Page 74 of 104 FirstFirst ... 2464727374757684 ... LastLast
Results 731 to 740 of 1032

Thread: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room[W:829]

  1. #731
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    28,659

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    What if she's incapacitated by an allergic reaction and she can't communicate to others - and then he tries to speak for her even if he's not legally permitted and tries to circumvent things - then what?
    Is that really any worse than the doctor taking unilateral control though? It's not like there aren't some legitimately incompetent and uncaring doctors out there, after all.

    i.e.

    The kind who might look at that kind of situation and think to themselves "Oh, goodie! Now I don't have to spend the next however many hours waiting on this cow to push. Someone bring me a scalpel, stat!"

    In some cases, the woman might not necessarily mind such a decision. In a lot of other cases, however, they might mind it a great deal; especially if they wind up having to suffer through the long term complications of an unnecessary and potentially risky surgical operation that they never wanted, or consented to, in the first place.

    There is a case to be made for having someone around to advocate for the mother in the delivery room. That's all I'm saying.

    Frankly, it doesn't even have to be the father if he isn't qualified to judge such situations. There are specially trained midwives and birth coaches that can be hired to give "second opinions" in the delivery room these days.
    Last edited by Gathomas88; 03-16-14 at 04:57 PM.

  2. #732
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,827

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    The mother gets all the rights during her delivery of the baby. After the baby is born, the father starts getting rights. But they are shared, and that is the problem. Most people aren't good at sharing.
    its funny that nobody can say what right of the dad is being violated?

    and then they claim that only the mom is giving rights.

    Nope this is about the right to privacy both physically and medically, the father has these same exact rights. Meaning they are equal.

    nothing has changed yet. Rights don't care about feelings and emotions.

    The womans rights were protected and the fathers rights remains 100% intact.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #733
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    I'll respond to this as this seems like the crux of your argument. One likes to believe that our rights are inalienable given to us by our creator, but lets face it, men wrote these rights and it is men and women who challenge them all the time. I don't mind your point of view, but to suggest that this is the correct ruling simply because a judge saw it that way is an appeal to authority and not a very experienced form of debate. I approached this debate from the unpopular point of view, taking the man's side. I certainly see what your argument is, and what that of the Mother's is, and it does have merit, however my main goal in reaching out to AGENTJ is to help him realize that he can't simply "Factually this and factually that" his way out of an engaging topic of discussion. He appeals to authority ALL THE DAMN TIME. I am a father of four and I was there for everyone of my children's births. The days of men sitting in the waiting room smoking cigars are over in case ya didn't know. Men are encouraged to be with their partners and modern women want them there.

    The deeper discussion point was when does a persons fundamental right trump another's? In this case both have a fundamental right to privacy. They both have a fundamental right to be a parent, free of interference from anyone less a clear and present material harm to the child. So, you're suggesting that he doesn't have a right to be a parent because you claim he is not necessarily the parent or would need to establish paternity. To my understanding this point was never contested by the mother, nor was there any allegations of abuse or anything remotely close to that. There are several intriguing legal questions here. One, simply having a right to privacy is not where it ends. We see that everyday, our privacy rights are stripped from us and sometimes we don't even know it. In order to bring a legal challenge to privacy rights one needs to demonstrate that insodoing a greater good is achieved. In the case at hand, the father would need to demonstrate that his right of parenting and being there at the birth of his child, outweighed her right to not have him there - her right to privacy. On its face as was demonstrated in this thread, people were quick to jump on this guy for bringing such a suit in the first place. I can see and I appreciate that point of view as I too share it. If my partner did not want me there I would not be there, and I would respect her wishes. But in this case the father had no relationship with the mother, only the unborn child. Some may try and assume what his motivations are/were, but we're simply not that good. I can envision several scenarios where his intentions were nothing but benign, but since we do not really know, I prefer to not speculate and take him at his word.

    So I thought this presented an interesting conundrum for the legal system. AGENTJ claims to support pro human rights, but isn't an unborn human child, human? He contradicts himself in his own tagline since he supports pro choice or the right of a mother to kill her unborn human child. No equal protection for the unborn human, no rights really at all. No rights of the father, only the rights of a mother whom is free to do what she wishes, even if that means killing a child that has no voice, and even if it does have the voice of a father, her rights trump all others. I find that unpalatable frankly, and it needs to change. Back to the subject, I wanted to know that in lacking any evidence of violence, abuse or anything that would otherwise cause this woman any detriment to her health, why would the court not use lack of these contextually significant extenuating circumstances to form an opinion consistent with any other legal precedence when adjudicating conflicting rights, or rights in general? Rights as I said earlier in this thread are predicated in the common law understanding that by not giving them a material harm would come to the person not receiving them. Common laws act in a similar manner, and the principles of justice perform the same function. So, my question which I thought was a legitimate question was, outside of any context showing material harm coming to mother, what harm was there for Dad being there to witness the birth of his child? I am not aware of the reasons and facts surrounding their breakup in the first place but I have known where the birth of a child experienced together can often mend relationship woes, even if only temporarily.

    Either way, I respect other's opinions on this, and I generally share them from a personal standpoint, but I think the questions deserved asking, and further to explore the philosophical implications on each party to the suit, including that of the unborn human who has zero rights and no voice.


    Tim-
    But AgentJ is right, the right to privacy of ones body has been factually established through law.

    And you not minding my point of view puhleeaze? I disagree with peoples opinion and if I disagree with them I try to explain my opinion even if that other person does not agree with that. Usually it is a fact of respecting someones opinion even if you do not have that same opinion, don't minding someone to have an opinion is IMHO one of the few attitudes that does not belong on a forum because it disrespects you fellow debaters.

    AgentJ mentions facts if she believes they are a fact, you can disagree with that and call that into question, but that does not mean that she is stating something is a fact to have a way out of a discussion. If you believe something is not a fact that is even a better discussion point than just disagreeing with someones opinion. If you can disprove one of those facts than please do so, discuss the facts or the false facts but your assertion that

    this is the correct ruling simply because a judge saw it that way is an appeal to authority and not a very experienced form of debate.
    is totally nonsense because AgentJ, my own and others pointing to the ruling is because that ruling has all the grounds mentioned in it that most of us have pointed to.

    The is the correct ruling is not just simply because a judge says so, but because the reasons he mentions are valid and relevant. Why does AgentJ have to posts all the reasons the judge mentions that he agrees with?

    I am pretty sure AgentJ has mentioned the right to privacy. I have mentioned the right not to have ones solitude imposed upon by unwanted individuals. I have also mentioned (as has the judge) that there is no pre-birth parental right on the side of the father that would warrant denying the woman her right to privacy during birth.

    If you want to know why people say because the judge said so, you should try and read that ruling. I did read it and a lot of points we have mentioned are also in it.

    1. the man's demand to have parenting time is not ripe for judicial consideration at this time because in accordance with N.J.S.A. 9-2-4 courts have to conduct a best interest analysis. A lot of these things are mentioned there but there is no basis for the father to demand parenting time before a child is born. The law does not mention the right to visit a fetus.

    2. the statutes (you can read which ones these are in the judicial ruling, I will post the link to the ruling at the bottom of my post) nowhere expressly defines the legal definition of a "presumed father" as existing before the birth of the child.

    3. the appellate court has decided that even mentioning the name of the father does not constitute a legal finding of parentage.

    see part 2 for more
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  4. #734
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    06-24-16 @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,073

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    I think the estranged father has no right to be in the birthing room if the mother did not want him there. But I also believe that the mother should have no right to expect child support from the estranged father either after this point.

  5. #735
    American
    cpgrad08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Lakewood,WA
    Last Seen
    10-18-17 @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,388
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    If my wife denied me the chance to see my child born, then I would file for divorce the next day.

  6. #736
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    4. the father in this case, the father/Plaintiff asks the court to rely on the proposition that “certainly the plaintiff-father has a right to be alerted and involved at the birth of his child” and that immediate and irreparable harm will follow if the sought relief is denied. But in his demands he mentions not one statute, case law or controlling authority stating that there is even such a thing at the right to be alerted and involved at the birth of his child.

    If I go for a judge asking for something through a lawyer, the first thing I would do is point to/quote or present legal arguments that support my point of view. In this case the father presents nothing but his "temper tantrum WANT WANT WANT" reasoning as to why he should be allowed to be present at birth.

    5. According to the supreme court of the US, it is an "undue burden to require of a woman to give spousal notification before an abortion", so how can this so-called father to be (in this case) think it is not an undue burden to require this pregnant lady to notify him when she is laying in frigging labor. How should she do that? Does she have to call him when the water breaks and she is doubled up in pain from labor pains? Wait doctor before you bring this child into this world because I have to text/call my estranged jerk of an ex-boyfriend so that he can have his non-existent rights as a father of a child that is not even born?

    6. The Supreme Court took notice that during the pregnancy “the mother who carries a child to full term is subject to anxieties, to physical constraints, to pain that only she must bear.” Casey, supra, 505 U.S. at 852,112 S. Ct. at 2807, 120 L. Ed. at 2d 699 (opinion of the court).

    While recognizing the state’s interest in child-rearing, the court noted its limits on women who elect to carry a child: her suffering is too intimate and personal for the State to insist, without more, upon its own vision of the woman's role, however dominant that vision has been in the course of our history and our culture. The destiny of the woman must be shaped to a large extent on her own conception of her spiritual imperatives and her place in society.
    [Id. at 852, 112 S. Ct. at 2807, 120 L. Ed. 2d at 699 (emphasis added).]

    And if a state, with all it's legal standing and legal powers does not have that right, then why should that father?

    and on and on and on are the legal ground why this father has no right to demand what he wants.


    The mother has only demanded that she has privacy in the delivery room, she (according to the court document) testified that his name would be included in the hospital visitors list. This mother has made nothing more than a reasonable demand.

    The whole issue is that this is a case where someone who has legal rights (the mother) is being unfairly targeted/sued by someone who does not have legal nor moral rights to request being present at birth.

    There is the legally guaranteed right of privacy but on top of that there is also the fact that patients have laws that grant those patients a right of privacy through the doctor patient privilege but also the licensor-licensee relationship between the woman and the hospital.

    Through this businessrelationship the New Jersey Supreme Court has recognized that by:

    a hospital room is clearly not a public hall which anyone in the building is free to use as needed. Thus, at least for certain purposes, a hospital room is fully under the control of the medical staff; yet for other purposes it is “the patient's room".

    [State v. Stott, 171 N.J. 343, (2002) (quoting People v. Brown, 88 Cal. App. 3d 283, 291 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979)).]

    Also under federal laws the patient has guaranteed rights to privacy.

    In short the court concludes this:

    Flowing from all these findings, the court further finds that requiring the mother to notify the father that she has gone into labor and or require his physical presence would be an undue burden on her. There can be no question that any mother is under immense physical and psychological pain during labor, and for the State to interfere with her interest in privacy during this critical time would contradict the State’s own interest in protecting the potentiality of human life. The order the father seeks would invade her sphere of privacy and force the mother to provide details of her medical condition to a person she does not desire to share that information with. Thus the court finds that the mother’s constitutionally protected interests before the child is born far outweigh the State’s and father’s interests during the delivery period.
    https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/tr...v-DeLuccia.pdf

    And I could not have stated it any better.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  7. #737
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    Quote Originally Posted by Del Zeppnile View Post
    I think the estranged father has no right to be in the birthing room if the mother did not want him there. But I also believe that the mother should have no right to expect child support from the estranged father either after this point.
    That is ridiculous. Just because she wants privacy during the birth itself? She has already testified that the presumed father would be on the hospital visitor list. You cannot have parental rights to a fetus, after the child is born the laws and regulations with parental rights come into action, including child support and he will have to pay for his failure to protect himself from making a woman pregnant (aka, using a condom).
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  8. #738
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    its funny that nobody can say what right of the dad is being violated?

    and then they claim that only the mom is giving rights.

    Nope this is about the right to privacy both physically and medically, the father has these same exact rights. Meaning they are equal.

    nothing has changed yet. Rights don't care about feelings and emotions.

    The womans rights were protected and the fathers rights remains 100% intact.
    And any rights of the father come into play only after the moment of birth, not on the fetus.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  9. #739
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    Is that really any worse than the doctor taking unilateral control though? It's not like there aren't some legitimately incompetent and uncaring doctors out there, after all.

    i.e.

    The kind who might look at that kind of situation and think to themselves "Oh, goodie! Now I don't have to spend the next however many hours waiting on this cow to push. Someone bring me a scalpel, stat!"

    In some cases, the woman might not necessarily mind such a decision. In a lot of other cases, however, they might mind it a great deal; especially if they wind up having to suffer through the long term complications of an unnecessary and potentially risky surgical operation that they never wanted, or consented to, in the first place.

    There is a case to be made for having someone around to advocate for the mother in the delivery room. That's all I'm saying.

    Frankly, it doesn't even have to be the father if he isn't qualified to judge such situations. There are specially trained midwives and birth coaches that can be hired to give "second opinions" in the delivery room these days.
    Yes, I agree and am not debating mother advocacy: it's up to her who she has with her. She is imbuing rights onto another person and they have to be competent to accept that responsibility. When you're pregnant you actually address a lot of this in paperwork that you file ahead of time at your hospital of choice so when you do go into labor you can be admitted quickly and without fuss during labor. If you go into labor early and are admitted elsewhere they'll have that information faxed to them - or fill it out anew under altered 'emergency admittance' type circumstances.

    And so we have an extensive 'patient's rights list' and hospital rules, regulations, an avenue for complaints, and legislation aimed at defining who can do what - and what should be done. The doctor and nurses have to answer to a higher authority - and so on. Their jobs are on the line, etc. It's already complicated but for good reason.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  10. #740
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,023

    Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

    Quote Originally Posted by cpgrad08 View Post
    If my wife denied me the chance to see my child born, then I would file for divorce the next day.
    They weren't married to begin with.

    Now, I do kind of understand this, but hopefully it wouldn't come to that during a relationship. I would hope that most couples who are in a good relationship (and being married normally indicates at the very least a relationship where the two can mostly get along, at least in most marriages, although I understand this isn't the case in all). If your marriage has gotten to the point where your wife isn't going to let you in the delivery room against your wishes and you didn't see it coming, most likely there is a serious lack of communication in that relationship/marriage.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Page 74 of 104 FirstFirst ... 2464727374757684 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •