Abortion 2

19 posts

Flag Post

Whilst there’s another thread somewhere discussing when abortion should be legal, and one of BongHits’ topics of the week is abortion, they discuss issues of the baby/foetus and mother/mother-to-be only.

My question is this: in the situations where the mother is legally allowed to abort, should the father be allowed to too?

I would expect the immediate answer to be a resounding ‘NO! It’s the woman’s body…’ or similar, so what if we introduced a male version of abortion of being relieved of all responsibility for the child? This would mean no monetary payments to the child via the mother, no visiting rights, nothing – the child would be no more tied to the man than his next door neighbours’ children.

For example, if a woman is allowed to abort because she feels she is unable to both work and spend enough quality time with her child, then should a man be allowed to leave if he feels he is unable to both work and spend enough quality time with his child?

Clearly, the situations in which abortion is allowed would have to be determined (“Click here for the most recent thread I can find”: http://www.kongregate.com/forums/9/topics/7919), but if they were, should men be allowed to absolve themselves of responsibility in those same situations?

 
Flag Post

I think this is entirely reasonable. The man would just sign a document saying that all his claims on the child are void, and in return all the woman’s claims on him are void.

 
Flag Post

It should be the woman’s choice up until the child is 6 months old.

 
Flag Post

So the father has to deal with the most expensive 6 months of a child’s life and then he can leave?

He should be able to get out ASAP.

 
Flag Post

Depends on who impregnated the woman in the first place. The father should be allowed to leave if the woman has committed adultery, but if it was him who did it, he should hold himself responsible. Just my two cents.

 
Flag Post

But if the man wants to keep the child and the woman doesn’t, she can get an abortion against his wishes. This is clearly unfair.

And as to “if he was the one who impregnated her” – well, what if she was using birth control and didn’t take the pills properly? Whose fault is it then? He can’t exactly check up on that.

 
Flag Post

Seriously? I guess no one has heard the words deadbeat dad. Men walk away all the time. And a man can just sign up his rights at any time. Just like a woman can sign up hers. What’s the debate? If you don’t want to be a father then go to the court and give up your rights to the child and boom you free to live your life without your kid. This is not an uncommon thing.

And to the comment above mine, you have sex and you take the risk of getting or getting someone pregnant. Whining that the chick forgot her pill or that the condom broke is just a cop out.

 
Flag Post

You can’t do that in America. If you walk away you have to pay child support. Lots of it.

 
Flag Post

It should be the woman’s choice up until the child is 6 months old.

A woman can’t abort a 6 month old child. What are you talking about? :/

Depends on who impregnated the woman in the first place. The father should be allowed to leave if the woman has committed adultery, but if it was him who did it, he should hold himself responsible.

Rape cases aside, it takes two people to get a woman pregnant. In situations where abortion is allowed, a woman can relieve herself of responsibility, but a man cannot.

And a man can just sign up his rights at any time.

My understanding is that he can’t. But let’s say he can, should he be able to do so?

you have sex and you take the risk of getting or getting someone pregnant. Whining that the chick forgot her pill or that the condom broke is just a cop out.

This is more an anti abortion argument. If the woman in that situation (accidental pregnancy) was allowed an abortion, then should the man be allowed to rid himself of responsibility too?

 
Flag Post

I am fortunate to have never been in this situation, but I do have friends that were, and it’s a hard situation indeed.

On one hand, yes, it is the woman’s body and she is responsible for her own health and well being. Yet it takes two people to make a baby. If a woman wants to keep a baby and the man doesn’t, he has no choice. If a woman wants to abort and the man doesn’t, it’s not his choice. Nothing at all in a pregnancy is the man’s choice, and though it should be, it never will be.
Now consentually, a man can sign his rights away and not be responsible for anything in the child’s life, as long as the woman agrees. This happens a lot in cases where the woman doesn’t want the man around (say an abusive boyfriend) and he doesn’t want to be around, nor would he even be a good figure in a child’s life.
Pregnancy is a physical and emotional thing. In order for a man to have any hand in it, it would affect the physical and mental well being of mother and child – you can not force a woman to keep a baby she does not want, or is not stable enough to carry.

Interesting debate…

 
Flag Post

The woman shouldn’t HAVE to agree, Mistress. Otherwise, the man should have to agree on the abortion or not. The rights should be sign awayable at any time during the pregnancy (and perhaps after), without consent.

Also, closing in on the big 500 posts, mistress. ;)

 
Flag Post

If a woman wants to abort and the man doesn’t, it’s not his choice. Nothing at all in a pregnancy is the man’s choice, and though it should be, it never will be.

Surely you’re not saying it should be the other way around? I mean there’s not much room for compromise on that one, if they disagree there’s no option to abort the top half of the baby and keep the bottom half…

Personally I have mostly sympathy for the man wanting to get out and not being obliged to pay child support but that’s mostly by extremely pro-choice bias talking; if it’s accidental it should be aborted immediately, if it’s intentional on the part of the woman but not the man the man has no ethical responsibility and only if the man led the woman to believe he would be supportive in the event of a child (before conception) should he have any legal responsibility.

 
Flag Post

Surely you’re not saying it should be the other way around? I mean there’s not much room for compromise on that one, if they disagree there’s no option to abort the top half of the baby and keep the bottom half…

No, that came across wrong. I meant he should have some kind of choice in the matter, but never will because it’s all or nothing, and will always be the woman’s choice.

 
Flag Post

Do you think, then, that he should have to pay for the child as well?

I personally think that your liability should be limited to half an abortion, if you say that you don’t want the child as soon as you find out.

 
Flag Post

No, that came across wrong. I meant he should have some kind of choice in the matter, but never will because it’s all or nothing, and will always be the woman’s choice.

I think technology will probably be able to change that in a couple of decades, tops.

 
Flag Post

I think that the man should be able to sign away all rights, have no contact with the child… Although this does leave the child in a hard situation growing up without a father. Of course, I’d personally be without a father (Although, in all honesty I do have one the best fathers in the land. Not because he buys me whatever I want [he doesn’t] but he is what I think is a great father.) than dead, which, I think is obvious.

The man should be able to sign away all rights, and not pay for child support, because [as stated above] it takes two to tango. [again, rape cases aside]. If the woman can do whatever she wishes during pregnancy against the man’s wishes, shouldn’t he be able to do the same? I mean, we talk about sexual equality, yet there is still this type of stuff going on.

I do not think it will ever be changed, for the simple reason of female activists and the outrage/riot that would forthcome, but I do think it should be changed.

The woman has full rights to kill the baby, while the man has to ‘take it like a man’. Remember, this is not some rabid animal that the guy wants to keep, but the woman doesn’t. This is a human, much like you and I are, and I believe that the human should be given a chance.

Now, one other scenario (I know, I know, pain of childbirth) but the mother having the child, and immediately [if she wishes, and the man agrees] gives the baby, and all of the responsibilities to him. Of course, you run into the breast-milk problem, and a guy cannot usually provide that. It is buyable, but it is very expensive.

I’m not so sure this made sense, but I think if you arrange it better, I do have some good points.

One last thing, I think that everything should be a joint decision, with 60% of the ‘vote’ belonging to the woman, 40% to the man, although that doesn’t make sense, I mean that if the woman kinda wants to keep it, and the man wants to, they should keep it… but if the woman is truly 100% adamant, then I guess its her call.

Note however, I am strongly against abortion.

I’m sorry, because I do not like celebrating these types of things, but I have just hit my 1,000th post.

 
Flag Post

Now, one other scenario (I know, I know, pain of childbirth) but the mother having the child, and immediately [if she wishes, and the man agrees] gives the baby, and all of the responsibilities to him. Of course, you run into the breast-milk problem, and a guy cannot usually provide that. It is buyable, but it is very expensive.

Again, It will NEVER EVER happen. As much as I feel it is a two person decision, you can not force a woman to carry a child she does not want. Of course if they agree to it… then fine.
But I can tell you from experience, most normal adult woman would have a hard time doing such a thing. Our bonding with our child begins at conception, not at birth, so it’s very hard to sign over rights at that time. It’s much like adoption, but you’re dealing with a child who knows his father, and will most likely know the situation as he gets older. It gets very complicated like this.

 
Flag Post

The rights should be sign awayable at any time during the pregnancy (and perhaps after), without consent.

Do you mean anytime during pregnancy that the mother can abort? I wouldn’t want a situation to arise when the man can choose to do a runner just as the woman goes into labour and starts screaming at him never to touch her again.

I personally think that your liability should be limited to half an abortion, if you say that you don’t want the child as soon as you find out.

Half an abortion? Do you mean both parents should agree to abortion? This is kind of getting towards when abortion should/shouldn’t be allowed though.

I do not think it will ever be changed, for the simple reason of female activists and the outrage/riot that would forthcome, but I do think it should be changed.

Yeah, I can imagine some people being pro-choice but very against this, hence why I suggested it only when abortion was allowed – but still, I’d expect there to be some pro-choice people against it.

 
Flag Post

Half an abortion? Do you mean both parents should agree to abortion? This is kind of getting towards when abortion should/shouldn’t be allowed though.

Well, my logic is thus: when you have a child, there’s only three options. You can either have it, put it up for adoption, or abort it. If one parent does not want to have the child, then the next-most expensive option is to abort it. As you are, presumably, half responsible for the child, then you should only be half-responsible for your desired course of action.