Talk:Paternal rights and abortion

NPOV

This article reads like a position paper. Even in the lede, it says "Men, it is argued, should (x y and z)." Argued by whom? I have removed that content and much content which is now placed below. Also, where is the criticism? And the laws which support full decision-making on the part of the woman are not mentioned here at all. Joie de Vivre 14:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Removed content

The following content is unsourced. Edit: The content about Roman law is sourced, but is out of place in regards to the modern father's rights movement:

From the lede

Men, it is argued, should share equal rights with women in the decision of whether or not a pregnancy is to be carried to term, requiring that the biological father either consent to or be informed before his wife or girlfriend undergoes an abortion.

From "#Debate and public opinion"

Those who defend paternal rights believe it is unfair that women are often given greater reproductive liberty: a woman can choose whether to abort a pregnancy, or carry it to term, and then whether to parent the child or place it for adoption. All of these decisions, it is argued, can result in emotional, financial, and other consequences for the biological father, and yet the man's opinion in the matter is seldom consulted in the decision-making process or given weight in legal considerations. If the man desires to be a father, the woman can still have an abortion, regardless of the deleterious effect to his mental health; if, on the other hand, he doesn't desire to raise a child, then the woman can give birth and he may still be liable to pay child support.

Some supporters of paternal rights seek to grant men social equality with women. Supporters, however, downplay the concept of men having the ability to impose their wishes in the abortion decision with any finality. A term which is used by some is "equal choice", meaning that the masculine and feminine choices are of equal importance, if not identical in nature: it is asserted that the woman can choose whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term and the man can choose whether or not to assume financial responsibility for the child which might result. Their stance is that granting a man the ability to forego fatherhood and the requirements thereof does not diminish the "woman's right to choose."

Those who oppose paternal rights hold that, because it is the woman who must physically go through the nine months of pregnancy and risk its associated complications, her will in the matter should be conclusive. In their opinion, permitting the man to opt out of any parental duty if the woman chooses motherhood is unacceptable, effectively allowing him influence or control over her ultimate decision, as she might not be able to financially support a child herself if she decides to carry to term. They concede that the current situation in many nations is slanted in favour of women but claim that the physical responsibility placed upon women by pregnancy balances out the financial responsibility which a child places upon men.

Comments

In this edit you described the "History" section as "unsourced." However, the section is in fact based on a number of reliable, academic sources. It's also completely relevant, as it adds historical context, rather like the "History" section at Abortion law. I will restore the "History" section, as I don't see a logical reason for limiting coverage in this article to the modern period, because this standard isn't being observed in other abortion-related articles.

When this article began, it could've certainly been described as a "position paper," as all it included at that time were two "Arguments" sections. I have tried to expand this article and make its content more encyclopaedic — thus, the "Laws" section, and the "History" section. As for the content in the "Debate" section, I will try to find sources for it, which shouldn't be too difficult. There is criticism in the "Debate" section already in the third paragraph. Intelligent design and Atheism, both Featured Articles, consist largely of arguments, so, obviously, there is a place for this type of content on Wikipedia, so long as it is attributed and adds context to the article as a whole (as if to answer the question, "Why do people think this?").

The original title of this article was simply Paternal rights. I moved it to Paternal rights and abortion to better reflect its scope. However, if this title is conducive of a specific position, we could change it to Men and abortion. This would be consistent with the titling of Minors and abortion. -Severa (!!!) 19:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, I did not intend to refer to "TIMELINE 3rd CENTURY" as a "reliable, academic" source. The academic sources in question would be the book by John M. Riddle and Cicero's speech. Riddle isn't specific about the timing of Septimius Severus' ruling, refering only to the length of his reign, and the 3rd century timeline was used only to confirm a specific year. The majority of information in the "History" section was taken from the book by Riddle (pages 62 to 63). -Severa (!!!) 19:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean that the history section was unsourced. I meant that as a caveat; "this is all unsourced, the History section is sourced but does not belong here". More later. Joie de Vivre 19:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Legal cases

I do not think it is necessary to retitle the "Legal cases" section as "Legal cases which failed." The fact that the outcomes of the cases currently featured in this section were likely not what the plaintiffs had hoped to achieve is already apparent from the text. Readers are capable of ascertaining this for themselves. Stating what is obvious in this manner verges on trying to prove a point. Also, do we have evidence to state, conclusively, that all such legal cases, ever, have failed? I don't think we should preclude the possibility that, given different legal and cultural settings, similar lawsuits might have turned out in the man's favour in other countries. I don't see a reason for content forking based on success or failure of the case; all cases should be incorporated into a single section. If the length of the section becomes prohibitive, then we could select a more objective manner of dividing up cases, such as by time period. -Severa (!!!) 02:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The fact that this article systematically avoids mentioning the laws that prohibit anyone else deciding whether or not a woman will have an abortion is far more problematic than offering a summary of a lengthy section. Joie de Vivre 02:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Nothing is preventing information on countries which do not have spousal consent legislation in effect from being added to this article. But, looking at Late-term abortion, I do not see a list of countries which do not restrict abortion in later pregnancy. This information should be readily discernable by process of exclusion from the list of countries that do, so, arguably, it's already in the article. -Severa (!!!) 03:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Recent changes

Does this seem out of place or biased to anyone else? - "In this way, men's rights groups are seeking to control women's bodies, not gain rights for themselves."

It seemed like it shouldn't be in here to me, but I thought someone else might have another opinion. 168.18.83.155 03:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The text in question was inserted into the article only 17 days ago, and, as such, I have reverted it. I have also restored two sources, which were removed under the explanation "Blogs are not reliable references," as neither source meets the definition of a "blog." "Aborting Equality: Men's Odd Place in the Abortion Debate" is from the magazine Reason and "Should men have rights in abortion?" is an excerpt from the book Abortion Law and Politics Today by David Nolan. It isn't helpful to simply replace an actual citation with a "citation needed" tag. If you believe that there is an issue with a source, then, please, at least look for a replacement citation first. -Severa 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed addition to article

Can someone include statistics on the issue of how often women seeking abortions actually face opposition from the man whose child they are pregnant with? From what I've read, of the women who told their partners of their intentions, only 10% were actively opposed. Can someone research this and add some info? I'm not the best at this sort of thing. 203.45.95.236 (talk) 13:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Misleading Redirect

"Male Abortion" redirects here - even tho it has little to do with this article. Apparently an actual article on the matter does not exist? Male Abortion deals with a fathers right to relinquish parenthood - not his options in avoiding his partner having an abortion. It's the exact opposite thing. 87.145.246.3 (talk) 16:05, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Unsupported claim

I'm removing the sentence in the controversy section that says that

Fathers rights and mens rights activists argue about a womens right to abortion.

This is a (to my knowledge) an unsupported claim and no citation is given. Since no source is given i'm going to delete it. If anyone is to reverse my decision please discuss it in this section/add a citation. The mention of a particular Mens rights activist in the section below doesn't indicate that it is something that collective MRA's and Fathers rights activists talk about often as suggested in the aftermentioned sentences. Metalhead498 (talk) 03:06, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you referring to here where you added 'some' on 28th? What I saw you remove on 26th was this:

A man's rights relating to a woman’s decision to abort a fetus are the subject of considerable debate. Advocates of father's rights and members of the men's movement often argue that the valuing of maternal over paternal rights in many Western nations is an example of sexual discrimination.

I don't believe this is accurately paraphrased here in your talk page statement. 'Rights relating to decision' being debated and being identified as sexist doesn't mean that the right itself is being argued, but rather, rights relating to that imbalance. For example, women have an indirect privilege/right to avoid child support payments from a pregnancy since they have the power to end the pregnancy. Identifying that as a sexist dichotomy and discussing ramifications (like perhaps, men not being obligated to parental responsibilities if they are denied equal veto power) does not necessarily mean you are arguing against the right to have or not have an abortion. Ranze (talk) 00:39, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources that directly and unambiguously support the claims rather than add and restore unsourced commentary. Thank you. --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 13:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)