"" A Missouri Republican is pushing a bill that
would allow a man who gets a woman
pregnant to stop her from having an abortion.
The measure would force a woman who wants
an abortion to obtain written permission from
the father first—unless she was the victim of
"legitimate rape."
Rick Brattin, a state representative from
outside Kansas City, filed the bill on December
3 for next year's legislative session. The
proposed measure reads, "No abortion shall
be performed or induced unless and until the
father of the unborn child provides written,
notarized consent to the abortion."
The bill contains exceptions for women who
become pregnant as the result of rape or
incest—but there are caveats.
"Just like any rape, you have to report it, and
you have to prove it," Brattin tells Mother
Jones. "So you couldn't just go and say, 'Oh
yeah, I was raped' and get an abortion. It has
to be a legitimate rape."
Brattin adds that he is not using the term
"legitimate rape" in the same way as former
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), who famously
claimed that women couldn't get pregnant
from a "legitimate rape" because "the female
body has ways to try to shut the whole thing
down."
"I'm just saying if there was a legitimate rape,
you're going to make a police report, just as if
you were robbed," Brattin says. "That's just
common sense." Under his bill, he adds, "you
have to take steps to show that you were
raped…And I'd think you'd be able to prove
that." The bill contains no provision
establishing standards for claiming the rape
or incest exceptions. It also doesn't state any
specific penalties for violating the law nor say
whether a penalty would be imposed on the
woman seeking the abortion or the abortion
provider.
Missouri is home to only one abortion clinic,
based in St. Louis. Each year, legislators
target the clinic with dozens of new
restrictions. In 2014, the GOP-controlled
Legislature approved a bill requiring women
seeking an abortion to wait 72 hours between
the initial consultation and the procedure. It's
the longest abortion waiting period in the
county.
A group of Democratic lawmakers in Missouri
found the onslaught of anti-abortion bills so
ridiculous that in 2012 they introduced a bill
to ban vasectomies except to save the life of a
man. If conservative male lawmakers imagined
jumping through hoops to obtain reproductive
services, the thinking went, they would see the
absurdity of their anti-abortion crusade.
Not Brattin. The father of five says that his
recent vasectomy was the inspiration for this
bill.
"When a man goes in for that procedure—at
least in the state of Missouri—you have to
have a consent form from your spouse in order
to have that procedure done," he says. "Here I
was getting a normal procedure that has
nothing to do with another human being's life,
and I needed to get a signed form…But on
ending a life, you don't. I think that's pretty
twisted.""
Link.

Interesting.

About time someone wrote a bill towards changing this unfair practice.

@LaDawn: It actually is kinda confusing.....I mean, the part abt the father having no say....to me, anyways.

from a legal standpoint this is going to be a very complicated precedent setting legislative issue, but from a moral standpoint how dare anyone deny the father say so. Especially when too often he is the one that gets court ordered to pay child support. It should be a decision made by both parents. Just like making the child was.

@LaDawn: A part of the article states why they think it wont get past the Supreme court....I didnt post all of it....and they may be right......but I was wanting to keep the thread geared towards opinions abt why a father cant have a say in an abortion....if that makes sense.

@WalkSoftly: It makes sense...and I am very much looking forward to reading a discussion about this. Thanks for the thread.