Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

Abortion: does the man have a say?

Status
Not open for further replies.
First, I don't believe the baby is the mother's body. It is a potential human being that is under the responsability of both parents. However the pregnancy is hers to endure so no one can force a woman to suffer a pregnancy she don't want, thus a father shouldn't be allowed to force a woman to stay pregnant. She's not a breeding cow and there's is millions of child to adopt if the man wants a child. Then of course it's his right to do whatever he wants if the woman abort without his consent. Maybe it should even be recognised as a reason for divorce.

However, it is true that sometimes a mother carry on a pregnancy against the father's wishes. Then under certain circumstanses, that is if the man used contraception, or believed the woman did, and it didn't worked/was sabotaged, he should be able to "bail out" and not pay child support. Of course he lose all his parental rights too. If he just put his unprotected dick in a random woman it's his fault.

For rape the rapist should pay huge damages, spend quite some time in prison and pay child support if a pregnancy happen without abortion. Of course he has nothing to say about keeping the baby or abort.He should'nt have the right to refuse working while in prison, and a sizable amount of his pay should be seized and given to the woman if a child is expected.
If the rape if proved false and the mother lied to get child support and money, a terrible punishment should fall on her, and huge reparations given to the man. The subject is very difficult thanks to the tendency of everyone, women and men alike, to lie/manipulate reality to profit from others or avoid their responsabilities.

Custody/child support is another subject. I believe that a parent can't keep the child and forbid the other to see it so the time with the child should be equally divised if possible, with no child support. And then, nobody can force someone to see a child he don't want to see, or a child to see a parent he don't want to see once he's old enough to think by himself.
 
Well if the man has a say is actually very simple.

If it is a rape baby, then he should have no say.

If it was a one night stand baby, then the man SHOULD have a say, think about it, they both had consentual sex, which was both of their responsibilities, now if the woman decides to have the baby, she is FORCING a lifetime of child payments, fatherhood etc... on the father, even if he isn't prepared, and often with young men just starting out in life, an unwanted child brings the kind of financial burden which completely ruins his life forever, and since this child can effect his life in that kind of irreversible way, I think his say should count for 40% of the matter, with the mother's opinion being 40% and the doctor's opinion being 20%, as if the doctor sees that they are both unprepared to care for a baby, or even give it a proper home, then even the doctor's say should be counted.

If it is in a loving, long-time relationship (possibly already married) then of course the man should have a say, he is going to be working to provide for that extra mouth to feed, or in the case of some men, he's going to be raising it, so of course his say should be very important, if not as important as the mother's say.

of course in our society, it doesn't matter how the baby will impact the man, he has no say in it because he has a penis.
 
I normally steer myself away from such controversial discussions on forum sites, but a lot of good points have been raised here and no one seems to be flying off the walls and being a butt-hurt little bitch about it, so I'll make an exception. Before I continue, let me just state that I am male. I note this because my opinion seems to be different from most men that I have had such discussions with.

Personally, I don't feel that the man has a say. The man is not the one that has to carry around an extra life for nine months. He is not the one that will have to go through the swelling, the growth, the back pain, or the labor. He might have helped make the baby, but there are no physical or even emotional repercussions for him for allowing the child to be born. At worst, if he's a worthless excuse of a man, all he has to worry about is financial 'burden'.

That said, I do think that the man should be consulted before the woman makes any final decisions on the matter. While there are a saddening number worthless men out there who just like to 'hit it and quit it', there are an equal number of men out there that still have paternal instincts and would welcome fatherhood. If the woman cares about the father of her child then it wouldn't be any more right for her to rob him of that chance than it would be for a man to knock her up then leave her to deal with the pregnancy alone.

With the changes in our society over the last century and the act of sex becoming a more casual and recreational activity, there are certainly cases where the woman might get pregnant from a guy she has no intentions of staying with and, as such, should not feel obligated to mention anything to him. On that flip side, if she intends to stay with her lover then she certainly should sit him down and have a talk with him.

Ultimately, the man shouldn't have a say in the final decision, but his feelings on the matter should be discussed in most situations.
 
The Pariah King said:
I normally steer myself away from such controversial discussions on forum sites, but a lot of good points have been raised here and no one seems to be flying off the walls and being a butt-hurt little bitch about it, so I'll make an exception. Before I continue, let me just state that I am male. I note this because my opinion seems to be different from most men that I have had such discussions with.

Personally, I don't feel that the man has a say. The man is not the one that has to carry around an extra life for nine months. He is not the one that will have to go through the swelling, the growth, the back pain, or the labor. He might have helped make the baby, but there are no physical or even emotional repercussions for him for allowing the child to be born. At worst, if he's a worthless excuse of a man, all he has to worry about is financial 'burden'.

That said, I do think that the man should be consulted before the woman makes any final decisions on the matter. While there are a saddening number worthless men out there who just like to 'hit it and quit it', there are an equal number of men out there that still have paternal instincts and would welcome fatherhood. If the woman cares about the father of her child then it wouldn't be any more right for her to rob him of that chance than it would be for a man to knock her up then leave her to deal with the pregnancy alone.

With the changes in our society over the last century and the act of sex becoming a more casual and recreational activity, there are certainly cases where the woman might get pregnant from a guy she has no intentions of staying with and, as such, should not feel obligated to mention anything to him. On that flip side, if she intends to stay with her lover then she certainly should sit him down and have a talk with him.

Ultimately, the man shouldn't have a say in the final decision, but his feelings on the matter should be discussed in most situations.
Click to expand...

This I can agree with.
 
Ivory11 said:
Well if the man has a say is actually very simple.

If it is a rape baby, then he should have no say.

If it was a one night stand baby, then the man SHOULD have a say, think about it, they both had consentual sex, which was both of their responsibilities, now if the woman decides to have the baby, she is FORCING a lifetime of child payments, fatherhood etc... on the father, even if he isn't prepared, and often with young men just starting out in life, an unwanted child brings the kind of financial burden which completely ruins his life forever, and since this child can effect his life in that kind of irreversible way, I think his say should count for 40% of the matter, with the mother's opinion being 40% and the doctor's opinion being 20%, as if the doctor sees that they are both unprepared to care for a baby, or even give it a proper home, then even the doctor's say should be counted.

If it is in a loving, long-time relationship (possibly already married) then of course the man should have a say, he is going to be working to provide for that extra mouth to feed, or in the case of some men, he's going to be raising it, so of course his say should be very important, if not as important as the mother's say.

of course in our society, it doesn't matter how the baby will impact the man, he has no say in it because he has a penis.
Click to expand...

This I can agree with.
 
Maybe not, but men do have an explicit right to divorce or separation just as women do, regardless of reason. I may not be able to demand a woman do one thing or another or stop her from one-another things, but that does not mean I have to accept it either - it is everyone's explicit right to believe it to be murder and to act upon their beliefs by any non-coercive means just as the opposite is true.
 
I believe that a man's opinion should be counted in, but not relied on. It will effect them in most situations (excluding if the women was raped, or the man was a one night stand and cannot be reached) and in the long run, it can effect their entire life as much as it will effect the woman's. However it should be left to the woman to make the final decision. It is her body after all, and she will be the one going through pregnancy. As well, if the father and mother are indeed, in a long-term, steady relationship it would seem appropriate to consider the father's opinion. It all depends on the person in the end, and how they feel and react to others and the situation they are in.
 
The opinion of 'the man should have some say, but the woman gets final say,' while I agree with, is little more than throwing the guy a bone. It sounds good on paper. It's like saying, 'What do you want for dinner tonight? By the way if your choice doesn't appeal to me I can override you.' I'd like to see something less wishy-washy.

And I could really do with the 'well he should have worn a condom' argument being put to rest. That's right, he certainly should have - but it takes two to tango, she could have told him no vaginal without one, or have been on birth control or have taken a morning after pill. That's not to say everything is equal in ease and accessibility, but as a guy the aforementioned statement comes off as 'the situation is 100% the man's fault and he no longer gets a say.' This is a little too defensive/pushy for my taste.

There's also the real, humane logistic issue - we can't tell women what to do with their bodies, nor should we be able to, nor do I want to. This is an enormous life-altering experience and they most certainly should have the overriding say on whether it happens or not, no exception.

What I'd like to see implemented sounds callous, but is fair, in my mind. I'd like a guy to be given a legal opt-out period. I'm not sure offhand what the amount of weeks is for the cutoff of getting an abortion, but something similar to that, where the man can legally say he doesn't want anything to do with this, he'll offer to pay for his share of the procedure but beyond that if she chooses to have and raise the kid it's her life that's altered, not his. In return he gives up all legal rights to the child, no visitation, nothing.

Again, I know it sounds cold and ideally it wouldn't need to come up. But stuff like this does come up, and it takes two people to make the dumb decision in the heat of the moment. If she makes the choice to keep it, he should be able to say far ahead of time, still during the decision making window, that this isn't something he wants to be a part of.
 
As Day Fades said:
The opinion of 'the man should have some say, but the woman gets final say,' while I agree with, is little more than throwing the guy a bone. It sounds good on paper. It's like saying, 'What do you want for dinner tonight? By the way if your choice doesn't appeal to me I can override you.' I'd like to see something less wishy-washy.
Click to expand...

In a valid relationship, a fair conversation is worthwhile, though. Especially when she has to push 'dinner' out her ladybits.

The rest, an 'opt-out' period as outlined, sounds good for ideal situations, but otherwise wantonly open to abuse.
 
The man has no real say.
The woman has a say, because it is her body.
She is under no obligation to be an incubator for anything.
I also do not think the man has any kind of ownership over the fetus that might entitle him to its continued existence, at least not until it is born.

Really, I'd be suspicious about a guy's motivations in wanting a fetus to be born when it has no qualities whatsoever. It probably has more to do with wanting to keep a shackle on the woman through the kid than actually wanting a child.
 
I would hope that in any relationship involved in a pregnancy there is a lengthy serious conversation between both partners before there is an abortion, but that's not something that is easy to legislate. I've heard ideas in Australia that abortion be something that you can only have after two counselling sessions, and possibly mandating that both partners be present in one of the sessions (in the case of an ongoing relationship rather than one-night-stand or rape) might be a way of ensuring this.

At the end of the day though it is the woman who has the biological ability of pregnancy and it should be her final decision as to whether she is willing to go through with the whole nine months of this. I should add that while I am emphatically for women having the right to choose I can't personally see any situation where I would be willing to have an abortion myself; that's not me being preachy or holier than thou, it's a personal choice I would value being able to make whichever way I chose - and it's one I'm currently viewing from never having been pregnant. It's possible I'd see things differently at the time.

I actually support As Day Fades' callous suggestion; make the decision period the first trimester less a fortnight to let him decide if he wants to 'opt out' (with a single financial payment) and for the mother to decide if she still wants to go ahead with it. I'd like to take it a step further though and give the option for the woman to opt out as well, if the father wants to keep the child. It doesn't mean she would be able to avoid the pregnancy, but she may decide to go through with that even if she isn't ready to be a parent if she feels he would be a good father.
 
The only problem with giving the man a cut off period is the wait time. If a is woman going to get an abortion, she should do it as soon as possible once she finds out shes pregnant (if thats the course she wants to take). The procedures to abort a pregnancy becomes more complicated and there is more risk as time progresses. I wont get in to detail, if anyone wants to know the procedures they can research them as I did. I'll just say its definitely in a woman's best interest to do the abortion without delay, should that be her choice.

Of course I'm not saying she shouldn't discuss it first with they baby's dad, should he be a significant person in her life....but I'm with those that believe it is absolutely the woman's choice. Its her body, and she has to go through the traumatic experience of birthing, after carrying it for 9 months.

Really, I'd be suspicious about a guy's motivations in wanting a fetus to be born when it has no qualities whatsoever. It probably has more to do with wanting to keep a shackle on the woman through the kid than actually wanting a child.
Click to expand...

Also....I believe thats a fairly ignorant statement. Many men want children, just as much as women might. I know quite a few single fathers fighting just to be in their childrens lives. The only men that wish to shackle a woman with a child are abusive men who shouldn't be in relationships in the first place.
 
Serenity said:
Also....I believe thats a fairly ignorant statement. Many men want children, just as much as women might. I know quite a few single fathers fighting just to be in their childrens lives. The only men that wish to shackle a woman with a child are abusive men who shouldn't be in relationships in the first place.
Click to expand...

What I mean is, specifically in regards to the abortion situation. He doesn't want the woman to get an abortion so he can have a child with HER and thus hang onto her.
If all he wanted was a kid, he could find someone else to have one with.

And a lot of abusive men ARE in relationships.
 
From a legal standpoint, this issue can be quite contentious. It ties into personal and religious beliefs―which, in many respects, the courts shouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole―however, the ultimate decision boils down to the woman. This makes sense because of a few things:
(1) The pregnancy has an absolute and immediate impact upon the woman's health and body;
(2) The increased health risks pertain, first and foremost, to the woman. As such, her decision remains the top priority;
(3) While the birth of a child has an impact on both parties involved, the impact therefrom, disproportionately effects the woman.

That being said, there are some changes to the system that must be made. Let's say, for instance, that it is a one-night-stand, and the father doesn't want the child. If the mother chooses to have the child, it begs the question of whether the father should be financially responsible for said child. The most immediate answer would be yes. However, because the father lacks any say as to the ultimate decision of whether the child is born or aborted, it means that he has no control over the future financial impact of the child.

Therefore, some discretion must be afforded to the father's wishes, in determining whether the father should be held financially responsible for the child. The counter argument to this is, the father assumed the risk by engaging in sexual intercourse without contraceptives. However, there are cases where contraceptives fail. That aside, it does seem that the system affords the father little consideration in this scenario.

While it may seem off topic, I believe the two are linked, legally speaking. For if the father has no say in determining whether she has an abortion, and also has no say as to whether or not he is forced to provide for a child he didn't want, seems disproportionate to me. After all, the responsibility for the action are shared between both parties. This is true whether the mother decides to have an abortion or not.

On the other hand, a father should not be allowed to simply abandon responsibility. Therefore, a review of the intent of the parties involved, the extent or amount of discussion about whether or not to have an abortion or child, and the father's current financial circumstances should be considered in an evaluation to determine whether he carries financial responsibility.

I suppose there really isn't a clean answer to this sort of area. But, I do believe some effort should be made in providing a more egalitarian approach to it. Otherwise, the legal system starts to lose a great deal of credibility, and fosters animosity between partners.

----As an aside, it has been brought to my attention that my usage of "begging the question" may cause some confusion. In this case, I'm using it under the original Latin phrase "Petitio principii" meaning―assuming the initial point. In other words, based on accepting the principle that the father, ultimately, has no say over a woman's choice to have an abortion, then it also would follow that if the woman chooses to have the child, he would still be financially responsible―as he has no say.

In so doing, I'm attempting to examine whether the result therefrom is consistent with the original position, or whether it is inconsistent with the policy reasoning behind it. Thus, if it results in a scenario, where the policy goals are contrary, then I seek to determine what steps may be taken to correct it.

I hope this helps clarify my reasoning.----
 
I do believe that it is the woman the only one who should have a saying. I mean, I do understand that it is also the male's baby and that he also put some work into it, but at the end of the day it's the female who gets the last word. It is the mother's body who has to bear with the difficulties. Since it's her own body she can do whatever she wants to it, but we must not also forget there is a life at stake. We are not simply talking about a piercing or a breast augment surgery. I believe that this may be the only reason why the man has just the right to give his opinion. I'm not saying that the man should decide on wether she gets an abortion or not, but he should be able to at least have the right to express his disapproval.
 
Don't guys 'opt-out' all the time?

By, I dunno, leaving?

I've had friends who were in supposedly committed relationships, got pregnant, and then around 6 months into it, the guy bailed and left them high and dry. Problem is, people flop on some choices, so that's why something like an 'opt-out' situation needs to be taken completely serious, which both sides fail to do a good portion of the time.
 
That's a bit different, that's the 'deadbeat dad' territory. The thought I introduced for conversation would have to take place very early on, would be handled legally, and would essentially reduce a man to the same status of a sperm donor, as if she'd gotten it from a sperm bank.

As Trygon pointed out it would be something very easily abused. It would possibly create just as many issues as it would address, and it is callous. I should've worded myself better originally; even though I brought it up I'm not really a fan, and just wanted to see some discussion on the thought, outside of my own mind.

There really isn't a way to improve what currently is, I don't think. The woman should have the final say, though I wish there was something much more tangible than 'I'll take your desire into consideration' for the man. Because while in some cases that does make the deciding difference, it can just as easily go the other way and be meaningless.

The much easier thing to improve is the attitude that 'he' fucked up, that 'he' should have used protection. He absolutely should have. But as adults both sides have that responsibility; I'd like to see that cadence improve at least, as with the topic of having a kid, I would think first and foremost should be everyone stepping up and accepting their share of the responsibility, pre-conception included.
 
After reading most of the posts in this thread (alright, well some of the posts, there are a whole-hell-of-a-lot of them) I can honestly say I have an opinion of my own.

I would want a say in it.

But society as a whole should not hold a woman's body as anything but her personal property when it comes to things like this. I mean honestly, what do we own if we don't own our bodies?

I think there are several ways to actually avoid this entire situation, depending on one's point of view and political leanings. But, in the end, if we aren't up to policing everyone's ability to procreate on a minuscule, individual level we need to leave the decision up to the woman for various reasons. Not the least of which being her health.

I guess this would come down to being more selective with who you sleep with and being responsible with your sex-habits. If you want a say on whether the baby is kept or not, find a woman who is willing to hear you out before you start going around slinging your baby-gravy.

Just my opinion.
 
gelidAtelier said:
The man has no real say.
The woman has a say, because it is her body.
She is under no obligation to be an incubator for anything.
I also do not think the man has any kind of ownership over the fetus that might entitle him to its continued existence, at least not until it is born.

Really, I'd be suspicious about a guy's motivations in wanting a fetus to be born when it has no qualities whatsoever. It probably has more to do with wanting to keep a shackle on the woman through the kid than actually wanting a child.
Click to expand...

So in other words, it doesn't matter if a condom broke and the guy will be ruined financially for the rest of his life because she thinks it would be "cool" to have a baby?

in the case of rape, he has no say, that rule is perfectly clear here.

however, you like many other people forget that having a baby doesn't just impact the mother. yes it's her body, but having a baby impacts a father's life just as much as the mother's.

To completely disregard the man because he's not the one squeezing it out is incredibly irresponsible and completely ignores 99% of the factors around this question.
 
Ivory11 said:
To completely disregard the man because he's not the one squeezing it out is incredibly irresponsible and completely ignores 99% of the factors around this question.
Click to expand...

I loved how you worded that. "Squeezing it out" as if labour isn't the most excruciating pain that a woman can go through, how many women have their bodies and minds changed for ever from the process.

So yeah, disregarded his feelings seems completely rational. You don't want tob e financially responsible for a child in the off chance you fuck a girl and she's against abortion? Well, keep it in your goddamn pants, or find a nice sock.
 
As a man I really wish I could say that men should have equal say, but, um, no. All we do is spray the fertilizer/seeds, the woman has to grow and care for the damn garden in her damn yard. Then after nine to twelve months of this tedious, sometimes vomit-inducing work, a giant screaming naked mole bursts out of their yard, wrecking it in a catastrophically violent way that in the modern world, even under the most exquisitely perfect of circumstances, still has a small chance for the yard being damaged beyond repair.

It's the woman's yard. She has the right to say "no" to growing whatever the man's seeds were going to be.

Plus, well, if a man really wants a child... We have quite literally thousands of children of varying ages all ready for adoptive parents, in a world that is already overpopulated and not needing even more babies. Just saying.
 
This is my simple answer to this:
The person who is pregnant is the only person who gets a say.​
 
I think we are forgetting that the man, can and often will be held financially responsable for said child (And often mother, since there are no laws telling the mother how to spend the Child Support) during the next 18 years or maybe even more, because of a child that he never wanted, asked for and possible actively tried to not have...

So yeah, sure, as a woman I'd say, my body, my choice, but that's an easy choice to make when someone else has to pay for it

If its my body, my choice, it should also be my responsability, if I'm to expect a guy to pay for 'My child', I think I do owe him the courtesy of hearing him out, just saying guys

Otherwise, its sounds an awfull lot like slavery
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom