Here is a tough issue I have been struggling with and I’d love some insight from others.
To preface, I am generally pro-choice, do not believe life begins at conception, and support the idea that a woman’s body is hers to control. I used to think that was pretty black and white but now I’ve found a gray area that I’m stuck on.
So, my friend has been married for several years to his wife. They made the conscious decision to conceive together. But in the wife’s second trimester, they got divorced. Now at the end of her second trimester, she wants to abort the fetus, which is legal by state law. However, her ex-husband wants to keep the baby and is willing to take full custody.
Does the father in this case have any rights to see the pregnancy to term? SHOULD he have any rights? Does the mother have any moral or legal imperative to see the pregnancy to term out of respect for the unwritten social contract that she and the father agreed upon when they chose to conceive? Or should a woman always do as she pleases with her own body no matter what?
My gut reaction is yes, when two consenting adults in a union of marriage make the conscious, consensual decision to create a baby they are entering into a social contract that implies the baby will be carried to term, thus the father should have some rights. Alternatively, I hate to compare babies as assets, but if you look at wealth that is accrued during marriage, the common legal practice is to divide it. Even if a fetus is not a person, it could still be considered an asset created during the marriage and thus either parent has an equal claim. I’m probably too emotionally close to this issue to have an unbiased opinion, though. I’d love to hear yours.
Please do not reply if your are going to debate pro-life or when life begins – that is not the question I am asking. I am asking about a father’s rights. Thanks!
A father should have every right to his child. I feel that the mother is most likely doing this to spite her ex-husband. Using a living human being to seek revenge and to hurt someone that hurt her.
This is a great example of late-term elective abortions. Abortion activists always claim they are done to save the withering life of a dying mother. In fact, most are done to kill a mentally or physically disabled child as part of a eugenics ideology, or for selfish reasons like this example.
What’s interesting about this case is that at some point, depending on the State, elective abortion for a reason as shallow as this one, is illegal. Abortion advocates are fine with overriding bodily autonomy if the child is viable outside the womb. But what doctor, hospital, or insurance company is going to intentionally force a premature birth? That’s right, NONE. So if ‘pro-choice’ agrees that an innocent living human being is more important than a woman’s bodily autonomy at around 20-24 weeks, why not override her bodily autonomy when a father wants custody of his own son or daughter? When he wants his child to LIVE, not die a violent death. Why would anyone want this child to die?
Abortion is wrong for many reasons, but this example stoops almost as low as killing for preferred gender.