What is right about this Ohio bill: Abortion law gives fathers a say, but opponents blast bill as 'extreme'?

Question

As written, the Ohio bill would ban women from seeking an abortion without written consent from the father of the fetus. In cases where the identity of the father is unknown, women would be required to submit a list of possible fathers. The physician would be forced to conduct a paternity test from the provided list and then seek paternal permission to abort. Simply put: no father means no abortion.

In addition, women would be required to present a police report in order to prove a pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.

With the proposal, men would be guaranteed that voice under penalty of law. First time violators would by tried for abortion fraud, a first degree misdemeanor. The same would be the case for men who falsely claim to be fathers and for medical workers who knowingly perform an abortion without paternal consent. http://www.recordpub.com/news/article/2327981

What is right about this bill? What if you didn't want to file a rape or incest report with the police?

Wow, one of you thinks if a woman is raped, and is too afraid to go to the police, she *deserves* to have the rapists child because she is *afraid*? So the woman is suppose to be punished twice for being raped. Whew!. Harsh, very harsh. Hope someone who care about, isn't raped and afraid. No sympathy from you, eh?

And the same poster thinks women should have their children taken away from them since they shouldn't be raised by a whore? Hmm, just who would be eligible to raise the child, if you made both men and women adhere to your standards, how many couples are going to be found who will be eligible to adopt? Would they both have to be virgins to adopt? Can they each have had one partner, and be allowed to adopt? Who decides what is a "whore" or "whoremonger"?

I see a lot of statements blaming the woman for having unprotected sex. What about the man that had unprotected sex with her? Where is his responsibility? Why aren't they being vilified for creating this fetus too?

Answer 1

If what you say is correct, I would not expect this bill to ever pass. If it did, it would almost certainly never go into effect under the current case law.

While parental consent is required for minors, the requirement for parental consent is based on the general rule that minors are unable to give informed consent to any medical procedure. For an adult woman, it is permitted to impose requirements designed to assure that her consent to an abortion is an informed consent. It is not permitted to give another person a veto over the decision to have an abortion.

If this bill were enacted, it would put Justice Kennedy on the spot (and to a lesser extent Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito). Justice Kennedy has said that it is unconstitutional to impose a substantial burden on a woman having an abortion. This bill looks like a substantial burden to me. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito promised the Senate that they did not have any agenda on this issue. This bill would put the continued viability of Roe v. Wade dead set at the heart of the case.

Answer 2

1st let me say thank you for bringing this to my attention! Not only do I live in Ohio but the piece is from my local paper! How could I have missed this??

This is sooo wrong! I'm a firm believer in parental rights for fathers, but this goes way beyond! To have or not to have an abortion should be something decided by the people involved and ONLY them! There are so many factors to be considered, are they ready for a life long commitment to the child? financially able to care for the child? Are they mature enough to handle all the things it takes to raise the child? These are things no government should have a say in ever!

I can say from experience that if a woman is considering abortion she has thought long and hard about each and every aspect. And if she is considering abortion chances are the men involved are either have walked away, are not "ready" for children, or just plain refused to acknowledge they have any responsibility to the child.

I don't think a man should be forced to pay support that is extreme either! Oh he should pay support but not to the extent that he can't live on what he makes. This I also know from experience! If a woman has a child that the father never wanted in the 1st place why should he have to pay? If the child was from a partnership or marriage that has ended that is a different story yes support should be paid because the parents never intended to separate when he/she was born.
But I digress..
Yes a man should know about the abortion but should he have the right to say no? No! If the women doesn't want to have the child why should she be forced in the the very situation she is trying to avoid? Why should she risk her health and well being because the man doesn't agree?The man who raped her sure wasn't planning to have a child! How is forcing her to carry that child because she can't prove physical rape not a form of moral rape its self?? If a man wants a child that bad that he is willing to risk the child's health and that of the mother's he needs find a partner willing to do the same.

But ultimately it is the women's decision it's her body.and if she doesn't want to carry the pregnancy to term for what ever reason then she should be be able to do what she feels is right for her future.The government does not have the right to make women 2nd class again by permitting a man to dictate what she should/shouldn't do? No! The government sticking it's greedy political hands into the mix is just going to make things worse, as all the other stupid ideas they come up seem to do!

Answer 3

Abortion is not an extreme form of birth control, at least it is not intended that way.

Your answers have been so extreme as the subject of abortion is so touchy.

I read your post with interest. I had an abortion, many moons ago under very difficult circumstances. Incidentally the father ducked out of his responsibility by saying 'you decide', and promptly handing himself in after being AWOL and then going to prison.

It takes two to conceive, but only one person can grow a baby. Not even medical sciencem with all it's knowledge and advancements can do what a woman can do. It can sometimes take over from 24/25 weeks gestation and successfully produce a child, but not without sometimes significant medical conditions. But for those first 24 weeks, nothing can replace a woman's body. That is why I think it is her right to choose. The law in the UK is that you can abort up to 24 weeks. I am not saying I agree with abortion. I find it a very difficult subject, precisely because I had one. But I also know the agony of finding yourself in a position where you are considering it. believe me it is extreme.

It is even more difficult when you include the matter of paternal consent. How are you going to prove paternity while the baby is still in the womb? Surely this must involve invasive procedures which put the baby's life in danger?
I'm sorry but the notion that a man could obstruct a woman's right to choose what happens to her body just doesn't sit with me.

One thing is for sure, if the law passes, you will see many more back street abortions where women and babies are badly maimed and injured in botched abortion attempts. Women who request abortions are desperate for a reason.

Answer 4

It's dangerous, because if you don't think about it too much, it sounds reasonable. The main problem is that it gives someone else control over a person's body. Why should a guy have veto power over a woman's medical decisions? Also, I can think of plenty of reasons a woman wouldn't want to get the guy's permission anyway. Rape and incest are two huge reasons. A woman or girl either still dealing with that or who has just been raped is really vulnerable. Not everyone is strong enough to deal with reliving it over and over right after the attack.

Finally, it's completely unenforceable unless we're going to spend billions on it. You know what I'd do if I found myself pregnant in Ohio and I didn't want to deal with the father? I'd call up one of my guy friends. I can think of a couple right off the top of my head who'd help me out. Hell, this is America, right? If it passes, there are going to be some thriving businesses popping up on eBay.

I know the current situation isn't ideal, and it seems like the fathers get no say. However, until men can carry the babies or there are artificial wombs, I don't think it can get any better. We always talk about how women need to be careful in their choice of sexual partner; maybe it's time we tell men to do the same.

Answer 5

I'm caught wondering if Rep. John Adams truely considered what atrocity he is promoting? The police state he is advocating for women in an unwanted pregnancy... has he codified the penalties for women who refuse to eat properly during pregnancy (candy bars would be a crime, chocolate cravings or not), exercise, abstain from alcohol, etc... So, the state of Ohio would have to construct Gulags to ensure women are doing what they "should"...
Also, are these fathers going to be making up any loss of income the women suffer, paying any and all medical bills (I'm thinking I need a second opinion from a doctor in Paris! lol), exercise classes and any plastic surgery to correct any damage the pregnancy does to her body. Does she get an additional fund to cover future medical bills relating to the unwanted pregnancy??? (diabetes, varicose veins, hemmroids, etc)
Personally, I don't feel EITHER person should become a parent unless they want to... While a man has no say in a woman's decision to abort, neither should she have any say in what he does with his income for the next 20 years if she chooses to carry to term. But then I also don't feel the government (ie we the taxpayers) should be expected to fund anyones breeding...
I'd like it if Rep. John Adams would require legally binding, informed consent (detailing past sexual history, most recent STD testing, acts you're willing/unwilling to perform, contraception to be used, and what the result will be in the event of pregnancy) to be filed prior to beginning a sexual relationship with someone new... IF he feels the need to intrude in the sex lives of others...

Answer 6

I don't see any right choices being presented. I don't think abortion is a right choice. I don't think allowing men to choose what a woman does with her body is a right choice. I don't think complicated convoluted legislation is a right choice. Politics seems to be about a bunch of moronic grandstanding in which we are constantly forced to choose the lessor of 2 evils and this is no exception. In fact, I think abortion debates is a perfect example of corruption in politics. Corruption of terminology. Corruption of the definition of citizenship and reproductive rights. Corruption of trying to decide what's a right thing and making it work to the politicians advantage instead of just making the right thing the law. It's absurd. Obviously, regardless of what stage of life a person is at, they are a person and have some sort of rights. But because this person is part of a woman's body and can't live independantly, the mother does have some say. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure? That's an understatement! So if the baby is viable, then a separate person exists. Let's just keep it simple. And spend the rest of our time and energy etc. towards educating people to make the right choices, plan in advance, get along, etc. to avoid this nastyness.

Answer 7

As written, it is too harsh an assault on privacy rights to have a reasonable chance of success in passing. Requiring rape and incest victims to file a police report in order to obtain an abortion can actually put the woman in danger of even more severe abuse from the perpetrator. What safety measures are in place to protect her if and when she files the report?
This must be addressed before the bill comes to a vote.

This bill was introduced as one stage in the political game.
It raises awareness of the inequity of reproductive rights as a political issue. I hope it will generate serious, reasonable discussion about improving access and affordability of birth control, which is the real underlying issue here. When birth control is affordable and accessible, the demand for abortion *should* drop.

Every abortion bill carries several layers of subtext -
-right to privacy
- accessibility and affordability of birth control
- who should have control over a woman's reproductive system, the state or the individual?

Paternal rights are important, but are they any more important than maternal rights? Why the heck don't people talk about this stuff before they hop into bed?

IMO, if everyone would display a reasonable degree of personal responsibility, we would not need laws attempting to regulate reproduction. It is a frustrating and sad state of affairs that brought us to this place.

Answer 8

It's completely wrong. I'm pro-choice, not because I like abortion, but because I know that abortions will take place no matter what, and I would much prefer that they be given in a safe place by a qualified physician rather than in some back street by someone with no medical training. If anything, this law would force some women to seek abortions in unsafe settings.

Answer 9

I think I'm gonna be sick. This will never fly: most abortions are performed to eliminate an embryo, NOT a fetus. The safest and least expensive method is a pharmaceutical one. I can just imagine how many men mysteriously dissappear...while the embryo grows into a fetus and then...no tri-semester abortion available. Sorry lady, you lose. The guy is never seen or heard from again? Too bad for you. Father's identity a mystery - the woman will just lie about it - who on earth will tattle on who she has been sleeping with - how absolutely ridiculous! What if the woman doesn't file a police report in event of rape? What if she is in shock? What if she doesn't want to?

What if...what if...what if...what if...

all I see is burocracy and government ineptitude on the horizon. If they can't get deadbeat fathers to pay what they owe now, how on earth do 'they' expect to get a handle on this (proposed) monstrosity???

If men aren't willing to embrace fatherhood they have the option of using a 'Vasclamp', getting themselves fixed, wearing multiple condoms...whatever. We had a case like this in Canada in 1989 where the guy - a convicted wifebeater - was fighting through the courts to prevent his ex-girlfriend from aborting. It was taking so long that she finally went to the USA to have it dealt with there. She had to have a late-term abortion - not available in Quebec - at that time. She ended up in Kansas after the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that as long as the embryo/fetus remained unborn, no paternity rights existed. END OF STORY in Canadian law.

Hands off the woman's body!

Answer 10

Men, should be able to opt out of being a parent,
I think it should be the other way around.

If a woman wants to have a baby and claim support from the father and they are not married, his consent should be required, without his consent to have the child. The Woman should be responsible for all child support.

Women should ask themselves, will he support a child before having sex and not just look to collect a check because things didn't work out.