Previous Post Next Post

Mom

Brought to you by

Ohio Law Would Give Men Final Decision in Abortion

By jeannesager |

pregnantbelly1A Republican lawmaker in Ohio has re-introduced a bill that would give a man the final choice on whether the woman he got pregnant could have an abortion.

Dubbed the “father’s right bill,” it would give the man the right to stand up and say he doesn’t want the fetus he contributed DNA to to be aborted. But it says nothing about then forcing him to be a good father or provide financial stability.

So yeah, way to go Ohio, if this bill makes it through to law, you won’t just be pulling a woman’s right to choose what happens to her own body (be it having to go through pregnancy or not), but you’ll be sticking a mother with everything that comes with pregnancy and putting none of it on the guy. Woohoo – score another one for progress.

OK, sarcasm done with.

I’m sure this will be met with a fair amount of “Oh, but now she can give the child up for adoption, so why should the guy be held responsible?”

Because that’s not actually what’s behind the bill (again, a bill, not a law). Its sponsor, Rep. John Adams (who has reintroduced a bill first put forth in 2007), has stated publicly that this is an attempt to “keep the two people who have created that child together.” In other words – he’s trying to force a family unit out of pregnancy rather than the other way around. He’s not aiming for adoption, he’s aiming for one big happy.

And realistically, that isn’t the way the world works. If it did – how do we account for all of the divorced parents out there? According to most studies, children don’t keep people together (the most oft-repeated stat figures half of all of America’s children will see their parents divorce at least once).

Throw in the fact that Adams’ plan would prohibit an abortion in cases where mothers don’t know the identity of the father (and bringing forth a fake would carry jail time), and I’m still trying to see how this could possibly be anything but punishment for the women involved. There’s a clear message here of “you made your bed, now lie in it.” But it’s focused solely on the woman, who has a federally protected right to make a brand new bed, and again lets men off scot free.

This isn’t about babies or fetuses, folks. It’s about a return to the patriarchal order where men are handed the right to dictate the way a woman can live her life, and she’s stuck with it.

Related Posts:

More on Babble

About jeannesager

jeannesager

jeannesager

Jeanne Sager is a freelance writer and photographer living in upstate New York with her husband and daughter, Jillian. She maintains a blog of her award-winning columns at jeannesager.blogspot.com.

« Go back to Mom

Use a Facebook account to add a comment, subject to Facebook's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your Facebook name, profile photo and other personal information you make public on Facebook (e.g., school, work, current city, age) will appear with your comment. Comments, together with personal information accompanying them, may be used on Babble.com and other Babble media platforms. Learn More.

90 thoughts on “Ohio Law Would Give Men Final Decision in Abortion

  1. Amanda B. says:

    I am a pro-life Ohioan, but this is absolutely NOT the answer to reducing abortions. This guy is ridiculous.

  2. Mistress_Scorpio says:

    I have nothing constructive to say. I just want to repeatedly cockpunch this John Adams character.

  3. Sabrina says:

    I’m pro-life too, but seriously? If they give the right to a man to step up,in court no less,and say he wants that baby to live, there should be automatic responsibility attached for him. Mandatory child support, maybe even full custody from the day of birth. And WHAT?? A woman who doesn’t know who the father is should have full say on her own!! Women get a bad rap for “forcing” men to pay child support for 18 years because they kept the baby the man didn’t want. Men should be getting a bad rap too if this law goes through. But it won’t.

  4. meg says:

    Just as long as I get a turn, Mistress_Scorpio.

  5. Jim says:

    I’m a pro-choice feminist, I suppose. I’ve always been stunned that the decision to end the life of a fetus rests solely with the mother. The father has no rights, only responsibilities. Would you support letting the father have sole discretion to end or continue a pregnancy? I think not. Why, then, should the mother?

  6. jenni says:

    WRONG~!!! The baby belongs to the woman’s body. Donating a sperm does give you the right. What does this mean for rape victims, or victims of abusive husbands and boyfriends. Men suck so bad. Why do we even let them live?

  7. Jim says:

    I support Sabrina’s position. If the father chooses to continue the pregnancy, he should be responsible for it. However, by that logic, if the father wants to end the pregnancy and the woman declines, should he be free of obligations?

  8. Jim says:

    Hi Jenni,

    Wow, thanks for your thoughtful, balanced comment. I mean, you make an excellent point when you suggest that women should murder all men. Thanks very much for your insightful contribution.

  9. PlumbLucky says:

    Wrong on so many levels.

    And Jim, I’m not sure what the answer is. At the moment, because of human biology, I have to say that the final say is the woman’s; a man can prevent conception, but has little say once it has occured. (I’m stating this as a biological fact not an opinion as I feel it certainly sucks in some cases)

    This bill is so full of holes I can’t even begin to find a good place to start…so I’ll start here: where’s the exemption to this crap for victims of rape and incest, or if the mother’s life is in danger?

    I’m seriously shocked that they don’t have provisions in this bill to brand a scarlet A on pregnant women’s foreheads…

  10. PlumbLucky says:

    (Wrong on so many levels – refers to the bill in question. It didn’t look clear when I hit the post button and wanted to clarify)

  11. anonymous says:

    “I have to say that the final say is the woman’s; a man can prevent conception, but has little say once it has occured.”

    A woman can prevent conception too. Perhaps both parties should be responsible anyway for conceiving.

  12. Amanda B. says:

    Before the 1960s and 70s, I think I heard that men weren’t responsible for a child if it was born out of wedlock , but that they didn’t have any rights to that child either. Is that true?

  13. Amanda B. says:

    Before the 1960s and 70s, I think I heard that men weren’t responsible for a child if it was born out of wedlock , but that they didn’t have any rights to that child either. Is that true?

  14. popurls.com // popular today…

    story has entered the popular today section on popurls.com…

  15. Lauren says:

    Say the man has to take custody if he won’t consent. Does he take on the risk of death in childbirth, hemmoroids, fistulas, emergency c sections… As far as I’m concerned, the second men start to take the risks associated with pushing a baby out of their nether regions, then they can have a say.

  16. Greg Perry says:

    Hmm. Well. It is sorta hard to conceive a child without a man involved, excepting of course incense and rape situations.

    So absent another immaculate conception, which to my knowledge hasn’t happened for over 2000 years, why is this a poor bill to sponsor? If two consenting adults – both of which are required elements for conception – have sexual intercourse with a resulting pregnancy, why wouldn’t the father have any say over the child?

    And isn’t arguments about the woman’s “choice of what to do with her body” irrelevant if she chose to have sex with a man?

  17. Yes! says:

    So, this means I can dump a load in any girl of my choosing and never worry about child support!? WIN

  18. Lauren says:

    Because the last time I checked, men don’t die in childbirth.

  19. LN says:

    Considering that full-term pregnancy is more risky than an abortion to the life of the mother…

  20. Jaap says:

    Some men die in working very dangerous jobs to support their spouses and children………. why is that different. As long as men are responsible for the children, they should have some say in the matter, but only if they are willing to take care of the kids on their one if the mother chooses not to want the kid.

  21. Preda says:

    Hmm.

    If the mother doesn’t want the child she can give it up for adaption, abort it, or give it to a hospital.

    What are the mens rights if he doesn’t want the child? Can he get off without paying anything?

    What if he is ready and willing to raise the child but she doesn’t want him. Why can she kill his kid without his input?

    Then again pregnancy isn’t easy. She could have a complicated pregnancy, lose work options, be passed over for promotions etc.

    This is not an easy decision.

    Both parties should have rights and responsibilities.

    If both want the kid but don’t want to be with each other, they should get 50/50 custody.

    If she wants the kid but he doesn’t, he should have to pay child support until the kid is 18.

    If he wants the kid and she doesn’t she should have to pay child support until the kid is 18.

    If neither want the kid then they should pay for an abortion/adaption.

  22. MyPersonalOpinion says:

    Hmm well what about men that want to abort the baby and women who want to keep them? The woman has the right to keep the baby right? Does she also have the right to force the man to pay child support for a child he never wanted. If she has the right to keep the baby, he has the right to keep the baby. I thought we were going for equality here, not women dominating the world. And by the way, it is NOT a “woman’s right to choose what’s best for her body.” The woman’s right to choose started with the action in which the child was conceived,

  23. Jack says:

    no doubt a simple minded Christian like most republicans….1 dimensional idiot

  24. Jamon says:

    The biggest problem with this suggested law is enforcability in the real world. There are loads of cases where the opinion of the father can either not be found, or should be trumped by health concerns for the mother. The biggest ones that come to mind are rape and possible death of the mother by carrying through with the pregnancy.

    The problem with these are that if such a law were introduced, pregnant women could simply search around for a doctor who will state that the mother’s health is at risk (because every pregnancy is somewhat of a risk), making the law useless. Additionally, every time a potential father showed their intent on denying the request for an abortion, it would result in the potential mother filing false allegations of rape. That doesn’t help anyone.

    Ideologically, however, the decision of whether two people should have a baby is made when they have sex (semantics games aside). It’s well established that once this has occurred, the father has a responsibility to help provide for the child. This argument, that the man became responsible for the child (and child support) once they took off their pants, can easily be applied the other way around. Once the woman took off her pants, she should have known there was a possibility of getting pregnant, and that if it happened, the potential father should have as many rights as they have responsibilities.

    That being said, the best solution that I can come up with (though I’m sure it’s full of holes too) is to amend the suggested law with an exception for “high risk” pregnancies (a well defined term in healthcare), and for pregnancies where the mother would like an abortion, but cannot retrieve the approval of the father, and an signed affidavit is provided, under risk of jailtime, that the mother made a reasonable attempt to solicit the approval of the father. In the case of real rape cases, cases where the father made little or no attempts at making himself available for contact in the outcome of a pregnancy (I’m thinking one-night stands with unknown people, other promiscuous behavior), the bar would be much lower for the mother, through due process. The only time it would come up as an issue is if a father later found out about an abortion where the mother made little or no attempt to contact him, and he can show reasonable proof that she could have contacted him. The burdon of proof would be on the father, in these cases.

    In short though, we must either choose that father’s have no responsibility in unwanted pregnancies, or that father’s have near-equal rights in the outcome of the pregnancy, and the child.

  25. MyPersonalOpinion says:

    No doubt an overbearing liberal hippie like most democrats…7 lettered idiot.

  26. Amanda B. says:

    Jack – While many Republicans are Christians, they are not “simple minded”. This Adams guy may be way off on this issue, but don’t judge a party by its worst members. I doubt Democrats would want people to do that either.

  27. Amanda B. says:

    Jack – While many Republicans are Christians, they are not “simple minded”. This Adams guy may be way off on this issue, but don’t judge a party by its worst members. I doubt Democrats would want people to do that either.

  28. Bigduke says:

    Sorry men, but your “right” ends when the semen leaves your body. Wrap that rascle boys! That is whe you get a choice.

  29. Bill says:

    I applaud that fathers are being recognized as having rights in a pregnancy. 100%. Yes, I said it.

    At the same time, I do recognize a woman’s choice when it comes to her body. One thing I think a lot of people are missing is when the woman can and should be making the choice. If she’s chosen to have sex with any given partner, with or without contraception (none of which carries a 100% effectiveness rate), she’s choosing to accept the risk that a pregnancy may result. So is her partner. Having both made that decisions, both are stakeholders in the pregnancy that can result.

    In the case of a rape, I would agree that the mother has a right to terminate, provided she at the very least files a police report and provides evidence as to the rape.

    If both parties chose, both parties have rights. It’s not about patriarchal control of women, since after all, if she chose to have sex, she’s prepared for the outcome, right? I hope we’re doing more than teaching our populace to just not have sex, so they’re well and properly informed about the risks that come with intercourse.

  30. annanimate says:

    This bill is going nowhere fast, so don’t waste any more time worrying about it. It’s just more politicians wasting tax dollars. Maybe complain about that.

  31. Tom says:

    This blog is so bias, for example: “But it says nothing about then forcing him to be a good father or provide financial stability”
    Existing state laws attempt to force fathers to provide financial support, and most judges and social services encourage fathers’ interaction with their children.

    And Preda’s comments and questions are appreciated

  32. Lauren says:

    Maybe this law could work if there wasn’t such a long history of oppression of women. But there is and this is just one more way for men (not all men but some) to abuse and control women.

  33. Kevin says:

    How about this: if I knock a girl up and don’t want her to have an abortion, but she does anyway, I don’t have to pay child support. She can assume all responsibility for the kid. Sounds fair to me.

  34. Andy Kucklis says:

    As long as this law also allows the man to force an abortion, I’m all for it

  35. busta says:

    Kevin, please don’t spill your seed til you can put together a multi-clause sentence. Thanks, signed, mankind.

  36. jeannesager says:

    Tom: there is nothing on the books that requires a guy getting a woman pregnant is financially stable. It’s nice to say he HAS to provide child support, but if he doesn’t have a pot to piss in – how exactly WILL he do that? There’s a difference between having a child support order and actually getting enough child support to raise a child on.

    There’s also a large difference between court-ordered interaction between parent and child and actual good parenting.

  37. leahsmom says:

    I just can’t ever feel Ok about any law that gives another person rights over my medical care. For me, with my medical conditions, to go through a pregnancy right now would be life-altering because of my health, and to allow someone else to mandate that I carry a pregnancy to term could force me to live with medical complications and potential disabilities for the rest of my life – which would endanger me, and add potentially to the taxpayer’s burden for my care, if I became indigent, but would also endanger my children, financially, emotionally and otherwise.

  38. Bill says:

    Leahsmom: The answer to your problem is simple. Don’t have unmitigated sex. If you choose to, then you accept the risk. Otherwise, find alternatives. Sapience generally defines the ability to override instinctive behaviour, and this includes mating. You know and understand the risks, so as long as you make choices based on that knowledge, you’re not conceding any rights to anyone else.

  39. Marj says:

    I hope they are paying for research for growing babies outside of the babies – or maybe they think it’s more humane to imprison women who don’t want babies, and strap them to tables to force them to carry to term.

  40. Marj says:

    I meant outside the women’s bodies…or maybe inside the men’s bodies.

  41. Gary Ham says:

    To me, the whole issue shouldn’t just be about “oh, is abortion right or wrong?” it should be about PREVENTING the choice of having an abortion ever being presented. Use birth control, or, at least, a condom. Don’t be stupid. “When you’re gonna make love, wear a glove.”

    THAT should be the new motto for women’s rights and birth control activists EVERYWHERE.

  42. Shadow says:

    So I read this article and also some of the responses to it.
    I myself think that this bill is ridiculous. Although I agree that men should be able to have some say in the continuation or abortion of a pregnancy, I don’t agree that he should have the final say.
    The only thing that this will bring about, if it does become law, will be that there will be a lot more young women dying because they will go to back alley abortionists to have the procedure done if the father says “No, you are keeping this baby”. Back alley abortionists rarely use safe medical practices, and it is likely that women who choose this option over continuing with the pregnancy would die from infection or other causes related to the procedure.
    I myself am a woman, and I consider myself as neither pro-life, nor pro-choice. I believe that life is precious and should not be ended, but I do not condemn a woman who has an abortion either because she is not ready for the baby or the child was the product of rape or incest. Would I myself ever have an abortion? I would not want to, but I know that if I had to (meaning if carrying the child became a health hazard to myself and the child) I would.
    In short, this bill is only going to force young, pregnant, women to go to back alley butchers to have the procedure done, causing numerous deaths of these women afterwards because of health complications from improper practice.

  43. Jean says:

    A woman cannot place her child for adoption without the father of that child leagally signing away his rights in the adoption paperwork.

    If this law passes in Ohio then impregnanted women will be bound to the father of the child should he refuse to consent to abortion or adoption. This is very bad news for women trapped in abusive relationships. The only remaining choice would be to run from the father so he never knows she was pregnant and then dump the child at a hospital after she’s given birth — and with her body full of bonding hormones that would be very difficult to do.

    For the women of Ohio, I hope this doesn’t pass.

  44. IpayChildsupport4kidsIdidn'tfather says:

    well who is for mandatory gov’t regulated birth-control? Make people go thru some legal hoops to reverse it if they want to have a child. Would be quite a change from the norm.. but we’ve already bent the norm so out of whack it might be worth a try.
    And to the posters whose comment amounts to ‘just because they are ordered to pay doesn’t mean they will’ thats true but it means tha they get locked up in jail for the crime of not having money. hardly seems just. btw title is misleading this doens’t give men the final say it just gives them a vote in whether or not the unborn child lives or dies.

  45. Bunny says:

    Everything about this is absurd. The fact that abortion is a woman’s choice, and not a man’s choice, is rooted in biology – even if abortion is illegal, a determined woman will find a way to not have a baby. Keeping abortion legal simply means that this determined woman has safe, civilized ways to go about this. If a man doesn’t want his partner to have a baby – well, none of the ways that a determined man will keep a woman from having a baby have ever been legal, and I sure hope none of you think that they should be.

    It’s not fair to men, sure, but who said life was fair? Nature has deemed total reproductive equality impossible, and attempts at making it “fair” are doomed to failure or horrible abuses.

  46. [...] Bill on Abortion Decisions This just won’t end well. Ohio Law Would Give Men Final Decision in Abortion | Strollerderby Personally, me being pro-choice but also holding the view that you should be reprimanded for [...]

  47. Me2 says:

    At the moment men have absolutely NO saying regarding a baby.

    If a woman has the right to choose if she wants or not to keep a baby then shouldn’t a man have the right to choose if he wants to financially and emotionally spport that baby or not?
    A woman has the right to choose. A woman has the right to force a man to pay child support (even if the kid doesn’t belong to him; just read the newspapers to see men jailed for failing or refusing to pay child support for a kid they didn’t even father).

    What rights does a man have? NONE. So stop bitching.

  48. Ben says:

    Outside any argument about pro-life vs pro-choice, this bill would be an obviously unconstitutional invasion of a woman’s privacy to not publicly disclose her sexual partners to obtain a legal abortion.

  49. Me2 says:

    Men:
    0% of the rights,
    50% of the responsabilities

    Women:
    100% of the rights,
    50% of the responsabilities

  50. Mike says:

    It’s simple: Men don’t have the ability to get pregnant, therefore it is not an even playing ground. This is the fault of biology, not the fault of either gender.
    If this bill is passed, I can see Ohio quickly turning into one gigantic sausage fest. This sounds more like something you’d see in Afghanistan, where women already have very few rights – not like something you’d see in the United States of America.
    If a man wants to have a child that badly, he can go impregnate a WILLING mother.

  51. Chibi says:

    This bill is absolutely disgraceful. Men are not the ones who have to live through the pregnancy, which can do a lot of irreversible damage to a woman’s body. It’s her uterus, she should have the right to decide what does or does not live inside of it. It sucks for any guy who believes that he’d like the baby around, but honestly? Too bad so sad. Go find a woman who does want children and leave the rest of us be. I mean, I can see so many ways this bill would be abused.

  52. Chris says:

    Seems to me that both the man and the woman should have the choice to opt out of a pregnancy. A woman can obviously do so through abortion, but I think a man should have the same right to opt out. If the woman chooses to carry the pregnancy to term, that’s her call, but it shouldn’t inherently obligate the guy. After all, a lot of sex involves an agreement, through the use of contraception, that pregnacy is specifically not part of the experience. In that situation, a guy should be able to opt out, same as the woman.

  53. Mike says:

    There is one other thing about this bill that I find funny. In order for a man to have any say in whether or not a woman can abort HIS child, he must first prove that it is his child. If the child has not yet been birthed, this would require an amniocentesis. This is a risky procedure for both mother and child, and last time I checked, amniocentesis could not be forced. If a woman cannot be forced to have amniocentesis, and therefore the paternity cannot be proven, then how do you guys expect the woman to be forced to carry the baby to term?

  54. SusieQ says:

    1) If a man wants to have a child using a woman’s body when she wants to abort, then he should have to carry the baby himself or engage a surrogate, as well as pay for the embryo transfer costs (embryo adoption is an already existing technique). 2) If a man doesn’t want to have/pay for a child but the woman intends to have the child, and Ohio makes this law, it needs to enforce a contractual agreement before sex: that way women who have certain beliefs won’t be tricked into sleeping with a man who says they would face up to their responsibilities (as I imagine those women would be put into a position where they asked this beforehand if they had no other choices), and so that men who do not agree to it beforehand would not be forced into it later. …. That’s a lot of paperwork just to have a one night stand.

  55. darter22 says:

    And if the man wants to abort and the woman wants a child? Sounds like a pro-choice bill.

  56. GetReal says:

    Uh, make sure you know who you are sleeping with!
    I have a guy friend who’s (after the abortion she’s an ex) girlfriend aborted their baby (that they intentionally produced together) about 9 months ago now. He has not been able to get over what he sees as the murder of his child, and he probably never completely will.
    I had a guy roommate that didn’t want a baby but saw abortion as murder to the level that he would’ve married a chick that he didn’t want to marry (or whatever else she required) to prevent his child from being murdered if the situation arose.

    It is really about how you view the fetus (personally, I go for the biblical view — they are property until about 5 years old, and humans after that … who the property belongs to is another arguement).

  57. Derek says:

    Presumably Ohio already has laws that require a father to provide for his child, either as part of a family or via child support. As this bill doesn’t mention anything about child support, the existing laws would still apply.

    Prohibiting abortion in the case of not knowing who the father is is pretty shitty, considering pregnancy can be the result of rape. :-/

  58. Gss says:

    wow, didn’t women love children at one point in history? Look how far women have fallen. It’s sad. There is no hope for society. It’s so sad that women don’t want men to help them with their children. Ladies, you reap what you sow. You raise a child without a father and don’t be surprised when that kid becomes an adult and doesn’t respect you.

  59. LolAtTheFearMongering says:

    Wow, playing on a mother’s love through fear. You must be one real nice person Gss. (That was sarcasm.) You men reap what you sow too. This is not a one way world where women have the sole responsibility And this bill is nothing but salt, pro-lifers using government to get into women’s lives in order to make their decisions for them.

  60. Mistress_Scorpio says:

    Jeanne, you really know how to post the comment-bait, eh?
    For all the man-child types and their enablers whining about how men don’t get to choose… they do, prior to conception. Treat your ability to procreate like the precious commodity it should be.

  61. Well...then says:

    i’m pro-life. i really don’t see how giving the final say to either the mother or father helps. abortions shouldn’t be happening in the first place but really? the baby doesn’t “belong” only to the mother. If only there was more respect for life, and less respect for humans lack of self control. and no, don’t start talking about rape. just because something is inconvenient doesn’t make it right, by that logic if you find your child unattractive, well then I guess he or she doesn’t deserve to live *rolling eyes*.

  62. Melissa says:

    Hey John- Let’s just prevent women from speaking because their male partners say so, let’s force rape victims to have their rapist’s baby, because the rapist says so, and hey, let’s just abolish women’s rights all together and force them to live in a cage where her male owner can dictate how she eats, speaks, acts, and lives…

  63. Ali says:

    Cool, so if a man impregnates his 11 year old daughter he can make her have the baby evne if she dies doing it? Gotta love equal rights for rapists and child molesters.

  64. Seranvali says:

    Due to female biology women have more than one chance to avoid being a mother. Men have only one. If they don’t want to be a father they should be wearing a condom regardless of whatever contraceptive measures their partner is taking. It’s by far the easiest and safest solution for everyone concerned. If they choose not to they are as responsible as their partner is and they should be liable for child support.

    I can’t see any reason why a man in a short term relationship with a pregnant women should have any say in what she does with her body but hopefully husbands and long term partners can be accommodated amicably but ultimately I think it should be the woman’s decision, since she takes the risks and grows the foetus.

  65. Jeff says:

    The PRO-ABORTION nuts will never understand the PRO-LIFE side of this argument, because they don’t consider ABORTION the Killing of an unborn child. It is just something they do, so they can MOVE ON!!!

  66. Seranvali says:

    Jeff:

    The FORCED-BIRTHERS will never understand the PRO-CHOICE side of this argument because they don’t understand that our bodies belong to us and they have no right to try and control them.

  67. Bebe says:

    This is ridiculous. While I do think fathers should at least be involved in the discussion, in the end the burden of caring for the child is going to fall to the mother. If they were to mediate between the two parties and come to an agreement that was actually enforceable, that would be something. At this point, if the man says please don’t have the child and the woman decided to, he is still on the hook for child support. I don’t think that’s right, but neither is being able to trap a woman in an unwanted pregnancy. The women involved would just cross state lines to obtain an abortion anyway.

    Of course the issue is very time sensitive, so I can imagine court cases which, through delay, would force a woman to have a child she couldn’t support.

    What about the morning after pill, or victims of rape or incest? What about instances of rape where the victim does not report it? This is insane.

  68. sam says:

    what if man want abortion and his wife not??

  69. PlumbLucky says:

    The forced abortion (where the father wants one but mother does not) and the fact that paternity would have to be proven, but an amniocentesis would have to be done (and that’s a risk in itself for a spontaneous (as in biological) abortion)…seems like this bill is a big honking waste of time.

  70. [...] Ohio Law Would Give Men Final Decision in Abortion | Strollerderby [...]

  71. Philip A. Kledzik says:

    Not to debate on the subject…There are definately positives to the bill and negatives. The baby is alive inside the mother, and is part of the father. I have 3 children, and they are definately made up of both of us. There is no way that only one person should have a say in the matter. I personally beleive that any form of abortion is wrong, even abortive contraception. I also understand that every person can choose right or wrong, there are just consequences that go along with choices. If two people create a baby together and one wants to kill the baby and the other wants it to live, life should definately be given a chance. There are many negatives that people seem to ignore about abortions. Someone up above said full term pregnancies are more dangerous than abortions. It all depends on how you look at it. Yes, there might be more physical dangers at the time of delivery. There are also large possibilities that a woman becomes unable to get a pregnant again from an abortion, there are huge amounts of depression and other emotional baggage that comes from having an abortion done. There are also the cases where the abortion takes place and the baby still lives and is later born, now with lots of problems. There is no easy way or answer when it comes to life and death situations. Mostly because people don’t want to give up their own choices for someone else. As a parent you do give up a lot for your children (and that is without spoiling them).

  72. Morgan says:

    “There are also large possibilities that a woman becomes unable to get a pregnant again from an abortion, there are huge amounts of depression and other emotional baggage that comes from having an abortion done.”

    Forced-birther propoganda. Sure, some women will be depressed after an abortion. Between the hormones, the possible loss of a child that they wanted, and, hey, society–in general–telling women they’re evil baby-killing sluts. That sure doesn’t help.

    But, in general, this crap is drummed up by anti-abortion forced-birth advocates: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/magazine/21abortion.t.html?8br=&pagewanted=all

  73. [...] 20: Strollerderby: Ohio Law Would Give Men Final Decision in Abortion [...]

  74. Dez says:

    Giving the sperm donor power over the mother is simply another desperate end run by the Party of Forced Birth. I do not expect it to pass.

  75. Glenn says:

    Look, to be fair, the Bill shouldn’t require the man to provide financial stability etc., because there are probably already Acts doing that.

    Aside from that, the Bill is fucked. I think there is an ethical responsibility on the woman to consult with the father of the foetus before termination, but I don’t think it should be legally enforced and the bloke shouldn’t have the veto power.

  76. SassyGirl says:

    When science and technology come to a point where a fetus can be removed from a woman’s body and successfully implanted in a man’s, is when the man should have a say. Childbirth and pregnancy are physically hard on a woman’s body, why should she have to go through that if she doesn’t want to? I have two children and pregnancy is not as glamorous as hollywood portrays it, try pushing out a ten pound baby with his arm over his head!

    If the woman decides to continue the pregnancy and to keep the subsequent baby, both parents need to be financially responsible for the child, even if the father did not want it. Why? Because if they don’t, taxpayers will be responsible for it.

  77. Pat says:

    The person who concocted this bill must have an overdeveloped case of patriarchy. When men begin to carry children, they may have earned the right of sovereignty over it. Until then, render unto women what is women’s work, and unto God, what is God’s work. The triangle works – for women and for men, and always has. Respecting God for wisdom doesn’t come naturally; it is learned. The ignorance of this bill is unbelievable.

  78. Todd says:

    What a dick. The only way this would be anywhere near acceptable would be that if the father enforced his wishes, then he had to adopt the child, leaving the mother with no responsibility.

    That would still be a pile of crud, though.

  79. jamie mcinerney says:

    Comments This is not an answer to reducing or ending abortion. If the man can tell the woman she must keep it, then accordingly he should also be able to tell her to abort it.

  80. Puck says:

    Comments My girlfriend that I got pregnant had an abortion. I never knew she was pregnant until we broke up and she told me she killed my baby. It’s a dam sham that a man has no rights I would have never let this happen I would have raised the baby myself if I would have had the opportunity. Something needs to be done a man should have rights to even if like me he finds out later some kind of legal action should be a law when something likes this happens. I will have to live with this for the rest of my life and it sucks.

  81. Margie says:

    A man should not and cannot have any say in whether or not a woman continues or terminates a pregnancy because he has zero risk or involvement in the pregnancy itself. Until men are physically capable of assuming all risk associated with a pregnancy, or get pregnant themselves, they rightfully have no vetos power over a woman’s body. The choice to save intercourse is not also the choice to accept a pregnancy and birth, and even if it were considered such by a woman, she makes the choice whether or not to continue with it – not the man.

  82. mark says:

    According to parts of the Bible, if you assault a woman and cause a miscarriage, but the woman is not hurt, your punishment is up to the husband. If you do the same thing and the woman dies, the punishment is up to the church elders. Thus, it’s clear that abortion would be OK if the husband was OK with it. So this law simply brings US abortion law in line with the Bible.

  83. Ri-chan says:

    I understand and approve of this law…sort of. The basic idea that a women shouldn’t be able to abort the child if the dad wants it. I do think he should have to support the women throughout pregnency and then take the child and leave her alone. I’m not a man, but I know that my husband would be devestated if he had ever gotten a woman pregnant and then she had aborted his child, with him being able to do nothing to stop what he would see as the murder of a child who he already loved. And if the situation was reversed, if you were a man and a women was carrying a child that you desperatly wanted, wouldn’t you feel horrible if she aborted it?

    Anyway, that part I agree with, the rest I don’t.

  84. jane says:

    All the men feeling sorry for themselves in this comment is hilarious. How many men skip out on their children and don’t pay child support? Millions. It is your sperm – you better sure as hell take responsibility for what you do with it. If you choose to have sex; then what the woman does with the baby is HER CHOICE AS IT IS HER BODY. And if you’re actually a man; you should step up and help if she chooses to keep it. It is the law. And for all the anti-choice people whining in here.. abortion is legal. Get over it and do some scientific research on what constitutes as a human being. You care more about something that isn’t even a life yet; and yet you don’t care about what happens to that mother afterward. The hardship of pregnancy on a body and on a mind, and the fact it is usually THE WOMAN who supports the child a majority of the time – or completely alone. While it would be grand if there were no abortions in the world or if women could talk and have a sane and rational conversation with the father before doing anything.. that isn’t the case. Abortion is never an easy option and is a painstaking and heartbreaking decision for most women.

  85. Marcelene says:

    I can grab a book from our neighborhood library but I believe I learned more from this report.

  86. Sewer You should proceed your own composing. I’m sure, you do possess a wonderful readers’ starting currently !

  87. I came across some really great sorts here as properly.

  88. Extremely very good catch,pristine developing in addition to prosperous hues

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *.

Previous Post Next Post