". . . could he force her to have an abortion?"
Absolutely not. But, like the last case, I can't really put my finger on why (in theory only . . . the case against forced medical procedures is an easy call).
But implanting then giving birth to what will be, genetically, his own child against his will strikes me as wrong, regardless of his legal obligations to that child.
Think of it like this; what if a woman had consensual sex, became pregnant, but shortly afterward split up or whatever and now cannot raise the child. What if her state had passed a law requiring unwanted pregnancies be brought to term and given up for adoption (like, say, SD). The mother would have no legal obligations, but I certainly would not be ok with it.
An interesting discussion/thread by Julie and Charlie. All of this reminds me of a few things: 1) I have no knee-jerk reaction to this. Seems like there is a contract. Was there? Sounds kinda tough on the mother. 2) We may be discussing what "conception" means here, that is, the distinction between an embryo (potential life) and an embryo growing inside of a mother's womb (in my view, life). Don't know ... but 3) all of this reminds me ... we are not God. It must be hard to be God, I say with tongue planted in cheek.
Medical science advances are going to continue to make this point, that is, the lack of knowledge/competence that we humans have in running the universe.
It's a hard question, but if there's a contract there's a contract. I feel for the mother. Still, I am sympathetic to the point re: no one should be forced to be a parent. In this particular case, though, the father would be like a mother who gives her child up for adoption. He could sign away parental rights.
If he were unwilling to do so, however, it does seem wrong to have his child on the planet without his consent.
Now ... all of this from a pro-lifer.
With that said, two, no three things ... (a new post)
Three final points: 1) If there is a contract between the parties re: the treatment of the embryo, then it trumps desires to be fair to the mom; 2) In my view, an embryo growing inside the mother presents a different scenario altogether. "Consent" has been given by both parties at that point. They may not understand the ramifications (like the Einsteins who fire pistols off in the air), but I think the principle is the same; and 3) These are hard questions, and those who have pat answers and don't acknowledge that they are ... are missing the boat.
Great stuff, Julie.
There is a difference between consensual sex and this situation. I feel badly for the woman but it is not exactly fair to the children who might come of this either.
Commenting by HaloScan
