So, like is the female rapist in jail? Because I think that if we're going to be questioning what legal rights he has in the case of being raped, that it relies on him being able to legally prove that he was raped or that the woman is a rapist.
In such a scenario I'd need to know whether he'd be the one taking care of the child as the father. If he's expected to look after it while she serves her time then yes, he should be able to have a say in an abortion. And in any case I don't think he should be made to pay child support.
I don't know that he should have a say in abortion... I guess I feel undecided. Though I don't think that a man who was raped should ever be under obligation to take care of a rape child that he can't provide for. Nor should such a child be allowed to stay with the mother given that she is, you know, a rapist and all (and should be in jail, etc).
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I cannot conscience forcing a woman to have an abortion under any circumstances. Obviously the man shouldn't have any obligation to take care of the child or mother.
IMO its just as much his child as hers. In a case of an 'simple' unwanted pregnancy I would be inclined to agree with you, as the man must have known the risk of pregnancy when they had sex (though, so would the mother), and in that case I would be inclined to lean towards the mother as its her body. I would still be inclined to suggest that he has a say in the matter but I would be uncomfortable with saying he can force an abortion. However in the circumstances we are discussing she raped him. He had no control in the matter, no say in whether he wanted to risk pregnancy. If he doesn't want the responsibility of having a child I would be leaning towards his opinion over the mother. Who is a rapist, a crime I admit to having a considerable emotional bias against.
Originally posted by Nephthys
IMO its just as much his child as hers. In a case of an 'simple' unwanted pregnancy I would be inclined to agree with you, as the man must have known the risk of pregnancy when they had sex (though, so would the mother), and in that case I would be inclined to lean towards the mother as its her body. I would still be inclined to suggest that he has a say in the matter but I would be uncomfortable with saying he can force an abortion. However in the circumstances we are discussing she raped him. He had no control in the matter, no say in whether he wanted to risk pregnancy. If he doesn't want the responsibility of having a child I would be leaning towards his opinion over the mother. Who is a rapist, a crime I admit to having a considerable emotional bias against.
I agree. I'd lean towards letting the lady decide without forcing the man to be responsible.
However, should the man be allowed to force her to keep the child instead of aborting? What about that decision?
Originally posted by dadudemon
I agree. I'd lean towards letting the lady decide without forcing the man to be responsible.However, should the man be allowed to force her to keep the child instead of aborting? What about that decision?
Again the issue is obscured by the issue yet again that... it is her body. She's the one who needs to feed and look after the foetus for 9 months. But I also find the idea that she can abort the foetus without his consent, with the father esentially having no say in the matter, abhorrant. That doesn't just apply to this rape-scenario btw.
Originally posted by NephthysI don't think that pointing that out leads to the conclusion that he should have a 'yes/no' vote on the topic of abortion.
IMO its just as much his child as hers.
If you recognize his status as a victim of rape and remove his legal responsibilities to the rape-child, then his rights as the biological father and rape victim are already looked after, I would think.
Originally posted by dadudemonI think this question is a lot more interesting, but I think I'd still side on the 'he gets no say, sorry buddy'.
However, should the man be allowed to force her to keep the child instead of aborting? What about that decision?
Originally posted by Nephthys
Again the issue is obscured by the issue yet again that... it is her body. She's the one who needs to feed and look after the foetus for 9 months.
That's what is bothering me. Even if she was forced to carry, she can still abort it on her own (sure, it would be very dangerous, but she could try to do it).
Originally posted by Nephthys
But I also find the idea that she can abort the foetus without his consent, with the father esentially having no say in the matter, abhorrant.
Ditto.
What if the man has a strong religious belief that the "child" should not be aborted because it is innocent of the crime that was committed? That's like...what...hundreds of millions of people that believe that?
Originally posted by Nephthys
That doesn't just apply to this rape-scenario btw.
Indeed.
But, yes, I would concede to the female to get to decide.
Originally posted by NephthysI would say that, if he bore no legal responsibility to the child, he bears no rights over it. If he chose to bear responsibility for the child (and if the rapist wanted to have the child) then he could care for it, but I also don't think that 'right to decide what happens to your kid' extends to aborting it. I view abortion as a perfectly moral choice because I think the mother's right to her body overrides the rights of the living-but-not-quite-human attachment growing inside of her. With that in mind, I don't see why a father would have a 'right' to abort a fetus, given that it's not his body, and the right to decide what happens to something shouldn't extend to killing it if not doing so costs him nothing (which happens to be the case here).
Why not? You don't think that a man should have the right to decide what happens to his own child?