Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion

Hopefully right-wingers are as disgusted with this as I am. Can't say we couldn't see this coming though. Maybe California should make a law where you can sue Texans for preventing abortions. Would be no less ridiculous.

 

Part of me says the woman should say ok, I'll have the child, and you can pay 25% of your income for the next 18 years along with providing health coverage. After that comes college. I wonder if this guy is even thinking straight? Maybe he thinks she will get back with him if she has a child with him?

 

Or maybe he just wants his future child to remain living?

 

I get that, is he willing to help raise said child? I would assume so or he wouldn't be going to all the trouble, but he declines comment, even if just to say he will bear full responsibility raising the child.
Also in the article, it describes the relationship between the man and woman as "toxic", which doesn't sound like the kind of household one should bring up a child in.
Is it worse to abort an unwanted child or to bring one into this world and give a f'd up upbringing?
Tough question, which is why it needs to be a decision the parents make, not just one or other, or the state.

 

He should have no say in the matter.

 

All good questions, I just don't know. As a catholic I really struggle with the issue, plus for other personal reasons we (wife and I) REALLY struggle. We had two miscarriages which were pretty devastating to both of us and especially my wife (obviously). But then on the other hand, a lot of people on my wife's side have no problem popping out kids that they have no desire to raise and then we watch the kids slowly decline as they are neglected and it breaks our heart. So really, I just don't know. My opinion on abortion has evolved a lot since I was younger, but I still struggle with the entire concept.

 

I know that will be the stance of most democrats, and I get the complications of trying to allow a man to have a say in the outcome of a baby and I'm not sure that you could ever find a common ground there. But for many people they would view that still as something they created that is growing in their former partners/flings/1nS belly. Looking at animals in nature, males do many crazy things to make sure they have an offspring and that it will be looked after.

 

But it goes beyond that. Pregnancy carries with it the risk of health issues, some of which may be serious and long term. Even in modern western societies women die every year as the result of pregnancy related issues. Even if a man is prepared to accept the financial & caring responsibilities of a child, he can never take on the physical risks associated with pregnancy.

That is one of the reasons why he doesn't get to decide if she stays pregnant.

 

The heart of this issue really isn't the abortion itself, it's the idea that Texas can punish you for something you did in another state where it was legal to do what you did. It's not even a case of bringing something back that is illegal in Texas, but was legal in the state you went to. Texas should have zero authority over your conduct in another state, and especially over actions that are perfectly legal in that other state.

 

I would think that he would have no legal recourse as this would be considered interstate commerce. But I'm no lawyer and don't play one on TV.

 

That’s my issue here

Pregnancy can be extremely physically and mentally damaging to a woman, sometimes causing permanent trauma. Not to mention the financial implications.

I will never comprehend how anyone should have the authority to say she will be forced to have the child against her will and on her own dime.

And when Republicans then move to say that a rapist should be able to pick their baby’s mother but a mother should have zero say — that is just disgusting

 

Previously I would have said this would be found unconstitutional but seeing that we have a religious ussc that ignores precedent they don’t like I really have no idea.

 

I'm sorry to hear of your personal troubles.
And I, like you, have seen too many who are "over" productive who either choose not to or aren't really fit to raise children have one after the other, knowing they can't really raise them right. Some kids come out ok, some not, a few soar. There doesn't seem to me to be a template for predicting the outcomes.
My brother was in his late fifties, he was married to his second wife, but she couldn't have any more children. He said one time that he kind of wished he could have kids, so I told him that there are many wonderful things about having kids, little sweet moments, but since he never had them he really didn't miss them, not to mention those extravagant vacations they take every couple of months and many other things would not have happened, not to mention the plight of a failed first marriage with kids involved.
For all these reasons, even though I don't like abortion, I feel it should be an individual choice, not a state choice.
Well wishes to you!

 

Just curious about something I've noticed a few times, but you quoted @bigfella but I can't locate the actual post by bf. How does that work, or why can't I view/like the original bigfella post?

EDIT: it just showed up. Maybe slow browser? lol

 

I'm more interested in how right-wingers perceive this. Obviously it's maliciously stupid and wrong. We were told a couple years ago when Roe was repealed that all the doomsday scenarios were just smokescreens. Now we have Texas trying to decide what Texans can do when they aren't even in Texas. If this is successful, this same dynamic will be applied beyond abortion and by more than just Texas. Liberal states will do this too, and then and only then will the right wingers who have no problem with this now suddenly find it to be repulsive.

 

It's just another example of "because mommy said so". Notice that a man cannot have a right to decide about the birth, but the state will intervene to make the same man financially responsible, even if the man was the person asking the woman to have an abortion. There is inherent unfairness in the law as it is applied here. I suggest that the TX man would essentially take the responsibility of the child and given the woman's desire to have the pregnancy terminated, use that as cause to remove her, entirely, from the picture. Why would a court assign any parental rights/responsibilities to said woman who decided to abort?

There is a liability structure that we use every day in liability litigation that represents the future value of a life. Why shouldn't the same structure be used against the woman who goes ahead with an abortion which deprives the life of the child and all future productivity, just like the drunk driver who kills someone has to face? Perhaps it's time to start applying the existing law to ensure that the inherent unfairness and inequality in the law that currently allows "because mommy said so" to end.

 

You might have an argument that the man has a legal right to the child — the issue though is that he shouldn’t have a legal right to the body of the woman.

How do we reconcile the two?

It says “because mommy said so” due to the fact that the woman should have 50% say with the fetus and 100% say with her body. Until we can figure out how to remove the fetus from the woman and plant it in the man then he should have zero say until birthed.

 

Point taken that sometimes the father is willing to step up and take responsibility. I've known a few women who ran out on their kids, leaving them to the father, or even their parents, to raise.
However, that is less than 10%, maybe way less, than the other situations where the female got pregnant and the father skipped town or refused to take any responsibility. It is not an easy situation to decipher.
That liability aspect is interesting. I've wondered before how a person can cause a fatal accident, or murder someone who's pregnant and get charged with manslaughter of the unborn infant, but then allow abortions. I guess it has to do with consent.
There is a much simpler solution, although not always easy to adhere to: Don't get pregnant unless you are in a position to take care of the child. I have 3 daughters and drilled that into them, and they fortunately paid attention. Way more often than not, the female bears the brunt of raising the child.
And with all that, the female is the one who has to carry the child, birth the child and suffer any medical issues arising from said events, 100% of the time.

 

What’s to stop her from just denying it’s his?

 

Nothing

 

This man was not married to this woman.

If he was going to actually take responsibility, they would have rectified that.

Since they were not married, or in any other legally recognized relationship, he should have no standing at all in regard to any matter.

Animals in nature have nothing to do with a legal matter.

 

If a woman chooses to have a child against a man's wishes, should he be able to refuse to pay child support as well as all other responsibilities of raising the child?

 

Fathers don’t matter.

 

In one demographic in America that seems to be the case.

 

A paternity test would settle that.