The reality of "parental consent" for abortions

[garbon]

I also disagree with that.

[derspiess]

I'm not sure I disagree.  I'm not comfortable with it, but Ide actually has a point for once 

[merithyn]

There was a case in Michigan, I believe, where a father tried to sue to have his parental rights/obligations terminated because the woman he knocked up would not get an abortion or give the child up for adoption.

Didn't work, obviously, but honestly I don't think there's a very good ethical basis for refusing prospective fathers but affording prospective mothers an ejector seat.

Meri: disagrees.

Clearly you don't know me well at all.

I have long advocated that men should be allowed to sign off on pregnancies in the first 12 weeks, just as a woman could have an abortion in that time period. If they didn't, then they would be required to pay for the pregnancy to term, and see the child at least once before being allowed to sign off to give up parental rights.

At that moment, however, he can't see the child again until he/she is 18 years old. There can be no relationship between himself and the mother. No contact with the child at all in that time period.

[merithyn]

I want to also add that I have a major issue with the idea that mothers can give babies up for adoption without giving first rights to the fathers. I know that this is changing, but in many areas, the father is still all but ignored when the mother gives the child up for adoption. I find that appalling.

[Valmy]

I want to also add that I have a major issue with the idea that mothers can give babies up for adoption without giving first rights to the fathers. I know that this is changing, but in many areas, the father is still all but ignored when the mother gives the child up for adoption. I find that appalling.

I have to say if one of my boys got a girl pregnant and she was giving the baby up for adoption I would want our family to have first dibs.  Seems rather odd if we would not.

[merithyn]

I have to say if one of my boys got a girl pregnant and she was giving the baby up for adoption I would want our family to have first dibs.  Seems rather odd if we would not.

Same here. But in some states (and some jurisdictions within other states) the courts don't always do that. Most do anymore, I think, but it's not uncommon for the father to lose their rights for various reasons, usually to do with not paying for anything during the course of the pregnancy.

[CountDeMoney]

I have to say if one of my boys got a girl pregnant and she was giving the baby up for adoption I would want our family to have first dibs.

derspiess would want first dibs.

[garbon]

I'm not sure I disagree.  I'm not comfortable with it, but Ide actually has a point for once 

I do because we already have a large enough problem with fathers abandoning their children. No need to allow them for an easy out to the "mess" they helped to make.

[merithyn]

I'm not sure I disagree.  I'm not comfortable with it, but Ide actually has a point for once 

I do because we already have a large enough problem with fathers abandoning their children. No need to allow them for an easy out to the "mess" they helped to make.

Well, this would have to be done legally and with purpose. If not, then the father would be just as legally responsible for the child as the mother who chooses not to abort or give up the child for adoption.

[Ideologue]

Clearly you don't know me well at all.

I was actually messing around, I thought I recalled you saying something to the effect.

At that moment, however, he can't see the child again until he/she is 18 years old. There can be no relationship between himself and the mother. No contact with the child at all in that time period.

Not sure I agree with this part, however; it seems largely to make the choice irrevocable (as an abortion or adoption is), even though the situations are different.  (Should a wife who has an abortion no longer be able to have a relationship with her husband?)

Of course, in the natural course of things most relationships where this happened would end on their own; and if a father were going to maintain a relationship with the mom, and thus the child, I'd see no harm in a court being able to evaluate that relationship and levy support, etc.

[merithyn]

Not sure I agree with this part, however; it seems largely to make the choice irrevocable (as an abortion or adoption is), even though the situations are different.  (Should a wife who has an abortion no longer be able to have a relationship with her husband?)

Of course, in the natural course of things most relationships where this happened would end on their own; and if a father were going to maintain a relationship with the mom, and thus the child, I'd see no harm in a court being able to evaluate that relationship and levy support, etc.

You can't have it both ways. If it's the same as an abortion/adoption, then he has zero contact with the child. Period.

If that means that he signs off his parental rights when his wife is 10 weeks pregnant, then yes, that means that he's leaving his wife for the next 18+ years.

[garbon]

I'm not sure I disagree.  I'm not comfortable with it, but Ide actually has a point for once 

I do because we already have a large enough problem with fathers abandoning their children. No need to allow them for an easy out to the "mess" they helped to make.

Well, this would have to be done legally and with purpose. If not, then the father would be just as legally responsible for the child as the mother who chooses not to abort or give up the child for adoption.

Sure there is that hassle but seems like it'd be worth it if you aren't trying to raise a kid. Probably less hassle then being on the hook for child support.

[merithyn]

Sure there is that hassle but seems like it'd be worth it if you aren't trying to raise a kid. Probably less hassle then being on the hook for child support.

Of course, but I don't think that it's anymore fair to saddle a man with a child he doesn't want than to saddle a woman with one. There are differences, of course, like the bulk of the care falling on the mother 90% of the time anyway, which gives me pause on giving the guy an "easy" out.

But ultimately, it's still about choices. If we're going to give women the right to choose whether or not they're parents, we should be prepared to do the same for men.

[garbon]

But ultimately, it's still about choices. If we're going to give women the right to choose whether or not they're parents, we should be prepared to do the same for men.

I don't think so. I think we need to factor in what is good for society. Making it easier for men to abandon their future children doesn't strike me as a positive.

[merithyn]

But ultimately, it's still about choices. If we're going to give women the right to choose whether or not they're parents, we should be prepared to do the same for men.

I don't think so. I think we need to factor in what is good for society. Making it easier for men to abandon their future children doesn't strike me as a positive.

That's a fair take on it, though I disagree that it takes precedence over personal choices. I'm not sure we'll change one another's minds on this, so I'll say that I respect your opinion and leave it at that.