if not wanting to have a child is excuse enought to have an abortion could men use the same excuse to get away
could men use the same excuse to get away from their responsibility ???
or is such argument good enough only for women ???
should men also have the right to say i do not want u ( woman ) to abort since we both made the choice of doing IT and he/she is of both of us ???
.... thoughtful answers only , thanks .
sorry for any grammatical mistakes ...
if sex was a choice i do not think we could call it being forced .
by the way i do not think Tracey answered whether or not men could use the same excuse or if it would be fair .
i agree the planet but we are talking about rights and THAT excuse in particular .
vianka good answer but what about men's rights ???
Shayna , FINALLY someone who gives the same right to both men and women , a real Humanist .
omorris1978 thank u for being thoughtful , however ur answer leaves me with a question :
could men use the same argument and say that his life will be affected in a bad way and get away since being a parent is something which affects both genders and not just women ???
i just wanted to add that when it isn't a choice then i do not oppose abortion nor when the person is risking her life by having a baby .
thank u for ur answers Chevalier and Amanda very insightful both of u .
thank u for ur answer Amanda and thank u Phil , both of u were very thoughtful . i do agree in some points with Amanda and in others with Phil .
i agree cute kittie
- ShaynaLv 51 decade agoFavorite Answer
No, they shouldn't be able to. Nor should women be allowed to choose abortion on the grounds that they 'don't want a baby'. I'm opposed to abortion. However, I do think a woman whose life is on the line, should have that choice.
That said, it's a simple concept. You shouldn't be having sex until you're ready for a baby, whether that be 16, 26, 36 or 46. It does not matter in my book.
Yes, I do think that a man should have the choice to request his partner to not have an abortion, if the sex was consensual. It is his baby, too. As another person said, if women alone have the right to decide whether to abort or not, a man alone should have the right to decide whether he's going to support that child or not. I think very lowly of men who run from their responsibilities. And, I apologize to any woman who has had an abortion, but that sickens me. I am unable to have children, and would gladly give one a loving home.
*I don't feel that omorris' comment about the 'timing of a pregnancy' is valid. Again, considering that a pregnancy can be prevented simply by refraining from sex, I don't think timing plays an issue.*
*I look at it like this, as well. Only the woman can choose to have an abortion or not?. Well, the woman chose to have sex, thus choosing to have a baby, irregardless of whether or not that choice was a conscious one. A woman also cannot get pregnant without a man (or at least without sperm); therefore, how can she, and she alone, have the right to make this decision?*
To the OP: I'm not a humanist. I'm staunchly pro-life. As far as I'm concerned, this feministic choice to abort is one of the worse things to happen in North America. I'll bet someone back then said "You wait and see! It'll become a form of birth control" and the feminists pushing it said "No, only for cases of rape or incest." Makes me laugh. There's usually a bigger agenda.
*I agree with vianka, as well. If a man were to have the right to force his partner to carry the baby to term, he should be ready to accept 100% responsibility for the child. The mother should also have her parental rights terminated, allowing for the man to have complete say in the child's life.*
Edit: Again I have something to say about sex, in response to another comment that's been made. Yes, sex is great! I agree, 100%. Sex is good. Yes, again, 100%. But sex is not some 'game' that you should be trifling with. It is an act which causes pregnancy, and an act which may spread disease. 'Responsible' sex is only truly responsible when you abstain from it, or when you are having sex with only ONE person, whom you know is free of all STDs, and with whom you would be willing to share the responsibility of a child with. Abstinence is NOT that difficult. I refrained for 22 years until I had an engagement ring on my finger, and I CAN'T EVEN GET PREGNANT! I have no reason to abstain, except for the STD issue, but yet I did. There are far too many unwanted children in this world, and far too many in foster care because of parents who are completely irresponsible. When my husband and I attended an adoption orientation, we were told there was a girl well-know to Social Services who was on her 12th child, and every single one of them was in foster care because she was a cocaine addicted, alcohol-abusing prostitute who used to take her 'clients' while her oldest baby was sleeping on a urine-stained mattress right next to her. She told the social worker that she was going to continue having babies until they finally let her keep one! How sick is that?!
There are also far too many abortions because our young girls are being taught that it's 'just a piece of tissue' they're having sucked out of their bodies. Ask any woman who regrets her decision to abort, and she will tell you the heartache that she's suffered because of what she's done, and the lies that were told to her so that she would choose the (very profitable, I might add) option of abortion.
I truly believe part of the problem is that we are look down upon younger girls getting pregnant in the first place, causing them to be afraid of telling their parents that they're pregnant. If I had a daughter who came to me at 15 and said "Mom, I'm pregnant", I would not judge her. I would be disappointed that she chose to even have sex at that young age, but I would love her, and help her do what she needs to do to take responsibility for that child. It is NOT that uncommon to be having children in your teens, and considering that's the prime time for a woman to be fertile, perhaps that is what nature intended. My mother had a baby at 18 (me). My aunts all were married and had begun their families by that time. In fact, my oldest aunt was pregnant with her first child while my grandmother was pregnant with her last. Are we really so arrogant to believe that we are THAT enlightened because so much has changed in the past 50 years?
- ViankaLv 41 decade ago
Any person, male or female, could make up any excuse they want to in order to run away from responsibility. It doesn't necessarily mean it's okay to do so.
My mother grew up in orphanages and foster homes because neither parent wanted to accept the responsibility. Also, I was raised by a single parent because my dad decided he didn't want kids after he already had them.
Personally, if I end up having a child, I must prepare myself to be a single parent because having a mate that stays with you is never a guarantee.
One way to never get into this situation is to keep yourself protected. This goes for both genders. But even smart human's can make really poor decisions when sex is involved and accidental pregnancies will continue as a result. Still, nobody has a valid excuse to get away from their responsibility once a child is born.
If abortion remains legal and it is the woman's choice alone: If a female becomes preganant and the male asks her to get an abortion, but she goes against his wishes and has the baby anyway, she should be prepared to be 100% responsible for that child (financial and otherwise).
If abortion becomes illegal and/or a man is given the right to force a woman to go through a pregnancy, the opposite should occur. He should be prepared to be 100% responsible for the child (financial and otherwise).
I'm not an expert on family law, but I think that the male can be legally made to pay the woman even if she has the baby against his knowledge or advice of abortion. Yes, in this case it seems the law is biased in the woman's favor.Source(s): Personal experience.
- Phil #3Lv 51 decade ago
This all boils down to one basic idea:
women are not responsible, no matter what; men are always responsible, no matter what. Sexism of the highest order in which the vastly different standards for each sex is delineated by law.
The majority of women answering have no problem holding a man responsible for the creation of a pregnancy while at the same time do not want women to be held to the same responsibility. It is the same treatment after birth, these women want men to be forced to support what is her unilateral choice. This includes many men who have been ordered to support the results of a woman's choice to engage in sexual encounters with OTHER men.
Feminists claim that feminism is about choice, what they mean is "choice for women but not for men", which is the basic problem with feminism: misandry.
From conception onward, men have little or no options whatever while women always have other choices up to and including legally abandoning an infant, so it is not about "her body, her choice" but simply feminist thinking in that 'whatever a woman wants should be provided for at the expense of men'.
Responsibility should follow rights but in this particular scenario (reproduction), it is treated as women have rights, men have responsibility without rights.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
It is an interesting question, I think the main reason is that it's the women's body that will go through changes and pain, and is growing inside so ultimately it's her choice. But I think the importnt thing is people should talk about what they would do if they ended up pregnant BFORE having sex. This way there wouldn't be a problem, because if a couple had very conflicting views about abortion etc, then they would have to think about their incompatibility and the consequences if they did make a child together.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- EllesarLv 61 decade ago
I suppose IF the man made it clear from the start, and IF he took personal contraceptive precautions, and the pregnancy could in no way be attributed to HIS negligence, then he has a point - if they are absolutely clear that they do not want to father a child then I am ambivalent about them paying child support.
However, I would imagine that those cases where the man has been shown to take all reasonable precautions and there is still an unwanted pregnancy are pretty rare - it's not rocket science and condoms are cheap.
But not on the abortion issue no. Pregnancy has so many risks and complications for women and takes so much out of you mentally and physically - I can't imagine much worse than being forced to go to full term with an unwanted pregnancy.
- Kayla SLv 41 decade ago
I think it is the woman's right to chose abortion without having a reason, if she does not want to have children then if she were to get pregnant it is her decision to make. However, men do not have the same right. They have to know every time they have sex they have to know there is a possibility of their partner getting pregnant and them becoming a father with the responsibilities that go with it. In order to avoid a lot of this confusion I think before having sex everyone should discuss what the outcome will be if a pregnancy occurs. Then if something happens neither partner can blame the other or say it is not fair. If we all did this we might decide to not have sex with certain partners and in the long run less disagreements. If it seems the outcome of sexual relations is going to be unfair then work out the details first.
- Amanda hLv 51 decade ago
This is simple for me: IF a woman is expecting and she doesn't WANT the child, she shouldn't be expected to carry it, as, she will carry the majority of the responsibility of caring for the child and her own body after the child is born.
However, IF she wants the baby and bio-dad does not, I don't think he should have to pay child support or be expected to be a father simply because of one night.
As a woman it is our responsibility to assure that we can provide for our children (at very least basic needs) if there was no father.
It is unfair to mom to decide that dad is going to be a father- like it or not- and is going to be paying for a child that he doesn't want for 18 years....
Of course, if the dad wanted the child and then changes his mind, he should have to pay child support, but, in cases of one-night stands or similar when dad doesn't want a thing to do with the child, it seems immoral for a woman to force a baby on a man- and it seems like something that is done for $ and nothing more.
*wouldn't it be a good decision that both parents (if unmarried) have to sign and agree to be parents before a child is born?? It makes me CRAZY that mothers out there bare children and after 5 paternity tests (all from guys that want nothing to do with her or the child) still don't know who is the daddy.
IF mom CAN'T support baby on her own and dad doesn't want anything to do with baby- WHY WOULD SHE Have baby???????
This is 2007. Sex is common. It would be GREAT if we could say abstinence, but, really... Sex is a good thing. More people should be responsible about it, but, sex is not the culprit here. Irresponsibility is. Condoms- dental dams are wonderful.....
- Priscilla BLv 51 decade ago
If a woman gets pregnant she either puts it up for adoption, in which case, the child is cared for. Or, she has the child, and accepts the responsibility of caring for it. Or, she has an abortion, in which case, there is no child.
What your advocating for is the "right" to neglect a living child. And no one has that right.
As for men having the "right" to tell a woman she can't have an abortion- a woman has to accept all the risks of pregnancy. Even women who have healthy pregnancies can die from childbirth, or suffer complications that could leave their body altered for a lifetime. Only the person who actually has to live with those repercussions should be the one to make the choice.
Besides- what if pregnancy prevent her from being able to do her job and make a living. Is the man going to financially support her? What if she doesn't have health insurance, will he pay all the medical bills? What if there are complications that leave her with lasting health problems? Will he help pay the bills on that for however many years she has to deal with it? These are risks we expect a woman to accept should she CHOOSE to go through with a pregnancy. If it's no longer her choice, but the mans, shouldn't he compensate her for these things?
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Men and women who don't want children need to seriously think about getting tubes ties and vasectomy's. If that isn't practical because they've got that tiny doubt in the back of the minds, then I'm sure they are extra careful about using birth control and are faced with the possibility of an abortion in far smaller numbers than the general population. To remain childless is a decision most people don't make lightly. Male or female.
And to answer your question, no, men don't have a legal say in what a woman's does with her body nor should they.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
I believe in children and love them, having said that I do not believe that a woman should have total control of the situation, To have the child or not. I do not believe that a male who has no say In the birth of the child and does not want to be this child's father, should have to support the child he had no decision involving its birth,and has no attachment to the mother.She will end up raising that child alone, why would she want to bring a child into this world, that would be rejected ,avoided and unloved by its father!
- omorris1978Lv 61 decade ago
Sorry this is so long :)
When a couple faces an unplanned pregnancy there are any number of possible reactions. Many men are very happy with the decision to abort, and most of those involved in committed relationships will support the decision, even if it is not exactly the one they would choose, given different circumstances. This is exactly the same for the woman. Many women facing an abortion have said that they would not mind a child - it is the fact of the pregnancy and the timing of the pregnancy that is the problem.
Clearly some men's feelings are likely to be hurt, where a partner or former partner makes a decision in conflict with their own. The question remains, where does the right lie? If the appeal for rights is entirely a matter of emotional attachment, then yes, men ought to have rights. But the question of right is less emotional. It seems callous to say that a women can decide to end a life in the same way that she might withdraw from a contract, but it is the same ability to determine your own future that is at stake. Where women can be legally obliged to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, we make women slaves to pregnancy. Whatever the emotional attachment of men, their loss is not a loss of freedom. It is important to refute the suggestion that men have as much at stake as women in pregnancy and subsequently abortion. It is legitimate to expect men to play a role in taking responsibility for contraception and childcare. However, pregnancy is something that, at this stage in scientific development at any rate, only women can undergo. It affects women's bodies, their careers and their lives. An unwanted pregnancy may have a devastating effect on a woman and it is entirely legitimate for her to seek to end that pregnancy on her terms.
The logical conclusion, but one which is often missed, of involving men in the decision is that it could give any third party with a connection to the pregnancy a say in whether a woman has an abortion. This removes whatever little control women have now over the decision to abort and dilutes that control to the extent that others, even those remotely related perhaps, can have a say over the decision to terminate. Could you imagine a cousin, relative, friend or neighbor, having control over YOUR body?
Is there perhaps something in the argument from those men whose appeal is based on the fact that they have to look after children when they are born against their wishes so they should be allowed to have a say whether they are born at all? And is it not entirely legitimate and logically coherent to say that in such cases there should be absolutely no legal or financial comeback on those men?
I think this leads on to one recurring and problematic area which appears to transcend the pro- and anti-choice barriers.
Men and women involved in unplanned pregnancy have all sorts of relationships to each other. Some may have on-going, very intimate relationships, while others have just met and have no intention of continuing on with each other. Most are somewhere in between these poles and have dated for a while but are not sure whether their relationship has the potential to become a serious one. The crises of dealing with an unexpected pregnancy forces a couple to examine some of the most intimate and sensitive issues of human sexual relationships. Uncertainties about the relationship can become crucial in what happens.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that when couples cannot agree on a decision ( let alone on whether or not to continue a pregnancy ) one or other of the partners will be hurt. Generally speaking when disagreements occur on such matters which are entirely fundamental to the relationship, it does suggest a deeper difficulty in the relationship. In this instance, both because the woman is the one who bears the child and is the one on whom the majority of the responsibility for childcare falls, it must be she who has the final say.
Men are generally involved in the decision to abort. It is only when the relationship breaks down that men will attempt to force women to either carry to term or end a pregnancy against their wishes. It is only in these circumstances that it becomes an issue. And precisely because it is in emotionally charged circumstances, we must hold firm to the cold calculated reality of pregnancy and childbirth: Women are still ultimately responsible for this aspect of the reproduction of the species and they alone should be allowed to make decisions as to whether and when to have children.