jane
Well-Known Member
Mumblin Deaf Ro said:That's just absurd.
How is it absurd?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Mumblin Deaf Ro said:That's just absurd.
cheryl said:of course she did. you can't just simplify it to that though.. oh well, you've had sex, now you're pregnant and now you have to have the baby. that's ridiculous. it's like saying, you've just set your finger on fire, you'll have to let it burn right off (kinda).
jane said:How is it absurd?
snakybus said:not particularly - your implication is that a father might be unaffected by such a loss
cheryl said:there is no law that states a woman ultimately has the final say so neither should there be a law that states the man has the final say.
Mumblin Deaf Ro said:I'm not saying she has to have the baby, just that she shouldn't have it aborted without the father's consent.
helena said:Ah right. I don't mean to imply that I think he would be completely unaffected, I guess, just that I think the effect would probably be less traumatic than a tangible human loss. Maybe not tho. I don't know.
kirstie said:yes, fine. But it's your soution to what happens next that is at issue. At least I have an issue with it. She can't have an abortion but what she can have is an unwanted pregnancy which has to go to full term instead. Yay! Fun times ahead!
So quite apart from men having no rights in this matter, women are actually the ones who end up getting NOTHING they want.
Mumblin Deaf Ro said:It's absurd to say that if a father wants to assert his rights he should adopt a child rather than express a view on the life of his own children.
Ah here now it's not that simple - it's not like popping down to Tesco.jane said:If it's about the kids, and about wanting kids of his own, he can hire a surrogate mother (with her consent) or adopt a child
edit: Fostering was thrown in as an option for men who want babbys, but if anything the requirements are even more stringent than those for adoption. the pay is better though.Who May Adopt?
The following persons are eligible to adopt:-
a) a married couple living together; this is the only circumstance where the law permits the adoption of a child by more than one person:
b) a married person alone; in this circumstance the spouse's consent to adopt must be obtained, unless they are living apart and are separated under (i) a court decree or (ii) deed of separation or (iii) the spouse has deserted the prospective adopter or (iv) conduct on the part of the spouse results in the prospective adopter, with just cause, leaving the spouse and living apart;
c) the mother, father or a relative of the child (relative meaning a grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt of the child and/or the spouse of any such person, the relationship to the child being traced through the mother or the father);
d) a widow or widower.
A sole applicant who does not come within the classes of persons defined under (c) and (d) above may only adopt where the Board is satisfied that, in the particular circumstances of the case, it is desirable to grant an order. It is not possible for two unmarried persons to adopt jointly.
Age of child Payment per week
Under 12 years 305 euro per child per week
Over 12 years 332 euro per child per week
no, just my heart.kirstie said:so did we break thumped with the unprecedented levels of oestregen and testosterone?
This is very true. An old friend of mine was in the position of getting a bird preggers, she didn't want it but he did.Mumblin Deaf Ro said:For some people, men and women, it would be akin to a miscarriage, which is the death of an orgnaism that not everyone would consider a child, but which nevertheless brings about all the grief of losing a child.
ReadySteadyJedi said:I saw a bit of this thread yesterday, but decided to leave it until i came in on overtime to read it. Reading this thread has earned me e18.25. Nice one thumped!
In an unrelated point, i think ye both agree, just that at different points different parties haven't been the best at putting forward their points and there has been amounts of hysteria. I agree with Ro that men should have some say, and i agree with Jane that women should have more say. Obviously this is an unworkable situation since there's two parties and one having more say means they have a veto, but giving a man a veto is ridiculous - Ro, do you think pregnancy is just going on the dry for nine months with a little extra weight round the front for the last few weeks?
It's a bit shit (for yer man) that a woman might have an abortion when yer man wants the kid, but with abortion there are no winners - anyone i know that's had one has had long lasting emotional (and sometimes physical) repercussions. But the fact of the matter is an unplanned/unwanted (50% or otherwise) pregnancy is a shit situation all round, and if a couple in a relationship can come to an agreement that both of them are reasonably happy with, that's mega. Ideally they could both have a say, but when the reality of the man having the veto (which, yes ro, you argued for consistenly for several pages) is a woman going through the long trauma of pregnancy (which lasts longer than a simple nine months when you consider the emotional repurcussions of bringing a child to term then giving it up), you have an unfair and unequal situation that goes far beyond "well, the sex was consentual".
Anal_Hygiene said:have you people gone to bed yet?
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...
Upgrade nowWe use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.