New proposed legislation in Ohio would make it illegal for a woman to get an abortion without a man’s permission, according to the Record-Courier.
Not knowing who the father of the fetus is couldn’t be used as an excuse under the new law. Women would have to provide a list of potential fathers who would then be required to submit themselves to paternity testing until a father is found. It would also make it illegal for a man who isn’t the father to provide the permission.
What about rape or incest? A woman seeking an abortion would have to provide “reasonable cause” for the doctor to believe the rape of incest occurred, which, in our estimation, would probably mean police reports and charges filed.
Talk about the government getting all up in your private business. Proponents of the bill are saying it’s a “men’s rights” issue, but fail to mention a man’s right not to be subjected to random paternity tests. This is real life, not the effing Maury Povich show.
Between the forced paternity testing of a random list of men to the “permission slips” and police reports… thank goodness this unconsumer-friendly hunk of crap is unlikely to pass.
Abortion law would give fathers a say State legislators propose change; opponents blast bill as ‘extreme’ [Record-Courier] (Thanks, Melinda!)
Text of The Bill [Ohio State Legislature]
More From Consumerist
-
House Passes Bill Tying Student Loan Rates To Treasury Notes
-
Federal Legislation Would Ban Export Of Horses For Slaughter, Protect Public From “Toxic Meat”
-
NYC Lawmakers Propose Raising Smoking Age To 21
-
California Lawmakers Move Forward With Homeowner Bill of Rights
-
Many Insurers Changing Prescription Categories So Customers Pay More For Already Expensive Meds
The co-sponsor of this bill, Lynn Wachtmann, also voted against criminalizing spammers and people who violated the Do-Not-Call list for telemarketers. He’s famous for slapping a 15-year-old-girl in the face whom he thought was his daughter, but wasn’t.
This blog post has some good details on the dude’s anti-consumer career.
WATCHMANSEVEN–”We’re expected to work it all out, pay child support, etc, but the woman wants all the benefits, and the final say on what and when everything and anything happens.”
I am wondering exactly what “all the benefits” of being the one to carry and raise a child are?
Everyone on here crying about men paying child support seem to forget that the woman is DOING ALL THE WORK and also most likely contributing a significant amount of HER income to raising the child as well.
The whole “I have to pay for a kid I didn’t want” argument to me is moot.
Either
1. wear a condom
2. don’t have sex
3. only have sex with women that you agree with and have a plan for the what if of an unplanned pregnancy
Is it that hard?
If you are with someone looking to “trap” you and get you to pay child support perhaps you should think twice about sleeping with her again…
This will never pass.
@meghannmarco: “…I posted it at the suggestion of a reader.”
Heck, I’ve sent in real “consumer” issues before and those didn’t get posted.
Most victims do not report rape and under this law they are force to carry an unwanted child. Fuck that shit!
If I don’t want to have a baby, why should I make a list in order to get an abortion? It’s nobody’s business.
If I were a woman facing this law, I’d register to have an abortion, and name the entire state legislature of Ohio as potential fathers.
I think the law would be amended rather quickly.
This makes me sick. What is Ohio thinking? Planned Parenthood is going to have a field day over this
Men shouldn’t be responsible for the children they create. Women should be responsible for getting abortions if they don’t want a pregnancy. If they want to keep the pregnancy, the man has no obligation or rights unless he’s married to the mother.
There. I’ve pissed off both sides. I win!
@Skyoodpov:
Actually, those were the “normal risks” associated with having a birth in a hospital. Every woman who steps through the doors of a hospital has a 20-30% chance of having a cesarean if not more. A cesarean scar can have future fertility problems like the scar rupturing during a future birth, placenta previa, placeta acreta, placenta percreta and abruptio placenta. In order – the placenta implants too low, implants too deep, burrows through the uterus and into other organs and tears away from the uterus. All of them are life threatenening and the reisk for all increase exponentially after a cesarean or any uterine surgery.
Handing out drugs that are being used off label to “speed up labour” simply because the little white pill is pennies a pill vs more expensive iv drugs which can also cause uterine ruptures or even maternal or for that matter fetal death.
Episiotomies were the norm and are still performed.
Repeat cesareans. “Fetal Distress.” “Large for dates babies” that are actually small for dates when born. Babies diagnosed with IUGR but are born “normal” sized.
Reactions to anesthesia, including death.
And the newest fear – Group B Strep. We know of at least one pennicillin allergic woman who was nearly killed because the doctor did not read her file and she was GBS+ when she was tested, probably because she had a cold that same week. The doctor ordered penicilling and it was only her quick thinking husband who saved her.
[www.thelizlibrary.org] What women are “at risk” for complications?
ALL of them. Every minute of every day, somewhere in the world, most often in a developing nation, a woman dies from complications related to pregnancy or childbirth.
@Skyoodpov: lol – well received!
I’ve been thinking about this all day, and it’s a sensitive subject, obviously. It should be a half and half decision. Privacy of both the mother and the father are completely being thrown to the wolves here. We’re allowing our government to intervene with our birthing processes. What’s next? Telling us what time of the day we’re all allowed to have sex? Please.
But unfortunately, if a man thinks he’s ready to rear a child, and the woman doesn’t want to go through 9 months of misery just to give him that opportunity, then I guess maybe the both of them should’ve thought about that before they whipped off their pants in ecstacy. It’s not fair to either side in a situation like this.
It all boils down to a “woman’s choice”, because for so many years, we never had one. Now our choices are being threatened to be taken away, or infringed upon by people who have little to no right to decide how my vagina should or should not perform.
Maybe men might not be so cavalier about “a man’s choice” if the government was telling them what to do with their testicles.
And Meghann – thanks for inspiring a great debate around here. It’s always good for some intellectual cultivation.
@pinkbunnyslippers: No, we just have to deal with being forced to go to war and get shot at/nuked/suffer bio-chemo weapons without a say in it.
I feel that both participated in baby making, so both should participate in the decision.
Don’t know how this will work. Like if the female feels that the man will say no, all she has to do is get a male friend to act like he is the father to say yes.
What the F is going on in Ohio?? And Texas gets a bad rap??!
@cde: Sorry I missed the reinstatement of the draft.
You have the right to keep your penis in your pants. Should you decide not to, then you have the right to make sure said penis is not capable of impregnating females. If not, tough luck, keep your penis in your pants next time. Those are your male rights.
@Indecision:
Me too. See what happens when the boys and the girls play together? Stick with your own kind, yo.
@mconfoy:
ROFLMAO!
we should sell that as a t-shirt!
To everyone who thinks they are so “evoled” in their thinking… Tell me how I’m supposed to deal with this:
I am a single father of a beautiful 5 year old daughter. I love her more than anything and always have… even before the day she was born.
My daughter was conceived and born in wedlock. We were then divorced when she was under a year old and I have taken care of her ever since.
I found out after my divorce that my ex-wife had had an abortion while we were married… I wasn’t asked what I wanted. I wasn’t given the choice to keep or kill my unborn child. She stole that from me, took away a life that would have grown to be loved and would have loved me as much as her older sister loves me now.
I have lain awake at night wishing I would have known so I could have done something about it. I would have taken her. She didn’t need to betray her own family and blood.
Tell me it was her right.
But… but… I thought anti-abortionists weren’t crazy!
To all the idiots whining about “father’s rights”:
Your options are simple.
DON’T want to have a baby?
A) Don’t have sex.
DO want to have sex, but DON’T want to have a baby?
B) Use a condom.
DO want to have sex, DON’T want to have a baby, and DON’T trust birth control?
C) DON’T HAVE SEX.
If you choose to have sex anyway, you have accepted an inherent risk. Your partner is not obligated to make choices about her body according to your wishes when SHE is the one who bears the burden of your risk-taking. Pissed off that you have to pay child support? You accepted that risk by choosing to have sex when you knew that your birth control might fail. Again, if you are violently opposed to supporting a child that YOU fathered, on purpose or not, DON’T. HAVE. SEX.
DO want to have sex, DON’T want to have a baby on purpose, but DON’T want an unplanned pregnancy that you fathered to be aborted?
d) Discuss the possibility with your partner BEFORE you have sex. If she doesn’t agree, DON’T HAVE SEX. Again, if you fail to do this, you have accepted the risk the your partner will become pregnant, and therefore you have ceded your right of control.
The bottom line is this: As long as men have the right to choose NOT to have sex, no man has ever been deprived of his “rights” by a woman’s choice about an unplanned pregnancy.
You want to talk about the “rights” you “deserve” as a man?
Start acting like one.
Ok people, we all know this is about men’s rights. Not only a man’s right to have a child, but his right not to have one.
Is a woman is pregnant and if she wants to have and abortion, she should. However, if she wants the child and the man does not, then he should not be forced to pay child support. Simple, everybody happy?
@sncreducer:
SNCREDUCER, what is it to act like a man? Please enlighten the rest of us. And don’t give me the chivalry rhetoric, it’s long dead.
To be a man in this modern world is simply to survive, and men like women and animals need to have their rights protected.
For MEN who don’t want to have a baby but want sex this is the option, either:
1. don’t have sex
2. if you’re going to have sex, use a condom
3. if condom doesn’t work, pay child support for 18 years.
For WOMEN who don’t want to have a baby but want sex this is the option, either:
1. don’t have sex
2. if you’re going to have sex, use birth control pill
3. if pill fails, you can always go have an abortion
So the logic I’m hearing from about half the commenters on the board can be summed up as:
Because a man doesn’t have a choice whether or not to raise/pay for a kid if a woman gets pregnant and keeps said fetus, a woman should therefore have to get a man’s permission to *not* keep said fetus? I suppose if you look at this sideways, it makes some kind of sense, but only after about 3 or 4 drinks.
I suppose to make the situation totally equal a man should then be able to force a woman to have an abortion if *he* doesn’t want the kid, if a woman can choose an abortion if she doesn’t want the kid. Or no one could have abortions at all, and everyone gets kids they don’t want. I guess if you take away the woman’s choice completely, it all works out for the men.
I’m glad I don’t live in Ohio.
@myls:
I don’t think anyone is agreeing with needing the dad’s permission, but rather giving the father the ability to veto somehow. That ability of course waived in absentia. Its his kid too after all, she just has the bum luck of carrying it.
If you put my car title in your vagina, it doesn’t mean you own the ride.
@Skyoodpov:
If you put my car title in your vagina, it doesn’t mean you own the ride.
I nominate that for the “Most Bizarre Statement in the Thread” award.
Any man’s permission?
*Girl walks up to random man on the street
*Girl asks, “Can I please get an abortion?”
*Man grimly shakes his head, no
*Girl walks away pouting and annoyed
@synergy: Sorry, you forgot about the Selective Service, forced registration, threat of jail for failing to register, lack of support if you fail to register, and the ever present draft bills (which admittily never make it out of committee,)
good lord – i’ve seen so many of these flamewars, and its always the same arguments.
If the woman choses to ahve the child, she is not trapping the man. when two people have sex, it is an agreement that a child *could* be the outcome. period. If the woman decides to ahve the child, she is not asking the man to do anythign that she herself is not willing to do. (anyone who thinks that the cost of raising a child is covered 100% by the child support is crazy – there are costs like having a larger car, larger house, and lost time that the woman is incuring if she has custody)
That being said – looking at this only as a legal standpoint, and not a moral one, the fetus is made up of 100% of cells from the womans body, and grown within her.
I’m not trying to get into the moral issues of abortion – its just one of those things in life where there isn’t a “fair” outcome. Even if the woman choses to have the child based on her moral grounds, she probably feels as trapped as the guy does.
My brain hurts, this is beyond stupid.
@Raanne: /That being said – looking at this only as a legal standpoint, and not a moral one, the fetus is made up of 100% of cells from the womans body, and grown within her./
Lets look at it from another stand point, 50% of the dna blueprinit is his, so she’s commiting copyright infringement?
Ok I am willing to put money on the fact that whoever came up with this stupid idea was a male with control issues.
I say lets ban abortions, and children of mothers who don’t want them will be forced to carry to term and forced upon pro-lifers, at pro-lifers expense. Women’s rights are violated by no abortion, men’s rights are violated by not getting a say, and pro-lifers rights will be violated by forced parenthood. Then there is no privacy issue as pro-lifers tend not to hide their opinions.
So no one wants to answer my question because they would rather argue about unplanned pregnancy. I’m talking about one that was PLANNED,in a MARRAIGE…. big words, I know. How does all the logic about “keeping it in you pants” apply in a marriage? How does the logic of responsibilty apply if the Father actually WANTS the baby. Your logic only applies to situations you are familiar with. It takes about three brain cells to realize that there are more situations than what you want to argue about.
@Geekybiker: this is most since anyone has made on this thread.
TIMSPC AT 08/02/07 04:35 PM – reposting, because this IS a consumer issue:
“Since this is the The Consumerist, let’s talk about our bad consumer experiences getting abortions. I remember one clinic I took a girl (as a friend, it wasn’t mine), and they kept giving her the runaround. First they said to come back, then they said all their doctors were busy, then they said their computers were down. Long story short, by the time they were ready to see her, it was too late and she had the baby.”
That was a fake clinic or “crisis pregnancy center.” They advertise in the phone book under abortion services and claim to be serving the needs of women – they offer pregnancy tests, have doctors on staff, etc.. Really, they are run by anti-abortion zealots whose main goal is to do just what happened to your friend. It’s super fucked-up.
@acambras:
Mission accomplished!
(The consumerist shows it is a commie-liberal rag, or is this a mistake?).
Limit child support to the prevailing cost of an abortion and there would be no need to worry.
Is the baby community property or not? If it is, the woman cannot destroy it unilaterally no more than she should be able to burn down a common home without recourse (or worse, force the man to pay the mortgage for the smoldering crater).
You cannot rationally have abortion exclusively a woman’s choice yet have men pay 18 years based on her choice (and I’m personally pro-life).
It’s bullshit. I basically have full custody of my son, and I PAY child support bcuz my loser ex husband wasnt working full time at the time of our divorce and I made more money. I don’t even want to hear it guys. There are far more women paying for kids, taking care of them, and TAKING CARE OF YOU than we get credit for. This world would fall apart with out women.
You know what’s a bigger pain in the ass than having to pay child support for 18 years? Looking after a child you never wanted in the first place for 18 years.
Pro-tip: It costs a whole lot more to care for a child than that monthly payment your forking out.
Also, the government could care less if you actually pay child support. Sure, the mother could take you to court, but what lower to middle class single working mother has the time or money to do that?
Working full time while taking care of a child by yourself for 18 years, only to find out that once your child moves out you’re too old or financially unstable to do what you’d actually planned to do with your life? Not the best feeling in the world.
If you want the child, you plead your case to the child’s mother. Not the government. This is between you and her. We’re all adults here. Unless you’re a 12 year old girl who was raped of course.
Also, yes this is a consumer issue. Because in the United States you have to pay for an abortion. An exchange of money = consumerism. Tada!
In brief: Ohio is crazy.
At length: the thing that bugs the heck out of me is that probably a majority of the peole arguing “The man should have a say!” are really saying “The man should get to decide.” Because that’s the example, really – if the woman wants an abortion but the man doesn’t, the man’s desires should be priveleged and respected. Why? It sounds like another misogynistic double standard dressed up as “father’s rights.”
I’m assuming this particular bit of nuttery (and gross privacy invasion, no, actually, the state does not get to have a legal briefing on the state of a woman’s sex life, thanks) has no chance at passing but every time I say that there seems to be some new insanity popping up somewhere so I guess you never know.
@andrewsmash:good comment. i quite agree.
men’s rights’ my a**.
The Supreme Court struck already down this kind of law in Casey v Planned Parenthood. women cannot be required to tell the father. Casey screwed up a lot of things, but it did stop this kind of crap.
I think there’s a simple solution.
If one of the two genetic donors decides they want an abortion, the other has the choice of accepting 100% responsibility for the child (legally, financially, etc) or going forward with the abortion. If the woman doesn’t want the kid but the man does, that woman’s getting stretch marks. Cost of fking irresponsibly.
If a woman wants an abortion and the father is unknown, the woman shall submit a list of possibilities for notification and testing. Those on the list can opt out of the test. If the abortion is carried out and the male donor was not notified, the woman can be brought up on charges of murder (at the male’s discretion).
Feel free to utilize my genius, Ohio!