Welcome to Gaia! ::

Many Pro-choicers that I've met seem to have the consensus that, yes it is the woman's choice. That makes perfect sense. They're pro-choice, of course they are going to support the right of the woman to terminate her pregnancy.

But last I checked, it takes two to tango. There's three beings involved in the pregnancy. The mother, the fetus, and the father. All three have equal rights (at least as far as I'm concerned). So, how can the woman's right to choose override the father's in a decision that is as important as the choice to have an abortion? Because it's her body? No. Sorry. That doesn't work for me. It's *their* baby. It's not just *her* baby.

And, just to get everyone thinking, I'll pretend I'm pro-choice for this segue.

**********
A mother has all rights over a fetus. That's it. She's a person, it's not, I have a right to total choice over whatever I want to do to this child in me.

Hm. Shall I consult the father? Maybe. But I don't care about his opinion really, because it's my decision.
**********
That was highly satirical, but I was being partially serious. There are many choicers (one I debated recently whose name I won't mention) who think that the father can go suck a lemon when it comes to the decision of what should happen to the child. How can this be, though? I mean, clearly a father is a person too. He has rights, he has the right to decide the fate of something that is his child as well.

For those of you who say that it doesn't effect the father as much as the mother, I say that you may have not done your research.

There have been many studies where there have been depression, suicidal tendencies, guilt, psychological damage, and behavioral problems associated with fathers whose children have been aborted.

Now, I support women's rights too, no doubt. But Don't you think that men should have a say in what is theirs as much as the mothers?

And just for a little backup, some sites on this subject. And some studies.

Here.

And another one on how abortion effects fathers.

I second Sensedog's post (as much as a chick can), and applaud him for his words.

However, father's rights are next to nill, and I think that is a problem that should be remedied. I like this plan:
http://www.unm.edu/~keithw/mindRamblings/abortion.html

I'm sorry, McPhee, but you can't compare the father's role to the mother's role when it comes to birthing a child. Yes, a woman should always consult with the father, but if she decides to on abortion, he should support her, if not her decision. He should not try to guilt her into anything--he has no idea what she's going through.

First off Mcphee, I appriciate the sincerity of your post... and your acknowledgement that it takes two to tango. ^.~

But...I do not agree that, in all circumstances, a biological father should have equal voice.

Yes, he is an equal person to the woman. No, I do not agree that a blastocyst, embryo, or a fetus is an equal person. I'm sorry we can't see eye-to-eye on that issue. sad

However, if the biological father was a rapist, or a deadbeat, run-away dad, or the woman's own father who participated in an act of incest, hell no they don't deserve a drop of opinions! (sorry for the strong language, I feel rather strongly against the "dirtbags" of society @_@) Well, they can speak their mind all they want, but what I mean is they can't force a woman to absolve rights of her body. Nobody can force anyone else to absolve their rights to their bodies. And Like Xanophia stated, a man (nor a woman) does not have a right to have a child or pass down genetic material.

Yes, that potential person is part of his genetic material. But like it or not, women carry a lot, if not all of the burden of a pregnancy. I really wish it wasn't so, because I happen to be one. >.< But nature sucks like that. *shrugs*... carrying on~

The way I see it is this- if a woman and man are in a healthy, consensual relationship, then it's not going to be a problem for the woman to consult the biological father for his feelngs/opinions. That's a given. I just can't see a woman making a decision for abortion without her loving significant other knowing and giving his input.. However, if it ain't a healthy, nor consensual relationship, then what business does the biological father have? why would he even care? But, on the same token, if a biological father didn't want a baby but the mom did and developed it into term, then I think he should be absolved of child-support. I think that would be fair on his part.

If a woman didn't want to have a baby, but a guy did, maybe he could motivate her to develop it to term with a nice financial incentive for her time and troubles. And that would be yet another choice a woman could make. It would be a voluntary action to her, not a forced one.

As for the men "suffering" from an abortion... sweatdrop

- I've checked the first site briefly, so far it looks unbiased but I will look more into that. Thank you for posting it! smile On the top though, it would have been lovelier if a larger sample of men were done.

- the second site is a site I've already known before you've posted the link, and it's DEFINITELY biased. http://www.leaderu.com/ It's a christian website. There is no such thing as "post abortion syndrome", and I will post why in a minute.

- the third site is so biased you could see it in the banner image at the top. "Serving the educational needs of the "Pro-Life" movement". Exchange the words "educational" with "propaganda" and you'd have a more accurate portrayl of this site. I mean, there's not even any citations at the end of that article just given. gonk

...At least the second website tried to disguise itself as a university lol

Well, here's a nifty lil' quote from that third website, "life issues".



That's because... there ain't no such thing as a "Post-abortion Syndrome"!

This is what I've learned from a college textbook~



edit= I searched "post abortion syndrome" at the APA's website (They're the American Psychological Association, for those that didn't know). I came up with one search result. For your curiosity, ~

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb03/website.html

So... if women don't even suffer from this magical "disorder", then how in the worlds do men manage to do so?

Is my college textbook, the same textbooks studied at Harvard and other Universities... lieing? sweatdrop

Okay. Just to respond to everyone.

Sensedog: Sure, the man can't carry the child for 9 months. Biological impossibility.

But that fact doesn't mean that the child is any less his child than it is hers.

Location means nothing. The fact that they both have responsibility over this life is what matters.

Lelas: I like the site you linked-- Maybe not the bias inherent in it, but at least the ideas on fatherhood rights are very well put forth.

And I kind of agree with you on your second point. Yes, the man shouldn't try and guilt her into anything, but he has a right to that child too. It's his, and it's not fair that he is absolved of rights because it grows in the female.

Xanaphia: Well, yes, if the woman has an abortion without his consultation, or if his opinion isn't factored into it, I'd say that that is a violation of his rights.

The woman is no longer using her rights to make this abortion happen-- She is using a child that is partially someone else's, and is destroying it because it isn't something that she wants.

To help explain, I will say this.

There are some things that change, and don't change when the baby comes out of the womb, to when it is being developed in the body.

-The biological makeup of the baby, and the fact that it has the man and the woman's DNA inside of it DOES NOT change.

-The location of the baby, from the womb to the outside of the body DOES change.

-The fact that the baby was always the two parent's responsibility DOES not change.

Now, if responsibility, and biological makeup of the child do not change, but location does, which is more important? Something temporary and possibly inconvenient for one of the parents, or something that is always the decision, morally, of both parents to make.

Well, you know what I think about that by now, I'm sure.

Grip of Death: Okay, I agree with you that a rape/incest dad should not have that opinion over the child. He gave up that right when he did what he did. But a dad who has consensually produced a child with a woman *always* has a responsibility with the child, and has a say in its growth.

Secondly, I will concede on the Post abortion syndrome. If you say that it is clearly a site that is fallacious and untrue, then I won't post it. However, I leave the other two up because, biased as they may be, they are still valid.

After all, what choicer hasn't linked a planned parenthood 'fact' site? And planned parenthood is definitely biased.

But, that being said... I trust the APA a lot more than most websites, so I'm inclined to agree with them. After all, that's where I get a lot of my arguments for my Gay marriage debates.

Mistress Dragonflame: That's my point. Of course, the father can't do anything about it-- But the fact that he isn't physically going to birth it, does that make it any less his child? I don't think so. I mean, Just because your baby is in Alaska, and you live in Texas, does that make it any less your baby? no...

I don't see why the location during it's growth has so much bearing on this.

What "right" of the man is being violated? The fetus does not have an absolute right to life, but the women does have an absolute right to her body.


You say "location" isn't important, but if that location is damaging to a women's physical and mental health (and please do not put it off as a "mere inconvincence") then location is an issue. IF my chid was in Alaska and I was in California, I wouldn't be sick every morning, nor would I have muscle aches (not to mention a chance of dying), and even if I did, this still has no connection to the child's location.

The man has a right to his child. Custody is an issue here, and Until that is settled, it is *both* the man and the woman's child. Through DNA. It's that simple. When the woman decides that she doesn't want that child, and she tells the man to go suck an egg, She takes away the child he wanted. She takes away that right that she had to it.

I'm not talking about whether it's her right to have it aborted. I think I've made it pretty clear that I don't think people should have to abort.

But what I am indeed talking about is that the man deserves to have a say in what happens to that child. And just to clarify Xanaphia, I called birth a *temporary* inconvenience. I know that birth is a big thing, and I wasn't trying to make it seem insignificant, but it is temporary.

Mistress DF: No, it doesn't make it less his child. He was on the sperm side of it, yes, but you are definitely devaluing the man's part in this. They helped create a life together, so they should decide what happens to it together.

True, his physical parenting does not begin until the child is born. I'll give you that. But what doesn't change is -responsibility- for the child. Both the people in the couple that created the child have an equal say.

And I don't know what you mean about having a child expunged from your record. That doesn't really make sense. But the analogy wasn't pertaining to what you would do, it was merely a comparison to prove that location has no bearing on biological rights.

And the mother is growing the baby inside her, but that's a location. Sure, it's maybe not something the mother wants-- But if the father of that child wants that baby, she doesn't have the right to abort it because it is not a baby made out of an unfertilized egg. It's sperm + egg. If she had suddenly in some 'immaculate conception' type of manner produced a child from an unfertilized egg, then she has all the say(Just take this remark with a grain of salt, as I still find abortion to be wrong). It's simple biology.

what if the mother wants to abort & the father doesn't? not allowing abortion would ignore the womans rights, aborting the fathers, we must choose who gets the choice.

It must be the woman as she goes through carrying the parasite fo nine solid months.


Signed
Scion_Of_Balance

I agree with Scion. Although the father can input his opinion and feelings about what happens to the embryo, it is ultimitly the womans decision. She's the one who's going to have to carry it for nine months, not to mention push the thing out (that sounded rather harsh, but it's rather true)