responsibilty for the child if he so chooses.


  • #290
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,215 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    I think in an ideal world the man should have the option to be absolved of responsibility when the woman insists on raising the child and he absolutely does not want it.
    what you are asking is for a scenario where in a situation where a man is 50% responsible for the pregnancy, the man gets to walk away with no obligations.
    the woman gets to have the abortion/adoption/raise the child scenario, none of which are easy.

    society doesn't work this way. thankfully.
    i'm still amazed that there are men who consider themselves more put out than women in an unplanned pregnancy scenario. certainly put out enough that even though they are less affected, they still want to shift whatever burden falls on them onto the more affected party.


  • #291
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    what you are asking is for a scenario where in a situation where a man is 50% responsible for the pregnancy, the man gets to walk away with no obligations.
    the woman gets to have the abortion/adoption/raise the child scenario, none of which are easy.

    society doesn't work this way. thankfully.
    i'm still amazed that there are men who consider themselves more put out than women in an unplanned pregnancy scenario. certainly put out enough that even though they are less affected, they still want to shift whatever burden falls on them onto the more affected party.

    The woman has a choice to have an early abortion which minimises the burden. The facts of biology mean that it is the woman that has to have the abortion that's just the way it is. The child is the Father's too so he should have some say whether they decide to keep it or not.


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    Sweet Rose wrote: »
    Unfortunately life isn't that black and white. Some men feel they 'aren't ready' to raise their own child so they cut ties. They then get in contact with the child down the line when the child is older.

    I know 2 children where the father got in touch 5 or 6 years later after the mother put in the hard graft of working and looking after the child singlehandedly. How confusing for the little child too.

    This scenario is not fair on both the mother and child. This whole opt in, opt out thing sickens me to the core. You are either the father or not. You should take responsibility from the start.

    It takes a village to raise a child. It's certainly true.

    I believe once the Father decides to absolve his responsibilities he should no rights over the child whatsoever, that's fair in my opinion.

    I presume you also believe you are either the mother or not and should take responsibilty from the start and not consider an abortion.


  • #293
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    Sweet Rose wrote: »
    Unfortunately life isn't that black and white. Some men feel they 'aren't ready' to raise their own child so they cut ties. They then get in contact with the child down the line when the child is older.

    I know 2 children where the father got in touch 5 or 6 years later after the mother put in the hard graft of working and looking after the child singlehandedly. How confusing for the little child too.

    This scenario is not fair on both the mother and child. This whole opt in, opt out thing sickens me to the core. You are either the father or not. You should take responsibility from the start.

    It takes a village to raise a child. It's certainly true.

    7 is the average age. It's eerie how often it happens at 7. Some don't come back until they feel they have their **** together. They don't want their child to see them a mess. Some don't realise maybe their child was missing them. And no one seems to realise the mothers are so busy they miss out on the childhoods too.


  • #294
    Moat_Cailin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 126 ✭✭Moat_Cailin


    BeerWolf wrote: »
    It's the woman's body... she gets the final say - how about the man in question doesn't stick his dick in unprotected next time ?

    Well, she also got final say in the man going in unprotected, sorry to burst your white knight bubble.

    On topic

    I would be very much Pro Abortion in any form. I think it should be legal and kept as an option until a child reaches at least their teens.


  • #295
    Calina
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Fabreo wrote: »
    I believe once the Father decides to absolve his responsibilities he should no rights over the child whatsoever, that's fair in my opinion.

    I think such a decision should come at a cost to the man, say, half a million euro spread over 23 years, adjusted each year for inflation?

    You don't get to decide freely. Such a decision should come as a cost to yourself in the same way as whatever decision a woman makes by definition comes at a cost to her, be it the abortion or the birth. As men don't have to deal with the physical fall out, they should deal with some of the financial fall out for the decision they make.


  • #296
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,215 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Fabreo wrote: »
    I believe once the Father decides to absolve his responsibilities he should no rights over the child whatsoever, that's fair in my opinion.
    i believe that i should be able to absolve myself of my responsibility for paying tax*. but society doesn't allow that, nor does it allow men to do a pontius pilate on pregnancies they helped create.

    *i don't. but you know what i mean.


  • #297
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    i believe that i should be able to absolve myself of my responsibility for paying tax*. but society doesn't allow that, nor does it allow men to do a pontius pilate on pregnancies they helped create.

    *i don't. but you know what i mean.

    Do you believe women should be able to absolve themselves of responsibilty by having an abortion?


  • #298
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    Fabreo wrote: »
    Do you believe women should be able to absolve themselves of responsibilty by having an abortion?

    An abortion comes with its consequences. That is not absolving of responsibility. That is a choice that terminates all other choices.


  • #299
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    diveout wrote: »
    An abortion comes with its consequences. That is not absolving of responsibility. That is a choice that terminates all other choices.

    It absolves the woman of having to be responsible for the well being of a child, an abortion in the early stages is a lot less responsibilty than looking after a child for 18 years.

    For a man who waives his rights to that child that comes with the risk of that he might regret his decision at a future date and have no rights, so he shares burden in that case.


  • #300
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    Sweet Rose wrote: »
    It's not like writing on a chalkboard and rubbing out the writing after. It will be something the women has to live with for the rest of her life. I personally know a woman who had an abortion and she is still going through the emotional trauma of it 4 years later. The guilt she feels is unreal. Not to mention the physical implications and wondering will she ever have another child.

    Men could also feel emotional trauma years later for choosing to absolve their rights.


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    pajopearl wrote: »
    Not as daft as it sounds, but with thank in the news about abortion cases, recently, it got me thinking. Should there be provisions, whether here or anywhere else in the world, where men get to decide if a child is carried to term or not.

    If a couple become pregnant, even though they had decided that they didn't want any (more) children, the woman decides to keep the baby but the man decides he wants nothing to do with a pregnancy or child, does he have a case for insisting she get an abortion and should he take legal steps to ensure she gets one?

    Abortion is legal in this specific case.

    Discuss

    I don't think it would ever be possible to bring in legislation so men can dictate what women do with their own bodies.

    That said, I do think men should be allowed to opt out of fatherhood if they don't want it.

    Women can choose to abort the pregnancy if they don't want it so I see no reason why men shouldn't also have the choice to walk away and not be involved.


Advertisement