That's a tricky one. I think he should get some say, but ultimately the decision has to be hers because it's her body, and she's the one who has to go through the pregnancy and everything that entails (risks to her physical and emotional health, even a small risk of death, pregnancy is no walk in the park, plus there is no guarantee that he will actually stay around and support the child afterwards). It's very sad if a man loses a wanted child that way but I think that's just how it's got to be.
It depends on the particular case in question....age, type of relationship etc...however I totally agree with the other answers, perhaps my opinion is even stronger that it is really the woman's decision.
Unmarried or married, absolutely NOT. I agree with the other comments that men and fathers grieve too but feelings have diddly squat to do with the issue of bodily integrity and autonomy. Remind me again whose body this is happening to. Everyone has the right to speak, to share their feelings and thoughts of course. But when it comes down to the decision to abort if the woman wants to have an abortion, that is her right, and hers alone. We aren't disposable foetal vessels and no one other than ourselves is allowed to, or has the right to, determine what will happen to our own bodies. End of story.
Obviously everyone should be thinking about this before they even have sex - no sex protection is 100% guaranteed - unless we are talking about abstinence! When accidents do happen, and the woman wants an abortion I stand steadfast this is a sole decision for her - she gets the final say regardless of if she is married to the man or not.
What about the unborn child rights to have a say about living or dying.
If the mother does not have the required love for the child adoption is an option
The list of people waiting for an opportunity to love a child is huge.
If an action is required to stop life then that action is murder.
Obviously an unborn child can't have a say in anything because even if it can have an opinion there would be no way for it to express it. Early enough on in a pregnancy it doesn't even have a will to survive because it doesn't have a brain. Adoption gets thrown into debates about this topic as though it were a simple solution but pressuring a woman into that instead is still making her go through something huge, both physcially and emotionally, at risk to her own health.
Not having an opinion, or no way to express it, should not be a justification for euthanasia/termination of life. The real question should be about where we draw the line concerning life vs not. However, the current topic is not about that, it's about whether a father should have a say in abortion etc.
How sad to think a man who help make that baby, is not worth a part in any of it.
Even more sad is that little soul, who is not even considered, if the woman doesn't want that baby, she can just dispose of it!
Mmm too tough a question this one. There are so many variables which have the potential to impact what perspective I would take.
Perhaps there should be more planning pre-conception so there is less pain post-conception?
Mmm I know that is a cop out but it really is the best I can do on this.
None. If he so much cares then he should tell his girl friend that he would be there to raise the child together as 'parents' or positive talk about ' marriage' & she can change her mind in to keeping the baby.His girlfriend already knows that he's a loser so no wonder if she has come to this mindset. And lastly it's her body & the final decision is in her hands & people like this guy,the Catholic church groups & other so call 'do gooders' should just butt out.
Shane women often regret murdering their child in later life leading to tragic results in their own life. People need to be supported and every effort made to stop the murder of a defenseless child.
We talked about Karma on this site recently. This is a perfect example of what not to take a risk on.
A bunch of cells is potential for a child, it is not a child. If a woman were raped for instance, or can not care for or support a child, it becomes even more of a good idea it is her decision alone and the father has no say in determining whether she carry those cells to full term or not. Women should be supported to make the decision that best fits them and their situation without judgement (like calling abortion "murder of a defenseless child"). By the way I know many women who have not regretted their decision. If I ever had a need for it, I like to know that option is there, and that it is my call.
The father should have every right to stop the murder of his own child.
A right to claim the child and care for it should be available via court action.
We all need to understand that making love was designed to produce life and when the blessing is granted we should love and protect it.
I am curious - do your views on abortion change if the woman is raped? Should the father have the right to further abuse her by forcing her to have an unwanted pregnancy? If a man can force a woman to carry a pregnancy to full term - then by that same standard the man can force the woman to have x y z intervention done to her body during pregnancy and childbirth. Pregnancy and childbirth have their own risks - and the woman is the one who will bear the brunt of the consequences stemming from that. Abortion is a womens rights issue. I personally would rather keep the baby than have an abortion, but that does not stop me supporting abortion as a valid option for women which should remain in the woman's control, not the man's (as it is her body, her decision).
Every father? There was a case in the US recently where a rapist took his victim to court to try and force her to carry his child to term. On what planet is that in any way morally acceptable?
Unfortunately, while offering to care for the child is good (except in the case of rapists I suppose, not a great idea to have a child raised by someone like that) a man cannot offer to carry the child for the woman, so if he were able to insist she carry the child to term he would be overriding her bodily integrity. Bodily integrity is very, very important.
Ideally, any couple having sex should be prepared to live with the consequences, regardless of how remote those consequences might seem. If not, then they shouldn't have sex in the first place. This is one of the reasons I think a permissive society is not the best way to go, but anyway, that's the way it is and most people would probably dismiss me as a nut or old fashion because "it's impossible not to have sex" or some similar ridiculous attitude.... I believe, if you choose to have sex, you choose the consequences that follow as a direct result of that sex. Rape of course is not a choice.
OK, so it's not an ideal world. Some people have sex first, ask each others' names second, and do everything else in reverse order too, and people get raped (which is the criminal end of sex). So what's the answer in the real world? I dare say it will depend on the circumstances.
My partner and I chose not to have sex until we'd discussed our views, and come to an agreement on all the possible consequences we could think of, and what sort of principles we'd apply for making decisions in those situations that we couldn't think of. Once we'd done that, we used birth control, only to find out later that it would take 9 years plus IVF to conceive after we stopped using it....
The ultimate decision is that of the woman. The father of the child at this point is first and foremost the partner of the woman and woman has the right to determine the future of a matter of conception. These rights have been hard fought and considered and as such should be respected. This should however not discount the fact that any relationship and consequences of such relationship should be build on the basis of good communication and trust, with any desire to move into an intimate sexual relationship involving discussion around birth control and protection from sexually transmitted disease. We live in an age where such matters should be dealt with with dignity but also realism and as such should include frank yet intimate discussions around reducing risk of pregnancy and transmission of disease if the relationship is not ready for a long term commitment or if the relationship does not include respectful actions to mitigate of all risk of disease transmission. This is more important than any discussion on rights or otherwise of fathers to unplanned pregnancy...
Quite rightly its the woman's right. A physically and emotionally arduous decision and procedure so if there is any assumption that such a decision is made lightly or selfishly its not true, it however needs to be the woman's right to make such a decision with or without her partner's/lover's agreement.
I think this is a difficult one to answer. If the relationship is stable both parties should discuss the pros and cons. However, ultimately it is the woman's body so, at the end of the day it is her choice.
Ouch. The fence is hurting my bottom. Having said that . . . I could never have an abortion and I can't give you 100 reasons, moral, ethical or personal, but I can say I support the choice of the mother. I have known people try very hard to damage themselves in the hope of producing a miscarriage and that is horrifying in itself and could lead to serious complications, the mother's death or birth defects in the child. I had the misfortune to be at an abortion clinic once (shudder) and it was horrifying. Whilst I was waiting for my accquaintance to be "done" a huge number of teenage girls in school uniforms came in and out - it was like Maccas! They had their mothers with them and some were even carrying burgers. The person concerned could not have cared less and probably never thinks about it but I know who carries the scars and I wish I had never been there.