Men should have the right to ‘abort’ responsibility for an unborn child, Swedish political group say - Polidicks

[URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/03/08/men-should-have-the-right-to-abort-responsibility-for-an-unborn-child-swedish-political-group-says/"]SOURCE[/URL] [QUOTE]Sweden may well have among the most accepting views of abortion in the world — one recent poll found that 84 percent of the country supports a[URL="http://ipsos-na.com/download/pr.aspx?id=15335"]woman's right to have[/URL] an abortion whenever she wants one. Yet a proposal from a Swedish group to offer men the right to a "legal abortion" of an unborn child has not been met with enthusiasm.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough, I'm okay with this.

We had this discussion in Denmark as well just recently - personally I think there are very specific cases where it should be applicable, but it's not [I]really[/I] a big deal.

I legitimately don't know how to feel about this.

I can see this being abused just as harshly as child support

There is no reason a man should be legally responsible for a child he never wanted to have when effective contraceptives and the right to abortion are widely available. If you choose to have a child you can not financially support that's on you, not the sperm donor.

Read the article and I can't see anything wrong with it. Has to be done within 18 weeks of pregnancy, loss of all rights to see child, no legal responsibility

[QUOTE=lordofdafood;49915221]Read the article and I can't see anything wrong with it. Has to be done within 18 weeks of pregnancy, loss of all rights to see child, no legal responsibility[/QUOTE] Well if the abortion went through is there really that much to see?

[QUOTE=soulharvester;49915215]There is no reason a man should be legally responsible for a child he never wanted to have when effective contraceptives and the right to abortion are widely available. If you choose to have a child you can not financially support that's on you, not the sperm donor.[/QUOTE] It's not 100% and as far as I am aware there is no legal way out. There has been plenty of cased of people using pregnancy as a cash grab ( oops I forgot the pill for a few weeks) [editline]12th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Tetsmega;49915233]Well if the abortion went through is there really that much to see?[/QUOTE] The husband doesnt force the abortion he just removes his legal obligations it's still the woman's choice to actually do the real abort

[QUOTE=The Party Spy;49915198]I can see this being abused just as harshly as child support[/QUOTE] i guess a man could potentially, for whatever reason, manipulate a woman into having a child she's not prepared for only to "abort" his responsibility during the pregnancy on the other hand, a woman could potentially manipulate her partner into "aborting" his rights to the child (by pressuring him or some other means, i suppose), which would most likely entitle her to increased child $, right? i don't know, something like this could lead to all sorts of stuff

I think this takes both parts into consideration, so it is a good suggestion.

[QUOTE=soulharvester;49915215]There is no reason a man should be legally responsible for a child he never wanted to have when effective contraceptives and the right to abortion are widely available. If you choose to have a child you can not financially support that's on you, not the sperm donor.[/QUOTE] The guy still makes the decision to have unprotected sex. Should he be able to force a woman to get an abortion or have a child she cannot support? I personally don't think so, since a child in this case is the result of both the man and woman's lack of responsibility, they should both be held accountable for it. In cases where pregnancy happens regardless of protection, then things are different. Of course this is just my moral thinking and in practicality very hard to enforce. With abortion, the emphasis is on "choice". It's the woman's body so it is unspeakable to force her to do something whether it be to abort or to keep the baby against her will. In most cases I think if there is a pregnancy, it's too late to bail on responsibility.

Seems fair and equal. If woman has the right to either abort or go with it out of her and only her own will, a man should have all the rights to accept or not the responsibility too. This is actually the sort of thing feminism needs to fight for, equality in law from both sides. No matter the gender, you should have the freedom of choice to your own life. [editline]12th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=meek;49915347]The guy still makes the decision to have unprotected sex.[/QUOTE] No he does not, both parties involved do. You can't pin one of them as the more responsible one.

[QUOTE=The golden;49915410]I'm actually a partial example of why such a thing should exist. My mother lied about the use of birth-control because she wanted a baby but my father was not prepared for it. The result was she got pregnant with me. My dad was badly traumatized by this, so much so he got tubes cut so it could never happen again. A situation like that would be perfect for such a system to be employed. The reason I'm a "partial" example is because after birth my mother tried to get rid of me. Violently so, like dumping me on the doorstep of my grandparents place. My dad took up full custody of me and raised as best as he could and really stepped up to be the parent my mother never was even though he never wanted a child. Looking at my dads young-adult life and the things he did - having a child really did ruin the life that he had. If my mother actually did raise me properly then my dad could have evoked this system (if it existed) and not have to deal with a child he never wanted.[/QUOTE] Sorry to barge but if this law was a thing and your mother decided to keep you, wouldn't you just grow up an orphan or your dad would take the custody anyway? I don't quite see how that applies.

If the dude doesn't want a child, if he makes that decision before its too late to abort it, then he shouldn't need to support it. Whether or not it gets aborted at that point is up to the mom. If he gets the choice and says "yes, lets have the baby" then bails, he should need to pay child support. Its that simple.

[QUOTE=rndgenerator;49915378]Seems fair and equal. If woman has the right to either abort or go with it out of her and only her own will, a man should have all the rights to accept or not the responsibility too. This is actually the sort of thing feminism needs to fight for, equality in law from both sides. No matter the gender, you should have the freedom of choice to your own life. [editline]12th March 2016[/editline] No he does not, both parties involved do. You can't pin one of them as the more responsible one.[/QUOTE] The thing is, the woman is already paying the price the moment she conceives the child, but the man somehow gets absolved of all responsibility? I never said that the man is more responsible for it. He is not the only one paying money for a kid, and he still gets off without having to invest time into the child so I don't know what you're talking about "pinning one of them as the responsible one". Sounds like you've never really considered the situation from a woman's point of view.

[QUOTE=The golden;49915410]I'm actually a partial example of why such a thing should exist. My mother lied about the use of birth-control because she wanted a baby but my father was not prepared for it. The result was she got pregnant with me. My dad was badly traumatized by this, so much so he got tubes cut so it could never happen again. A situation like that would be perfect for such a system to be employed. The reason I'm a "partial" example is because after birth my mother tried to get rid of me. Violently so, like dumping me on the doorstep of my grandparents place. My dad took up full custody of me and raised as best as he could and really stepped up to be the parent my mother never was even though he never wanted a child. Looking at my dads young-adult life and the things he did - having a child really did ruin the life that he had. If my mother actually did raise me properly then my dad could have evoked this system (if it existed) and not have to deal with a child he never wanted.[/QUOTE] Your father had his fallopian tubes cut?

[QUOTE=meek;49915434]The thing is, the woman is already paying the price the moment she has the child, but the man somehow gets absolved of this?[/QUOTE] This. This is where I think "equality" is taking it too far. A man and a women both make the choice to have a baby whether intentional or not. The man should be absolved of all responsibility because he didn't want it? Fuck the woman right? What if she is not pro choice or what if she wants to keep the child? That's how life happens. You shouldn't be able to get off the hook as a father because you didn't want it.

[QUOTE=meek;49915347]The guy still makes the decision to have unprotected sex. Should he be able to force a woman to get an abortion or have a child she cannot support? I personally don't think so, since a child in this case is the result of both the man and woman's lack of responsibility, they should both be held accountable for it. In cases where pregnancy happens regardless of protection, then things are different. Of course this is just my moral thinking and in practicality very hard to enforce. With abortion, the emphasis is on "choice". It's the woman's body so it is unspeakable to force her to do something whether it be to abort or to keep the baby against her will. In most cases I think if there is a pregnancy, it's too late to bail on responsibility.[/QUOTE] Unprotected sex is consensual between [I]two[/I] adults. A women can have the right to abortion of a child, then a man should have the right to legal abortion. It takes two to raise a child, can't afford it then don't have it. It's a double standard otherwise and slap in the face to true equality. For once I agree with the swedes. By the logic of this 'legal abort', my father could've had the choice to have nothing to do with me. But, I'm fine with that; that's equality. My parents love each other(although many rocky moments in their relationship), and so I'm lucky to have the both of them together in my life.

[QUOTE=The golden;49915443]Yes he did. He basically had a child raped out of him so I can't really blame him. He never wanted children in the first place anyway. (also fallopian tubes are the female version lol)[/QUOTE] I was poking fun at you because I've never heard of a vasectomy referred to as getting your tubes cut lol. [editline]12th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=LtKyle2;49915448]Unprotected sex is consensual between [I]two[/I] adults. A women can have the right to abortion of a child, then a man should have the right to legal abortion. It takes two to raise a child, can't afford it then don't have it. It's a double standard otherwise and slap in the face to true equality. For once I agree with the swedes. By the logic of this 'legal abort', my father could've had the choice to have nothing to do with me. But, I'm fine with that; that's equality. My parents love each other(although many rocky moments in their relationship), and so I'm lucky to have the both of them together in my life.[/QUOTE] You might call it equality but it's morally reprehensible and unfair to the child to have been born of someone who could so brazenly give a shit less about them. This is human life we're talking about BTW.

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49915453]I was poking fun at you because I've never heard of a vasectomy referred to as getting your tubes cut lol. [editline]12th March 2016[/editline] You might call it equality but it's morally reprehensible and unfair to the child to have been born of someone who could give a shit less about them. This is human life we're talking about BTW.[/QUOTE] Is it not morally reprehensible to kill a potential new life in the womb?

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49915478]Is it not morally reprehensible to kill a potential new life in the womb?[/QUOTE] No. Not if both agree that they do not want the child. Absolving a father of all responsibility and telling her "sucks to be you should have gotten an abortion" is awful and goes directly against the concept of "choice".

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49915448]Unprotected sex is consensual between [I]two[/I] adults. A women can have the right to abortion of a child, then a man should have the right to legal abortion. It takes two to raise a child, can't afford it then don't have it. It's a double standard otherwise and slap in the face to true equality. For once I agree with the swedes. By the logic of this 'legal abort', my father could've had the choice to have nothing to do with me. But, I'm fine with that; that's equality. My parents love each other(although many rocky moments in their relationship), and so I'm lucky to have the both of them together in my life.[/QUOTE] You are forgetting that for many women, abortion isn't a choice. It's both the man and woman's responsibility to ensure they're protected, if it fails both should be held accountable. That is true equality, not leaving the woman to rot with a child she cannot support.

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49915481]Not. Not if both agree that they do not want the child. Absolving a father of all responsibility and telling her "sucks to be you should have gotten an abortion" is awful and goes directly against the concept of "choice".[/QUOTE] Consequences are the result of choices. If a man does not want it, yet the woman does then man feels the consequences of the woman' decision. Yet, should we have the equality of choice for both sides, then the both sides have that freedom to choose and the man does not have to feel the woman tighten the noose around his neck. The woman will be accountable for her own choice, no one else.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49915540]Consequences are the result of choices. If a man does not want it, yet the woman does then man feels the consequences of the woman' decision. Yet, should we have the equality of choice for both sides, then the both sides have that freedom to choose and the man does not have to feel the woman tighten the noose around his neck. The woman will be accountable for her own choice, no one else.[/QUOTE] The man makes a choice the moment he chooses to have intercourse that can result in a baby, though.

[QUOTE=meek;49915558]The man makes a choice the moment he chooses to have intercourse that can result in a baby, though.[/QUOTE] The woman has a choice to either abort or give the child to a orphanage. If you require child support to raise a child then you are financially ready to raise one. That child could find a home with two parents who are incapable of producing one on their own.

[QUOTE=meek;49915523]You are forgetting that for many women, abortion isn't a choice. It's both the man and woman's responsibility to ensure they're protected, if it fails both should be held accountable. That is true equality, not leaving the woman to rot with a child she cannot support.[/QUOTE] If the women has the means to get an abortion, and she chooses not too, she chose to raise that child. If the man wants nothing to do with that child, but the women wants to have it, despite having an alternative option, then it's on her to raise that child herself. I'm not okay with locking men into an 18 year fee for a decision they have have no right to decide on. Your body, your choice, your responsibility, see how that works?

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49915540]Consequences are the result of choices. If a man does not want it, yet the woman does then man feels the consequences of the woman' decision. Yet, should we have the equality of choice for both sides, then the both sides have that freedom to choose and the man does not have to feel the woman tighten the noose around his neck. The woman will be accountable for her own choice, no one else.[/QUOTE] I disagree with the equality of choice for both sides. There should be the equality of accountability for both sides. Abortion is not a choice for many women; whether it for spiritual, personal, moralistic, or religious reasons. To absolve a father of all responsibility and then expect a woman who does NOT want an abortion to have a child she can not support is NOT equality. It takes one penis and one vagina to make a baby and if you someone gets pregnant in the midst of it then both parties should be held accountable for those actions. Sometimes shit happens in life you don't want but guess what, you suck it the fuck up. Especially when it's a child. True equality is equal accountability. [editline]12th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=soulharvester;49915572]If the women has the means to get an abortion, and she chooses not too, she chose to raise that child. If the man wants nothing to do with that child, but the women wants to have it, despite having an alternative option, then it's on her to raise that child herself. I'm not okay with locking men into an 18 year fee for a decision they have have no right to decide on. [B]Your body, your choice, your responsibility[/B], see how that works?[/QUOTE] No you see that's not how it works. In a nutshell for someone to get pregnant a [B]man[/B] needs to cum inside a vagina. This is a 50/50 process (unless you steal someones seed and then idk artificially inseminate I guess); when you make the choice to have sex you are going into it well aware that a potential outcome of that is impregnation. If someone gets pregnant in the process then that's both party's fuck up and that's life. If the woman does not want to get an abortion guess what? That's life. You play with fire, you get burned. You might not want to have anything to do with the child but it does not change the fact that the child is a result of your actions. You should at least be held financially responsible for it. Equal accountability is equality (in situations where an abortion is not agreed upon).

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49915577]Sometimes shit happens in life you don't want but guess what, you suck it the fuck up. Especially when it's a child. True equality is equal accountability.[/QUOTE] Except when a man wants to have the child but the woman doesn't? And it's not about accountability, the man has no choice in whether or not the baby gets born or not. Whether or not the baby gets born is the choice of the mother, her body, her "choice", her [b]responsibility[/b]. There is no reason that a man should have to pay for the decision to raise a child made by someone else if he wanted no part in it. If a woman doesn't want a child, she has a plethora of birth control options available to her, if a woman doesn't want to have a child she can absolutely have sex whilst avoiding pregnancy these days, and failing that, she still doesn't have to raise it if she doesn't want to. Why is the man legally obligated to pay for mistakes and or decisions made by someone else?

Can't she give up the child for adoption at that point? Abortion isn't the only option.