Question on Abortion.

Can the woman in a marriage decide not to go through with her pregnancy even if her Husband is opposed to it?

Let us assume that it legal otherwise ( Not late term , partial etc ..)


If yes, should it be so , or rather, have there been challenges? Given that husband has contributed 50% of the genetic material

no state can limit a woman's choice because of the opinion of her husband.

It's parental notification requirements, not paternal. My bad.

It's her body, why would the husband possibly have any say on whether she should be required to undergo a nine month pregnancy?

I see no rational reason why you would think "contribution of genetic material" had anything whatsoever to do with it.

if it is still legal to terminate at her stage of pregnancy, of course.

you are also assuming there is nothing medically wrong with either the fetus or mother, right?

Are you thinking along the lines of a couple getting ready to divorce?

I'd think that would be tricky, and maybe up to a judge to decide.

woman has a constitutional right to make?

in that it went before a judge. If memory serves, the ruling was in favor of the woman, but because the precedent was set, I could see a man trying it again.

Of course this would all be moot if both men and women could get pregnant, and you never knew which one would be carrying the baby.

to make his genetic contribution.

When the baby is born, could the husband be forced to donate a kidney for the baby if it was necessary?

Ever have sex on railroad tracks?

:rofl:

something, in the form of pleasure. It isn't as if his gratification is delayed for nine months. His contribution is a gift, not something he can take back to reuse another time just because she doesn't want to carry a pregnancy.

as soon as he's the one actually carrying the baby. The way things are right now, he controls the genetic material until such time as he ejaculates. If you're concerned about what happens to your ejaculate, then use it with discretion.

if you actually want to discuss and not start a flamefest.

:evilfrown:



The following reflects either flippant insincerity or flippant ignorance. Either way it's irresponsible bullshit.

"Let us assume that it legal otherwise ( Not late term , partial etc ..)"

Flame baiting isnt my style

unanimous agreement on this thread on what the rights are and should be.


I dont understand what you are trying to accuse me of.

questions.
"should it be so" that a woman can get an abortion against the wishes of the sperm provider is questionable.

Since there is no such thing as "partial", unless you mean the anti-choice term "partial birth abortion", which is a misnomer, meant for its gut wrenching emotional aspect rather than anything based in reality. In which case I would still call it flamebait, or even moreso.

Also, "let us assume it is legal otherwise" is questionable since yes, abortions ARE legal.

If you don't mean to be offensive, are just using terms wrongly, I apologize. But those terms and phrases are those used by anti-choice people.

the limitations on abortion have to do with fetal viability and that's it.

Planned Parenthood v. Danforth that neither spousal consent nor notification can be required for an abortion.

Google: Don't boot up without it.

Vague recollection of a couple who were divorcing and she wanted an abortion, he didn't. I can't remember what happened, but thinking that her right prevailed.

I would say of course she can decide what use her body gets. If he wished to get pregnant, I'd suggest he find an egg donor, then go to Octo-mom's doctor and get the embryo implanted in him.

Or, alternatively, she could give him 1/2 after the abortion. Given that he contributed a sperm.

after the abortion. It's also her parents' genetics. Do they get a say too?

Abortion rights aren't based on property law, i.e. "the woman is holding joint property". Abortion rights are based on patients rights to available medical procedures that they choose.

partially pregnant? only partially aborted?

It doesn't exist, therefor is not legal or illegal.

He should certainly have a say, as it directly affects him, but ultimately he cannot stop her. People who so angrily declare that men should shut up even when the woman is pregnant by them are just as bad as anti-choice zealots.

she can do what she wants legally, but she cannot force him to agree with her or be happy about it and if he disagrees strongly enough it will have some kind of impact on the relationship and I doubt it would last long term. I am female by the way so for me this is kind of like, if I get married, I can't stop my hypothetical husband from having a vasectomy since it's his body, but I strongly want kids, so if he did that against my wishes or even worse did it and didn't tell me and I found out later on when I couldn't get pregnant, I'd have the right to be angry and not stay in that relationship.

and that's all that counts to me. It's a woman's choice. Personally, I think a marriage or relationship is in piss poor shape if those in it can't discuss a vital decision like this.

so stuff your zealotry accusation .

Are you asking if she's legally able to? If so, I don't know of any law that would keep a woman from having one. :shrug:

on edit: To answer your second question, a man's semen has nothing to do with a woman's right to medical privacy and personal autonomy. If a man is concerned over the treatment of his seed once he passes it on to another person, then the best advice one can give is to not ejaculate. :)

did give a husband either veto power, or at least required his notification. Roe vs. Wade dynamited that concept, but there has been no similar judgement at any court level that said that a man doesn't have to support a child that is not genetically his, born during his marriage, if he missed the state's deadline for proving that he wasn't the father.

A pregnant woman is has no less right to the control of her body than any other adult.

Legally... I don't know that it's the law's job to force her to tell. Ethically/morally however I think he deserves to know if it's a committed relationship, the woman shouldn't keep such a big lie from him. I'd be unsettled by a woman who refued to tell a non-abusive partner about getting an abortion. If a future husband kept a secret that big from me (I guess closest comparison would be hiding a sterilization) I'd be very angry and it would hurt the relationship....

The bottom line here is simple: it's her body. Come the day when either parent could carry the child, either parent (the one carrying) would get to decide.

So long as the woman is the one who would have to provide the necessary womb in order for that child to be born, she gets the choice. Period.

Bottom line, the mother gets to choose no matter what.