Should the father have rights?

Paula - posted on 07/23/2011

Either he is an equal parent or he isn't. If Mom can opt out of parenthood, why can't Dad?

Paula - posted on 07/23/2011

Either he is an equal parent or he isn't. If Mom can opt out of parenthood, why can't Dad?

Jaime - posted on 01/12/2011

Nicely put Mary!

Mary Renee - posted on 01/12/2011

Facinating question!

I think in an ideal world the answer would be yes. There might be fathers out there who would be totally willing to take full responsibility of the child, and there are fathers out there now that already do.

That said, this is not an ideal world, and obviously any case that would call for abortion is not an ideal situation to begin with.

In my opinion, as long as the woman is the only one who can actually carry the unborn child for nine months and the only one who would have to suffer the havoc it would bestow on her body - it all comes down to the fact that it's HER choice to be pregnant or not. Since the man isn't the one that's pregnant, he doesn't have an equal say.

And I can see where people might see it as a double standard - if she decided to abort the pregnancy the man doesn't have a say, but if she decides NOT to he still has to pay child support... I get how it would seem like a double standard but to me the bottom line is that women are the ones that get pregnant and men are not, so already by definition the situation isn't"equal" or "the same" to begin with.

Jaime - posted on 01/12/2011

Lacye, I think we are all pretty much on the same page, save for the father's 'rights' to the fetus in utero. I know that it doesn't seem fair that he cannot have a say over the fetus inside the womb, but because the fetus is being incubated inside a woman's body...she has sole rights to decide what happens during that time. I don't think that a single one of us would be okay with another person trying to overtake our rights to our own bodies.

Lacye - posted on 01/11/2011

I don't agree that a man should have the right to tell the woman she has to have an abortion. Not at all. If she wants the child then she has that right to have that child.

The same should go with the man. If he wants the child, he should have the right to have it. It will never happen but that is what I think.

As long as the child is wanted, I don't believe that an abortion should be allowed. I do, however, think that if the man wants to have the child, even if the mother doesn't, he has to prove that he is capable of being a good father to the court system before the time when an abortion is no longer possible. If he cannot, then the woman can abort.

Jo - posted on 01/11/2011

Lacye, out of curiousity, if the man said "You have to have an abortion, I refuse to have a being with my DNA walking around." Or "You will have this child, I impregnated you, that is my sperm." Would you force that woman to have an abortion or go through with that pregnancy? (Really think about the implications of your answer.)



A man is absolutely responsible for the choice of ejaculating. That is where his rights end. He has no right over the ejaculate once it has entered another human being. His right to his sperm does not trump the rights of the mother to her body. It is not his body.



When fetus is not yet viable outside of the hosts body, the only rights that need any consideration are the rights of the host aka mother. It is her right and her choice over her own body. The father does not have the right to dictate what the mother should do with her body - at any point.



Once his ejaculate grows into a viable being, his rights are in full force again. That child is no longer a part of another human beings body. It is its own entity. It is half his DNA. It is half his genes. It is half his responsibility. It is his right to choose to be a part of that entity's existance. It is also his choice to opt out of that existence by signing over all rights and responsibility.



I believe that a man and woman should have the exact same rights once a child is born. A woman can choose to put a child up for adoption - at any point - and sign over her rights, relinquishing any physical and financial responsibility. The man should be allowed the same choice without judgment.

Chatty - posted on 01/11/2011

Round and round we go...

Lacye - posted on 01/11/2011

I understand what she is saying. I just don't agree with it. I do think that the man is responsible for when ever he ejaculates. It might be far fetched but you never know. As for men who donated the sperm, screw that. He gave his sperm away to a clinic. He gave up all rights to that sperm when he donated it to that clinic. The sperm then belongs to the clinic and eventually to the woman or couple that buys that sperm. In some cases, not all, but in some I do think the man's right should be considered when making a choice about the fetus that he helped create. It was not created by the woman alone. She had help in there too.

Jaime - posted on 01/11/2011

I think she means in terms of the incubation period though Lacye. The sperm came from the man and he is responsible for putting it there, but he is not incharge of it while it is in utero and has no rights to it's livelihood while in utero either. That belongs to the woman because it is her body. If she decides to give birth, THEN the man has rights to the baby once it is deemed viable outside the uterus. Men ejaculate sperm for the purpose of making a baby and sometimes just for the purpose of sexual pleasure (through masturbation). So what about the times that a man ejaculates without the help of a female partner? Is he still responsible for that sperm? Or does it only apply when the potential for a baby comes into play? I'm sure that seems like an absurd stretch...but you'd be surprised at some of the lawsuits from men that have donated sperm and then later seek out the women that use it for the purpose of obtaining custody or visitation rights to the resulting children.

I know it seems unfair to the men that would WANT to be responsible for the baby if the woman opted for abortion...but as has been said, until men grow a uterus and have the ability to grow a fetus, it remains the woman's choice.

Lacye - posted on 01/11/2011

I'm sorry but I can't agree with some of that. The egg needs the sperm in order to be fertilized. The sperm still belongs to the man. It's just in a different place. It doesn't make sense that it belongs to the man, then when it gets implanted in the woman it doesn't belong to him but when a child is born from that implantation, it all of a sudden belongs to him again? No. The sperm was his from the get go. The being that was implanted in the uterus was partly from the father. It can't go from being his and then not his and back to his again.

Chatty - posted on 01/11/2011

Ya, like I said! ;)

Jo - posted on 01/11/2011

A mans right to his sperm is decided before he allows them to become out of his control. He has the right to prevent his sperm from becoming out of his control. If he allows his sperm to enter a vagina, he relinquishes his right to their existance.



The right to those sperm then becomes the right of whomever's body they are in. If she allows those sperm to grow into a baby or if she terminates whatever has come of those sperm is her right, since the sperm are occupying her body, not his.



The mans rights then returns as soon as his sperm has exited the body of it's inhabitant - usually by this time, his sperm has grown into a miniature human being. His rights then become just as equally important as the rights of the person that allowed his sperm to enter their vagina.



At that point - a woman has the choice of giving the child up for adoption (relinquishing all rights and responsibility for the financial and physical needs of that child) or keeping it. The man, I believe, should have the exact same rights. If he relinquishes his rights, he should not have to pay child support or if he stays in the childs life, it is equally his responsibility to care for the child, physically and financially.

Chatty - posted on 01/11/2011

I agree that men should not have to pay child support.

Lacye - posted on 01/11/2011

oh. LOL! I never heard her say that before. That's why I put it in there.

Jaime - posted on 01/11/2011

Lacye, I actually think Dana agrees with us on that point...she just didn't mention as much in her comment.

Lacye - posted on 01/11/2011

Well Dana, then the men should have the right to not pay child support then. They didn't want to have the child in the first place. The mother did. But yet men still have to pay the child support either way if they want to or not. Like I said, there is no win win situation when it comes to children and unwed parents.

Jaime - posted on 01/11/2011

Corena, deciding not to have a child IS selfish...but deciding to have a child is ALSO selfish. Anything that serves one's own self-interest is selfish. You'd be hard pressed to find anything in this world that is truly selfless.

And as much as it's devastating that some men lose the opportunity to be fathers to the babies they have helped create, as Dana said, unless they grow a uterus it won't happen anytime soon!

Chatty - posted on 01/11/2011

I made a rhetorical statement, Lacye. I realize that people still want to "debate" this but it just goes round and round and the same things are being said, over and over. You cannot, nor will anybody, EVER be able to force a women to carry a pregnancy to term. That's just the bottom line. Men don't have rights to a woman and HER fetus or pregnancy. Men have the right to use protection or not have sex or face the consequences. When a man has sex he goes into it FULLY knowing that a woman is the ONLY one who gets to make that decision. PERIOD!

Lacye - posted on 01/11/2011

I never said it was a win win situation. But then again, when it comes to children and the parents aren't together, there never is.

Brandi - posted on 01/11/2011

But if you let one parent decide, you are still forcing one person into adoption or another into adoption and childbirth.

Lacye - posted on 01/11/2011

Brandi I do understand what you are saying. I believe (as I've already said) that if one of the parents decide to keep the child, then they should have that right. When a child is born, both parents have to decide if it should be given up for adoption. Not just the woman. If the woman wants to keep it, she does. If the man wants to keep it, then he does. I don't believe that father's rights are BS.

Dana, we are still debating it because it is up there and people still want to discuss it. :)

Chatty - posted on 01/11/2011

"Should the father have rights?" He's not a father until the fetus is born! He has no legal rights to the unborn fetus and NEVER will! It doesn't matter if someone thinks he should or not....it's not going to happen, EVER! Well, unless he grows a uterus and can carry the baby himself? I'm not sure why we're still talking about this?

Brandi - posted on 01/11/2011

You're not understanding what I'm saying.

In order for a man to have equal rights in a pregnancy situation, he would have to be allowed to choose abortion or adoption as well as being a parent. Just like women do. That isn't possible. That is why "fathers rights" is total BS.

Shauna - posted on 01/11/2011

THE FATHER HAS EVERY RIGHT TO KNOW!

Corena - posted on 01/11/2011

"But lots of women aren't totally willing to take on the responsibility to carry the fetus for 9 months Corena, and THAT is what matters in this situation."

Ummm...yeah I'm aware that many women are not that selfless. I am also friends with a couple of guys whose children have been aborted. It destroyed them...absolutely no different than any other parent losing a child.
I'm also pro life so, obviously, I don't think it is OK to have an abortion regardless. I do think there is a huge inequity in a society that forces men to be fathers when they don't want to or shouldn't be, yet would never even consider allowing a man who wants his child desperately to stop someone from aborting it.
It is just completely illogical to me.

Lacye - posted on 01/10/2011

I can't agree with you more Jamie! :)

Jaime - posted on 01/10/2011

I agree Lacye that it's absolutely NOT wrong for the man to want the baby...just as it's not wrong for the woman to want the baby. The sad truth of the situation however, is that the woman makes the choice to either carry the fetus or abort...and no one else. I certainly don't think it's a fair choice because I think that there ARE men who would make wonderful, single fathers and don't get that opportunity. Having said that, I think that if a woman wants to keep the baby and the man does not, he should have every right to forfeit his parental responsibilities. I think the laws are starting to recognize that biology does not make someone a parent, so I hope that eventually our laws can include more options for those that do not want the responsibility of being a parent. Of course every person should enter into a sexual encounter responsiblity...that goes without saying. But life is unpredictable and full of mistakes. Some hard mistakes give us the opportunity to become better people, and some can completely ruin us. I don't enjoy the idea of abortion, but I do support a woman's right to choose abortion for whatever reason.

Lacye - posted on 01/10/2011

No. If the father wants to sign over his rights then he needs to do it. Same with the mother. Men are forced to be parents every day Brandi. It's a fact of life. There are millions of men out there that didn't want the kids but the woman had it anyways. I'm not saying that is wrong because the woman wants the baby. Just like I'm saying it's not wrong for the man to want the baby to raise even if the mother doesn't.

Nikkole - posted on 01/10/2011

If the mother didn't want the child and the father did the mother could sign something giving up all rights and vise versa in my opinion i wish that option could be mad and then if both parents didn't want the child then do what you have to but i know its her body her choice.

Brandi - posted on 01/10/2011

So what you're saying, Lacye, is that fathers should have rights until you don't agree with their decision. Then they just get forced to be parents?

Lacye - posted on 01/10/2011

I know that Jamie. I was just answering what Brandi was asking at the top of the page. :)

Jaime - posted on 01/10/2011

Sure...in a perfect world that is what should happen Lacye. If the father wants the child but the mother doesn't, he should be able to have the child...but the reality is that the woman has to carry the fetus. If she doesn't want the baby, then she shouldn't be forced to carry it. And Haley, it doesn't matter if the father is a deadbeat or isn't...it's still not his body and THAT was my point. If someone is careless when having sex and ends up pregnant and doesn't want the baby, I think the best option is abortion. Nine months is a long time for a resentful woman to carry a baby in her womb, doing possibly MORE damage to that 'innocent child's life' than if she were to just abort and be done with it!

Lacye - posted on 01/10/2011

If the father doesn't want the child but the mother does, then the pregnancy should continue. I believe that if one of the potential parents wants the child, then the pregnancy should continue.

User - posted on 01/10/2011

I never said it's only up to him if he's not a dead beat. You must have missed what I actually said Jaime. I said it's not up to him if he's a dead beat. Why? Because he obviously doesn't care if he's not making any effort on his part. It should be up to BOTH the parents what happens if the father ISN'T a dead beat Jaime. I don't agree with abortion. If you have as much carelessness to have sex and get pregnant than you can give that child to someone who isn't able to have kids instead of ending an innocent childs life.

Jaime - posted on 01/10/2011

But lots of women aren't totally willing to take on the responsibility to carry the fetus for 9 months Corena, and THAT is what matters in this situation.

Corena - posted on 01/09/2011

I believe the father should have equal rights...I don't believe that will ever happen.
I know more than one single father and my husband and I have raised/are raising his children from his first marriage. Lots of Dad's are TOTALLY willing to take on the responsibility.

Brandi - posted on 01/09/2011

To the people saying the father should have rights because he had a hand in conception....what if he doesn't want the child? What if he prefers abortion or adoption? Does he simply lose his rights? Or should he get to keep the rights you WANT him to have and use them to force abortion or adoption on a woman who doesn't wish to do either?

Jaime - posted on 01/08/2011

Even if the couple is married Christina, the father should not have a right to consent to or against abortion. I understand your thinking there, but it's not the same as sterilization...we're talking about a woman carrying a living, growing fetus for nine months...it's just not something that every woman wants to do.

Christina - posted on 01/07/2011

I feel if the couple is married and the state requires both spouses to sign consent for sterilization (tubal or vasectomy) then the father has a right to consent to an abortion. However, if the couple is NOT married or is separated (living in different houses completely) then he should not get a say. Abortion is a medical procedure on a woman's body, and that woman should be the only one who should have say over it.

Jaime - posted on 01/07/2011

That's assuming she wants to carry the baby to term Brittany. And a woman should not be forced to carry a fetus if she does not want to...no matter who is at fault.

Brittany - posted on 01/07/2011

I think he should know. What if he wants the baby. In the unmarried case he might want one, she could give up all legal rights to the child and hand him over to the father.

Lacye - posted on 01/07/2011

Oh I understand what you are saying. A man will never have a choice in the matter until after the baby is born. It sucks but it's a fact.

Jaime - posted on 01/07/2011

Yes, but even if he wants to pay for the woman's hospital bills and take responsibility for the baby she doesn't have to carry the baby if she doesn't want to and she is the only one that can determine that end of it. That is what I'm saying. I think it sucks if a man wants to be a father and take on that responsibility...it's not fair one bit, but it's not his body carrying the fetus.

Lacye - posted on 01/07/2011

But it was his body that helped make the child. If he wanted to keep it, he should pay for the woman's bills and upkeep during the pregnancy. I'm not saying he should just decide to keep the baby on a whim. I'm saying a man should have to prove to the court system that he can be a responsible parent to this unborn child.

Jaime - posted on 01/07/2011

lol...So it's only up to the man if he's not a dead beat? Does it somehow make him the decision-maker just because he wants the baby? It doesn't matter if he's devoted or deadbeat...it's not his body carrying the baby, so it's not his choice.

User - posted on 01/07/2011

The father has as much say as she does. The kid is half his and frankly without him or his sperm she wouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place.



BUT



If the father is a dead beat and isn't around then it's not up to him.

Chatty - posted on 01/07/2011

How come I'm not getting emails about this thread? I want in again! ;)

Toni - posted on 01/07/2011

Jennifer, does that mean that the father should or shouldn't have rights?

Jaime - posted on 01/07/2011

I agree Brandi and I do see that you have a valid point.