Fathers' Rights and Abortion
Created by FindLaw's team of legal writers and editors | Last updated October 03, 2018
The legal reasoning for this is twofold, based on a woman's right to privacy in her medical decisions, and the fact that the mother is more directly affected by pregnancy.
In Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, the Court reasoned that a husband's refusal to consent would in effect veto a woman's choice to terminate a pregnancy. While both prospective fathers and pregnant women have an interest in the decision, when the two disagree, only one partner's position can prevail. According to the Court, since the woman actually carries the pregnancy, "the balance weighs in her favor," preventing the husband from vetoing her choice.
Opting Out of Fatherhood, or "Financial Abortions"
Another question that arises is whether a man should be obligated to financially support a child that his partner gives birth to, if the man would prefer to remain childless. After birth, the father generally will be responsible for child support payments despite his objections to carrying the pregnancy to term. This has led some fathers' rights advocates to oppose what they see as a double standard in family planning
The court rejected his argument that, since a woman may avoid motherhood through abortion, the man had a right to disclaim responsibility for a child born against his wishes. The court saw the question not as one of the father's interests versus the mother's, but of the child's right to parental support. Once a child is born, the parents were responsible for its support and education.
Should Men Be Able to Opt Out of Fatherhood?
By MassCentral on July 16, 2018
With abortion, a woman decides whether or not to bring a child into existence. The right of the child to a legal relationship with his or her father—and in particular, the right to financial support to help with the child’s upbringing—should trump the right of a man to opt out. Plus, at the end of the day, both parents were responsible for the conception of the child, so both should take responsibility for the child, should that child be born.
そもそも中絶するのに、夫やパートナーの同意が要件になっているのが間違い。
夫に同意権があるとすれば、産むか産まないかの判断が両者で分かれた場合、夫に拒否権があって夫の意見のみが尊重されることになるが、産むのは女性であり、直接影響を受けるのは女性、しかも、女性には自分の体の医療問題について自分のみで決定する権利もある。
最終的には女性の意思が尊重されるべきで、夫、パートナーの同意要件を廃止すべき。
産むことに反対しても生まれたら夫/パートナーにも扶養義務が生じるから、それでは不公平だ、という意見もある。
この文脈でいえば、男にも同意権を与えるか、反対した場合には扶養する義務から解放される権利を与えるべき、というわけであろう。
一理あるが、しかし、子供が生まれる可能性のある性行為をしたわけで、その責任は負うべきだし、また、子供が扶養を受ける権利は、男が親にならないことを選択する利益よりも強いものであって、本件のようなケースで子供の権利を殺してまで主張することはできない。
ちなみに、男性支配的といわれるインドでも夫の同意要件は不要である。
