There's no such thing as the "war on women"

[Dirty Penguin]

I disagree. If a woman is 9 months prego she has a responsibility to the child.

But that child would be viable at that point.

That is the point. And the argument for allowing abortion but not late term abortion is that it gives women time to have the abortion before we start calling it murder.

We're only advocating leaving it at 22 to 24. That's not late term.

I mean by the extention should a man be forced to pay child support for a child he doesn't want?

Yes because it's the law.

should men have a say in if their child should be aborted?

No.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

I mean by the extention should a man be forced to pay child support for a child he doesn't want? .

I hope you can make this work

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Specifically why? I'm not arguing a poitn but just wondering why.

This has been discussed in this thread as well. Viability has been determined to more of a possibility around or after 24 weeks.

I am not seriuos about uber small government.

Me either but I hardly think this is an area for government at this point given the SCOTUS ruling on the matter.

I don't think that late term abortions should be legal under the morality issue.

Who's morality? Shouldn't the morality of the mother be the only factor here or do you belive others should dictate her morality?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

My question on abortion specifically is when does life begin and why? What constitutes as un-developed tissue and unborn baby. Where is the line drawn and why? Is there wiggle room?

If you say birth then what about escaping the vagina is so liberating in terms of rights to the mass of cells? What development is required to be considered alive in its own terms rather than just a mass of cells that don't match DNA to the mother.

I encourage you to research the basics of Roe vs. Wade to understand the court opinion on not just the constitutionality of the decision, but the medical ethics surrounding the issue. It is through this decision that fetal viability struck the balance between a woman's autonomy and the protection of the developing fetus.

I support measures of allowing women unrestricted access to abortion services up to week 22. Between weeks 22-25, I believe the decision to abort or to induce labor ought to rest in the hands of a woman and her doctor, depending on the fetus' chances of survival and quality of life were they in need of resuscitating after birth. After week 26, if a woman does not wish to be pregnant any longer, I believe she should have a right to induce labor and deliver the pre-term newborn where NICU physicians and nurse staff are available to treat/resuscitate given the infant's chances at survival and quality of life.

Those are my opinions, though, but I believe they are not radical by any means according to the current medical ethics surrounding the abortion issue.

 

[Apex]

Are you denying there's an effort by republicans to control a woman's ability to make her own medical decisions without state or federal government involment?

Not really.

 

[Revoltingest]

....these decisions should be between the woman and her doctor. It shouldn't be determined by government. Thatis if we're being serious about small government, less government intrusion into our private lives and preventing government overreach.

I'm curious about a couple posts of yours. Above, you give a woman's doctor some power in her right to abortion. But here you grant none to the father....

Quote:
should men have a say in if their child should be aborted?
No.

It strikes me that a father should have at least as much say as a doctor in aborting a fetus, since it would also become child. Thus he faces the loss of a child or its life, with all the attendant responsibilities & benefits.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I'm curious about a couple posts of yours. Above, you give a woman's doctor some power in her right to abortion. But here you grant none to the father....

It strikes me that a father should have at least as much say as a doctor in aborting a fetus, since it would also become child. Thus he faces the loss of a child or its life, with all the attendant responsibilities & benefits.

It's in her body. How would this be legislated with a man having a "say so" in what happens inside a woman's body? Is there similar legislation for a woman having a legal "say so" in what happens inside a man's body?

 

[Revoltingest]

It's in her body. How would this be legislated with a man having a "say so" in what happens inside a woman's body? Is there similar legislation for a woman having a legal "say so" in what happens inside a man's body?

This is not the point I'm addressing. We so often hear that a woman's right an abortion involves her doctor. I'm curious why some would grant the doctor influence (perhaps even a veto?), but deny the father any role. I argue that the doctor's function is merely to offer medical services & advice to the woman. This is less involvement than many a father has, yet the father appears to be considered irrelevant to the decision by some feminists. To have a "say so" is not just the right of a father, but rather an obligation, even if the ultimate right to abort or not rests with the mother-to-be.

Let us note too, that in post #664 you allow government to limit the woman's right to choose by giving the medical community control over her body. So we're on the same side here....we're just drawing lines in the sand in perhaps slightly different places.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

This is not the point I'm addressing. We so often hear that a woman's right an abortion involves her doctor. I'm curious why some would grant the doctor influence (perhaps even a veto?), but deny the father. I argue that the doctor's function is merely to offer medical services & advice to the woman. This is less involvement than many a father has, yet the father is considered irrelevant to the decision by some feminists.

It is a medical decision, like other medical decisions, that is made between a physician and his/her patient.

I'd like to hear the reasoning behind a person having a "say" with what another human being can do with his/her body when that human being is of age and is informed, lucid, and capable of making a legal decision. Are there arguments for when a man must include a woman's "say" in what happens inside his body legally?

 

[Apex]

Is the issue of child support even worth bringing up?

 

[ignition]

It is a medical decision, like other medical decisions, that is made between a physician and his/her patient.

I'd like to hear the reasoning behind a person having a "say" with what another human being can do with his/her body when that human being is of age and is informed, lucid, and capable of making a legal decision. Are there arguments for when a man must include a woman's "say" in what happens inside his body legally?

It doesn't make any sense because you're comparing apples and oranges here. I agree in principle that women shouldn't have to ask for permission from men to do it for many reasons, but you argument doesn't hold the water. Men and women are not the same thing. Men cannot get pregnant and give birth to a child that belongs to both parents.

 

[Curious George]

It's in her body. How would this be legislated with a man having a "say so" in what happens inside a woman's body? Is there similar legislation for a woman having a legal "say so" in what happens inside a man's body?

No legal authority or requirement but many doctors require written permission from the wife before they are willing to perform a vasectomy. is this reasonable? I am not sure, but there is no legal authority to require a woman's "say so," similarly there should be no legal authority requiring a man's "say so." But that does not mean that morally a responsible woman should not discuss the decision with her lover with the ultimate decision up to the woman. rather, this only means that a no legal authority exists which should require a woman to get her lovers say. I hope we all agree that family planning should ideally involved both parents. That said I fail to see how any man or partner has.legal authority or should have legal authority to dictate a medical decision when the party whose body is affected is capable of making such a decision.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is a medical decision, like other medical decisions, that is made between a physician and his/her patient.

This is vague though. What authority is the doctor to be given?
Is it merely to advise, with no restriction upon the woman?
Or is his/her medical opinion given legal weight which might restrict her body sovereignty?

I'd like to hear the reasoning behind a person having a "say" with what another human being can do with his/her body when that human being is of age and is informed, lucid, and capable of making a legal decision. Are there arguments for when a man must include a woman's "say" in what happens inside his body legally?

I argue that a pregnant woman has no legal obligation to do as instructed by her doctor. (For the moment, I'm avoiding philosophical complexities such as the 3rd trimester.) The same is true with the father, ie, the woman's choice to abort (or not) is hers alone. But the father's say in the decision should matter as much as a doctor's, even if their perspectives (service provider vs potential parent) are vastly different.

 

[Revoltingest]

Is the issue of child support even worth bringing up?

That's just the man's lot in life, eh?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Is the issue of child support even worth bringing up?

I've addressed that before too. I'm willing to discuss it again. It's part and parcel of child custody legal matters.

 

[Curious George]

It doesn't make any sense because you're comparing apples and oranges here. I agree in principle that women shouldn't have to ask for permission from men to do it for many reasons, but you argument doesn't hold the water. Men and women are not the same thing. Men cannot get pregnant and give birth to a child that belongs to both parents.

No, but we can alter the scenario, if a surrogate mother is pregnant with a child should the parents be able to dictate whether or not she got an abortion. Surely, they could due for money spent under a breach of contract claim but they could not, to my understanding, due for specific performance. Now we are not talking about denying the father's right but both mother an father.

Sorry, read sue instead of due*

 

[MysticSang'ha]

It doesn't make any sense because you're comparing apples and oranges here. I agree in principle that women shouldn't have to ask for permission from men to do it for many reasons, but you argument doesn't hold the water. Men and women are not the same thing. Men cannot get pregnant and give birth to a child that belongs to both parents.

Pregnancy is a women's health issue. It is not a parental custody issue. I think that is the distinction that needs to be made to show how absurd it is to have a woman give a "say" so in what happens inside of men's bodies.

No legal authority or requirement but many doctors require written permission from the wife before they are willing to perform a vasectomy. is this reasonable? I am not sure, but there is no legal authority to require a woman's "say so," similarly there should be no legal authority requiring a man's "say so." But that does not mean that morally a responsible woman should not discuss the decision with her lover with the ultimate decision up to the woman. rather, this only means that a no legal authority exists which should require a woman to get her lovers say. I hope we all agree that family planning should ideally involved both parents. That said I fail to see how any man or partner has.legal authority or should have legal authority to dictate a medical decision when the party whose body is affected is capable of making such a decision.

Good post. I wasn't aware of doctors requiring a wife's written permission to perform a vasectomy. When the procedure was introduced to us as an option, nothing was mentioned about any requirements or anything by me. TBH, that's how it should be. What right do I have to say what happens with my husband's - or any man's - body?

This is vague though. What authority is the doctor to be given?
Is it merely to advise, with no restriction upon the woman.
Or is his/her medical opinion given legal weight which might restrict her body sovereignty?

Not sure what the confusion is. It is a medical concern, so it falls under the same umbrella as other medical decision-making between doctor and patient.

I argue that a pregnant woman has no legal obligation to do as instructed by her doctor. (For the moment, I'm avoiding philosophical complexities such as the 3rd trimester.) The same is true with the father, ie, the woman's choice to abort (or not) is hers alone. But the father's say in the matter should matter as much as a doctor's, even if their perspectives (service provider vs potential parent) are vastly different.

Why should it when the fetus is not viable? Before viability, it is squarely about her body. Not about the fetus.

I'm willing to discuss a father's legal say in the ethics of NICU staff decisions in DNR clauses for pre-term newborns that have little chance for survival. But as long as the fetus is still inside a woman's body, it is a medical concern between a patient and her doctor.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

No, but we can alter the scenario, if a surrogate mother is pregnant with a child should the parents be able to dictate whether or not she got an abortion. Surely, they could due for money spent under a breach of contract claim but they could not, to my understanding, due for specific performance. Now we are not talking about denying the father's right but both mother an father.

Sorry, read sue instead of due*

That is a great alternate hypothetical.

And as long as that surrogate is pregnant before viability, the adoptive parents have no say. Male or female. It is the surrogate's body and her uterus.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not sure what the confusion is. It is a medical concern, so it falls under the same umbrella as other medical decision-making between doctor and patient.

This is an incomplete view of pregnancy. To the doctor, it might be merely a medical decision. But it's also a parenting decision to the mother & father. You give the doctor a say (in the above post), but not the father, who might have a great interest in the abortion decision. I believe that it's not just normal for a father & mother to discuss & reach an abortion decision, but this is ethically proper for each to consider the other's views. (Note: I say that body sovereignty ultimately rests with the person owning the body.) But you & others say it's between a woman & her doctor, specifically excluding mention of the father in the decision. Since the doctor is granted greater involvement, I asked: To what extent would you (or other feminists) grant the doctor authority over the mother & her body?

Why should it when the fetus is not viable? Before viability, it is squarely about her body. Not about the fetus.

I agree. This is why I don't grant the doctor any authority over her.
(It becomes complicated it she plans to carry the baby to term, but commits acts which would result in damage, eg, fetal alcohol syndrome. This can be addressed separately.)

I'm willing to discuss a father's legal say in the ethics of NICU staff decisions in DNR clauses for pre-term newborns that have little chance for survival. But as long as the fetus is still inside a woman's body, it is a medical concern between a patient and her doctor.

This statement still does not answer the question about how much autonomy the woman should give up to her doctor. I ask because it seems that many are proposing that the medical community have legal authority to act as gatekeepers to our (all genders, since it's about more than abortion) rights over our own bodies. This is disconcerting.

 

[ignition]

No, but we can alter the scenario, if a surrogate mother is pregnant with a child should the parents be able to dictate whether or not she got an abortion. Surely, they could due for money spent under a breach of contract claim but they could not, to my understanding, due for specific performance. Now we are not talking about denying the father's right but both mother an father.

I don't know if I want to comment on this; I don't believe that surrogates should even be used in the first place.