The paternal rights and abortion issue is an extension of both the abortion debate and the fathers' rights movement. Countries recognizing father's legal rights on abortion have laws requiring that the male who impregnated the pregnant female either consent or be informed before she has an abortion.
Contents
History
Roman law allowed induced abortions but regulated it in consideration of the biological father. Emperor Septimius Severus ruled circa 211 AD that a woman who had an abortion without consent from her husband should face exile for having bereaved her husband of children.
In his speech Pro Cluentio, delivered in 66 BC, Cicero refers to a case he had heard of in which a woman from Miletus was sentenced to death for having aborted her pregnancy, upon receiving bribes from those who stood to inherit her husband's estate if he produced no heir. Cicero said that in doing so she had "destroyed the hope of the father, the memory of his name, the supply of his race, the heir of his family, a citizen intended for the use of the republic".
A 4th century BC Greek writer from Alexandria, Egypt, Sopater, quoted the lawyer Lysias, who had referred to a trial in Athens in which a man named Antigene accused his wife of having deprived him of a son by having an abortion.
Men and abortion in law
Whether a male has a legal right to advance his personal interest, whether it be toward abortion, fatherhood, or adoption, over that of the female partner in the relationship differs by region.
In 1998, it was reported that Egypt, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Republic of Korea, Kuwait, Malawi, Morocco, Nicaragua, Syria, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates all had laws which required that an abortion first be authorized by the woman's husband. However, in some countries, this stipulation could be bypassed or overridden if there is genuine concern for maternal health.
Since Roe v. Wade, some states in the United States have attempted to enact laws requiring spousal consent. All of these laws have been ruled unconstitutional, spousal consent in the 1976 decision Planned Parenthood v. Danforth and spousal awareness in the 1992 decision Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Legal cases
In China the husband of a woman who had an abortion filed a lawsuit against her in 2002 under a law intended to grant sexual equality in terms of childbearing and contraceptive decisions. The law stated that a woman has no overriding priority over her spouse in deciding whether to have a child.
A number of legal cases have arisen in the Western world in which men have tried to prevent women with whom they had been sexually active from obtaining an abortion, all of which failed:
Controversy
Those who support a man's right to direct involvement argue that it is unreasonable that, after fertilisation has occurred, women are often given more options with regard to pregnancy and parenthood than men. Parenting authority Armin Brott has said of this, "A woman can legally deprive a man of his right to become a parent or force him to become one against his will".
Abortion vetoing
Men's rights and fathers' rights activists have argued that men should have veto power over their partners' decisions to abort. Similarly, Philosopher George W. Harris has written that, if a man impregnates a woman with the explicit goal of having a child, in a manner that is mutually consensual, then it would be morally unacceptable for that woman to later have an abortion.
Pregnancy vetoing
Bioethicist Jacob Appel has pointed out that “if one grants a man veto power over a woman’s choice to have an abortion in cases where he is willing to pay for the child, why not grant him the right to demand an abortion where he is unwilling to provide for the child?
Opting out
In reference to those cases in which men who do not desire to become fathers have been required to pay child support, Melanie McCulley, a South Carolina attorney, in her 1998 article, "The Male Abortion: The Putative Father's Right to Terminate His Interests in and Obligations to the Unborn Child," set forth the theory of the "male abortion," in which she argues that men should be able to terminate their legal obligations to unwanted children.
Those who object to men having a right to direct involvement argue that because it is the woman who carries the couple's unborn baby, her determination for or against abortion should be the definitive one. Marsha Garrison, a professor at Brooklyn Law School, stated that U.S. courts acknowledge "that embryo is in the woman's body, it is within her and can't be separated from her, so it's not just her decision-making about whether to bear a child, it's about her body".
A 2002 United States Gallup special report mentions only 38% of the population being opposed to requiring the consent of the husband of a married woman for an abortion. In a 2003 Gallup poll, 72% of respondents were in favor of notification to the husband, with 26% opposed; of those polled, 79% of males and 67% of females responded in favor.
Opting in
It is also possible, rather than taking the stance that males should have the freedom to opt out of inherent responsibilities and rights, to take the stance that one must opt-in and agree to undertake those responsibilities to be compelled to follow them, and only through doing so, earn parental rights. This is what occurs during adoption.