Abortion Notification for Husbands- Yes or No?

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:59 am

So I'm having this discussion with a friend and naturally I'm bringing it here. :rolleyes:

Should there be a law requiring that a husband be notified that his wife is having an abortion?

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:14 am

RedGlitter;635899 wrote: So I'm having this discussion with a friend and naturally I'm bringing it here. :rolleyes:

Should there be a law requiring that a husband be notified that his wife is having an abortion?
Absolutely. All fathers should be notified wether married or not. They damn sure are notified for child support.

el guapo · Post by **el guapo** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:15 am

YZGI;635908 wrote: Absolutely. All fathers should be notified wether married or not. They damn sure are notified for child support.

agree

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:16 am

RedGlitter;635899 wrote: So I'm having this discussion with a friend and naturally I'm bringing it here. :rolleyes:

Should there be a law requiring that a husband be notified that his wife is having an abortion?

Yes, with exceptions made when appropriate. eg. rapists..

you're just full of ideas today RG;)

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:20 am

zinkyusa;635913 wrote: Yes, with exceptions made when appropriate. eg. rapists..

you're just full of ideas today RG;)

I'm kinda on a roll here, Zinky! :wah: I don't know where it's coming from!

Carl44 · Post by **Carl44** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:25 am

how about should a wife be notified if a guy has the snip or if a woman was expecting could a guy slip her a pill to make her lose the baby without telling her huh huh huh

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:26 am

Mystery · Post by **Mystery** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:27 am

Most definitely the man should be notified. It would be his baby as well, and the idea of a single father isn't out of this world.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:30 am

RedGlitter;635899 wrote: So I'm having this discussion with a friend and naturally I'm bringing it here. :rolleyes:

Should there be a law requiring that a husband be notified that his wife is having an abortion?

No.

Whilst in the normal course of thing it would have been discussed and agreed there could be circumstances where it would be physically dangerous to a woman for such a notifcation to go out. In such circumstances, to have a rigid law demanding it be done would be wrong.

When it's right it's not needed, when it's wrong it's wrong - so why have it?

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:43 am

jimbo;635928 wrote: how about should a wife be notified if a guy has the snip or if a woman was expecting could a guy slip her a pill to make her lose the baby without telling her huh huh huh

The Snip...well...it's his body, his control. But maybe that would be a form of betrayal or rather, it would put the marriage/relationship to false pretenses if the woman went in presuming they were going to become parents?

Ideally, you'd talk about this stuff but if that weren't the case...

In the end, I'd have to say The Snip is the man's decision (IMO) in the same way an abortion (or say a hysterectomy even) would be that of the woman. It's more his call than hers, the way I'm seeing it.

As for slipping a pill to a woman to make her abort, a resounding hell no. That's messing with someone else's body and seems absolutely criminal to me.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:44 am

Bryn Mawr;635936 wrote: No.

Whilst in the normal course of thing it would have been discussed and agreed there could be circumstances where it would be physically dangerous to a woman for such a notifcation to go out. In such circumstances, to have a rigid law demanding it be done would be wrong.

When it's right it's not needed, when it's wrong it's wrong - so why have it?

Good points there, Bryn.

minks · Post by **minks** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:19 pm

RedGlitter;635899 wrote: So I'm having this discussion with a friend and naturally I'm bringing it here. :rolleyes:

Should there be a law requiring that a husband be notified that his wife is having an abortion?

of course cause the man in your question is husband and therefore should know. He has as much right to the child as the woman does.

Now if it were the sperm doner... and it was a case of rape, or a case of he got the woman pregnant and buggered off, no he gave up those rights and he does should not be made aware.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:18 pm

Minks said it so well, and I agree with everything she said.

Pheasy · Post by **Pheasy** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:21 pm

I think that the husband should be involved in the decision to have abortion. However, I agree with Minks if rape or similar, or the man has chosen to leave you alone then he lost the right to have any say.

pinkchick · Post by **pinkchick** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:45 pm

minks;635975 wrote: of course cause the man in your question is husband and therefore should know. He has as much right to the child as the woman does.

Now if it were the sperm doner... and it was a case of rape, or a case of he got the woman pregnant and buggered off, no he gave up those rights and he does should not be made aware.
agree

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:50 pm

chonsigirl;636027 wrote: Minks said it so well, and I agree with everything she said.

AOL.

crazygal · Post by **crazygal** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:57 am

Unless it was through rape or a one night stand, if the woman is in a relationship or married then I think the man has the right to know definately. It isn't their fault that they can't get pregnant. I also think they should have a right to have a say as to whether or not she goes through with it, it's his child too.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:32 pm

I have to say although I can see the other point of view, I take the angle that possession is 9/10s of the law...ok, seriously, that as long as the woman conceives and carries and potentially delivers, that it's her call. Until men can get pregnant, I don't see that it'll change.

It would be *nice* if the relationship was such that she would tell him but there are instances when that's not a desirable thing. And what's going to happen if he doesn't want her to abort? Is he going to force her to have the kid? Is he going to raise it himself?

As far as requiring the wife to sign over permission for a vasectomy, I think that's terrible. Just as terrible as if they required a husband to "permit" his wife to have tubal ligation or a hysterectomy. At what point does marriage require us to forfeit full control over our own bodies- our own property?!

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:45 pm

minks;635975 wrote: of course cause the man in your question is husband and therefore should know. He has as much right to the child as the woman does.

Now if it were the sperm doner... and it was a case of rape, or a case of he got the woman pregnant and buggered off, no he gave up those rights and he does should not be made aware.

I quite like CG's point - the husband might not be the father and, if so, would he still have the right to know?

Also, the OP made no mention of the husband and wife still being together - if the law required the husband's consent she could be searching half way round the world trying to find him first even if he is the father.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:24 pm

RedGlitter;636871 wrote: I have to say although I can see the other point of view, I take the angle that possession is 9/10s of the law...ok, seriously, that as long as the woman conceives and carries and potentially delivers, that it's her call. Until men can get pregnant, I don't see that it'll change.

Perhaps if the female, in posession, which is 9/10ths. of the law, wanted to abort the baby, but the male did not, then that would be one thing, and the male could not do anything about it - but, should the female, in posession, which is 9/10ths. of the law, want to keep the baby, but the male wanted to abort it, then he should still have to pay for it, and he could not do anything about it?

What a dilemma!

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:28 pm

Bryn Mawr;636884 wrote: I quite like CG's point - the husband might not be the father and, if so, would he still have the right to know?

In this day and age, it is easy to find out, with or without the knowledge of one's girlfriend, fiancee, or wife - whether or not one's putative offspring are in fact such - for a quite small fee, perhaps £150. $300-ish. Maybe less.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:35 pm

Bill Sikes;637015 wrote: In this day and age, it is easy to find out, with or without the knowledge of one's girlfriend, fiancee, or wife - whether or not one's putative offspring are in fact such - for a quite small fee, perhaps £150. $300-ish. Maybe less.

The proposed law, as stated, does not make allowance for such.

And how are you going to find out if the foetus is your's, before the cut-off for any possible abortion, without the lady's knowledge?

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:41 pm

Bryn Mawr;637026 wrote: The proposed law, as stated, does not make allowance for such.

Ah, I had become carried away. Of course it does not - my mistake.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Fri Jun 15, 2007 8:19 am

Bill Sikes;637005 wrote: Perhaps if the female, in posession, which is 9/10ths. of the law, wanted to abort the baby, but the male did not, then that would be one thing, and the male could not do anything about it - but, should the female, in posession, which is 9/10ths. of the law, want to keep the baby, but the male wanted to abort it, then he should still have to pay for it, and he could not do anything about it?

What a dilemma!

Yes it is, isn't it. Wasn't sure if you were expecting a reponse or were just making a point there so I'll try to offer my answer.

First off, I do appreciate the angle you're taking it from and I do see why it would be considered unfair for a man to have to raise a child he would have chosen to abort. I guess I still go with the "you play, you pay" concept here. That may not be fair or a popular answer, I realize. And it would be nigh impossible and very time consuming to try to explain my thought process behind why I think the way I do and the position I take.

I'll try to condense it.

I'll just say that I have always felt that in matters of pregnancy, delivery, and the care and raising of a child, women get saddled with the majority of the responsibility. This based on what I have seen and know to be true. I know there are responsible fathers in existence but their part in this compared to that of the woman is very small. It is not equal so there's no sense in pretending it is or trying to make it so. That business about couples saying "we're pregnant!?" Uh uh. SHE'S pregnant. Women still do the majority of the raising. The men get off easy. Because of this, I feel the woman's feelings should be honored over what the man wants. The guy doesn't want to be a dad? Where was the rubber then? It broke? Them's the breaks. Yous buys your ticket and yous takes your chances.

That baby is in it's mother's womb. Not it's father's. Why should that woman have to forfeit her body to such a painful, traumatic, scary, and degrading procedure; killing her baby because her man doesn't want to be a father? When a man is able to conceive and nourish another human being within his own body and is able to give birth to it and is saddled with the majority of the responsibility for that child, then I'll be willing to reconsider my stance on the issue.

Ok Bill...I look forward to your comments on this one. :-3