Ohio Bill Would Make Abortion the Man's Choice

Posted by Guest Blogger at 1:00 PM on August 1, 2007.

Jessica Valenti: Written notes? Submitting a list of potential fathers? Sometimes I think that anti-choice folks forget that women are, you know, adults.

Post Tools
EMAIL
PRINT
16 COMMENTS

Ohio

Share and save this post:

AlterNet Social Networks:

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

PEEK RSS Feed

Main AlterNet RSS Feed

This post, written by Jessica Valenti, originally appeared on Feministing

Oh this is rich. A group of legislators in Ohio are pushing a bill that would give men a say in whether or not a woman can have an abortion.

"This is important because there are always two parents and fathers should have a say in the birth or the destruction of that child," said [Rep. John] Adams, a Republican from Sidney. "I didn't bring it up to draw attention to myself or to be controversial. In most cases, when a child is born the father has financial responsibility for that child, so he should have a say."

As written, the bill would ban women from seeking an abortion without written consent from the father of the fetus. In cases where the identity of the father is unknown, women would be required to submit a list of possible fathers. The physician would be forced to conduct a paternity test from the provided list and then seek paternal permission to abort.

Written notes? Submitting a list of potential fathers? Sometimes I think that anti-choice folks forget that women are, you know, adults.

But seriously here's the best part of the bill:

Claiming to not know the father's identity is not a viable excuse, according to the proposed legislation. Simply put: no father means no abortion.

Fuck. You.

But wait, it gets even better. Women would be required to present a police report if they want to "prove" that the pregnancy was a result of rape of incest. Because women can't be trusted, obviously.

Click here to read the rest of this post.

Tagged as: abortion, sexism, ohio

The guest bloggers are a pool of people that blog for AlterNet and share their content. Got a tip? Send it to peek@alternet.org.

Return to PEEK » Post Tools: EMAIL PRINT 16 COMMENTS PERMALINK

Also in PEEK
Breast Flaunting for Jesus The life of a failed California beauty pageant contestant gets even weirder. Post by Thers. November 11, 2009.	Dobbs to Quit CNN Dobbs, under fire, to seek greener pastures. Post by Staff. November 11, 2009.	Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry. Post by Lee Fang. November 11, 2009.

Comments	Turn comments off sitewide	Give us feedback »
Comments closed. The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.		View:
Zounds! [Report this comment] Posted by: stormchilde1975 on Aug 1, 2007 1:48 PM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Since the bill is so concerned about fairness, does it give fathers the right to motion for an abortion, provided they can get the mother's consent? What an idea! "Yes, I'd like an abortion." "And where is the fetus, sir?" "Umm...I left it at home. But I can go get it." lol [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] truly truly truly outrageous [Report this comment] Posted by: Amynda M. on Aug 1, 2007 2:04 PM Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] It's outrageous that men should have any say in the reproductive process whatsoever-- not when WOMYN'S BODIES are at stake! And by the way, when an embryo is conceived in a petri dish and a womyn's body isn't involved at all, we STILL think that men should have no say in the reproductive process! HAHAHA! And even after children are born, we we think moms shoudn't be censured for neglecting their infants to death or throwing them into dumpsters if they want! Cuz bein' a womyn means you're more important than everything else on the fucking planet and you can do whatever the hell you want and it doesn't matter who or what has to die! WHEEEE! [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] » Pathetic, sad and puerile Posted by: MatthewSavage » I'm not the satire- YOU'RE the satire Posted by: Amynda M. » If you really were a women Posted by: terradea » "bein' a womyn means... Posted by: hurricane hugo OHIO, TAKE A LOOK AROUND [Report this comment] Posted by: VZEQICVA on Aug 1, 2007 3:33 PM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] You have so many people out of work, mortgage forclosures, people without health insurance, poverty. And this is all you can come up with? You definitely have more important things to do. Thanks, ANNA [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] OHIO, TAKE A LOOK AROUND [Report this comment] Posted by: VZEQICVA on Aug 1, 2007 3:33 PM Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] You have so many people out of work, mortgage forclosures, people without health insurance, poverty. And this is all you can come up with? You definitely have more important things to do. Thanks, ANNA [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] Not that outrageous actually [Report this comment] Posted by: Tombo on Aug 2, 2007 9:02 AM Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Why shouldn't men have a say in something that effects them. Two people created the child. So two people should make the decisions. I don't think it should be simplified to a women's rights issue. If a woman can decide completely on her own to get rid of a child then the father should have the option of opting out of all responsibility such as child support also. There are cases in which the mother chooses to have the child against the wishes of the father and then the father is saddled with responsibilities he didn't want. Or what about the opposite case, it really makes no sense morally or legally for the woman to have such power. Of course the woman has to carry the child to term but there needs to be some balance of rights here [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] » "have a say..." Posted by: hurricane hugo » RE: Not that outrageous actually Posted by: helenwheels » RE: Not that outrageous actually Posted by: Tombo "I think that anti-choice folks forget that women are, you know, adults. " [Report this comment] Posted by: maureen on Aug 2, 2007 5:59 PM Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] The far right has not "forgotten" that females are adults. It is a tenet of their belief system that women are not and can never BE adults. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] Ron Paul is a MD so he "maybe" part of the current problem... [Report this comment] Posted by: Bearzerker on Aug 3, 2007 9:21 PM Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] This snippet doesn't have really much to do about rights of the individual to choose what he/she can do with there own bodies, but universal health care would enable universal coverage to all medical procedures and pharmacy dispensed prescriptions... now back to our regular cut and paste segment.... originally posted here *poppop_schell wrote;*...push the decision on medical reform down to states to allow each state to develop what is best for them... Single Payer, Universal Health care... "WOULD" be administrated by the individual States anyway, but universality means a national single payer system as any other system just wouldn't be cost effective... and if he truly was for health care he would know the issues and the solutions... as adopted by 90% of all western nations... there are lots of models to look at! The number one cost to the manufacturers in the US is health care with manufacturing plant closures the number one concern for people in the rust belt! Just think of all the jobs that could be saved if this simple concern was relieved from the manufacturing sector. and the votes are up for grabs The number one cause of bankruptcies in the US are health care related, imagine the saving to the people, the courts and economy if this burden was taken over by a national nonprofit organization. and the votes are up for grabs The number one cost to medical professionals is legal malpractice and the insurance to cover this added cost, just imagine the savings to the tax base through court costs alone if this burden was taken over by a single payer nonprofit organization. and the votes are up for grabs and the huge purchasing power that a single non-profit desk would provide, plus the multiple other cost effective benefits that universality provides! and the votes are up for grabs Nice try... but Dr. Ron Paul is not for universality, or for non-profit health care. His policy from what you have listed boils down to mean, some coverage for some people, and no coverage for others... all depending on the ability of a states resources... At best you are advocating a 2 tiered system, which would be a huge step backwards as that dumps all the expensive procedures to the non-profit organization, leaving the safer clients to the profit based systems... no thanks that definitely wont work! A single payer system works... do your research, I'm sure Dr. Paul has and why he doesn't fully embrace universal health care coverage for all "is for him to detail"... I don't think he would ever stand for a true non-profit health care system... but if he ever does a paper detailing his position... ensure he gets it published here on Alternet to be vetted... the people hear would love that! He must realize that Health Care coverage is "thee" issue this election cycle... It's the elephant in the room, and the mouse that is roaring...is us!!!... HE MUST PAY ATTENTION TO IT OR LOOSE RELEVANCY! This is not a left wing socialist agenda to reform government policy but is in reality a blatant capitalistic approach to bring sensible direction to the manufacturing base of this once powerful manufacturing society called the USA! I love politicians that accept responsibilities for their actions and recognize positions where policy improvements can be made... Ron Paul can go far... but so far he's way out in right field while others are way out in center and left field... I'm looking for a closing pitcher that can deliver a win and I don't care which field he's in as long as he delivers the win! [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] my 2 cents... [Report this comment] Posted by: Bearzerker on Aug 3, 2007 9:31 PM Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Most who know my posts know my position, but I have to say theres something to be said about a man's contribution... and all that I can say at this point is that it would be polite if the man was informed... unless he's a total idiot then full speed ahead... still... men do have some rights that come with the responsibilities some enforce unwillingly and unknowingly upon them don't they? [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] OldMayfly [Report this comment] Posted by: Mayfly on Aug 4, 2007 7:33 AM Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] How 'bout this scenario? Stern official: "Now, young woman, give us the name of the father." Pregnant woman: "All I know is he said his name is John Adams and that he is an elected representative." [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

«	November 2009					»
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

» Pathetic, sad and puerile Posted by: MatthewSavage

» I'm not the satire- YOU'RE the satire Posted by: Amynda M.

» If you really were a women Posted by: terradea

» "bein' a womyn means... Posted by: hurricane hugo

» "have a say..." Posted by: hurricane hugo

» RE: Not that outrageous actually Posted by: helenwheels

» RE: Not that outrageous actually Posted by: Tombo

Newsletter

PEEK archive by date:

Use » and « to view other months.

Search: