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

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

AGENT J said:

1.)
2.) nope they simply do not. Also the father has no legal right to be in the room and see the birth against the womans will, ZERO.
if you disagree simply tell us this right?

Click to expand...

Parental rights are fundamental rights, look it up skippy. Is he not a parent at the moment of birth?

3.) because i factually am, real rights not the ones you make up

Click to expand...

Real rights means to you rights that you agree are worth supporting. Gotcha.

4.) thats not a right so the answer is NO

Click to expand...

He has a protected legal right to be a parent free of interference from the government provided there is no MATERIAL harm to the child being done. I can't believe you're arguing this point, there are thousands of legal precedence for fundamental parental rights. This is a new one, granted, so that's why we're debating the rightness or wrongness of this legal decision. You agree this is a debate forum, right?

5.) meaningless to rights, how many girls have you seen naked, does that give you the right to see them now too? lol thats retarded

Click to expand...

Well, I'm arguing that if I was in the4 same position as this father that I would and should have the right. See what I'm doing is taking a side and arguing with merit why I think I'm right. Now, you're supposed to do the same, but from the other point of view.

6.) easy its her privacy and her medical situation

Click to expand...

Yes, that's what the judge said, and I articulated why I think that her decision was wrong. Why do you think it was correct, and specifically how does that apply to your stated goal of equal rights for everyone?

7.) nope thats what YOU are saying

Click to expand...

Yes, now you're getting it. See, at least you're recognizing the basic principles of debate. What you now need to do is actually provide a logically coherent argument as to why you think I'm wrong. It really not that complicated a concept.

8.) you are welcome to this OPINION but its meaningless, your feelings dont impact rights

Click to expand...

This judge's feelings impacted the rights of this man. Did you read the decision? It's an opinion of an interpretation of how SHE felt who's rights should prevail in this matter.

9.) nothing to do with the topic

Click to expand...

Well, it might not, but it could add context to why this women for no other rational reason decided to exclude the father from the birthing process. Now if she did have a legitimate reason, perhaps you can enlighten me? Materiality matters in law, superficiality has no weight usually, and that was the basis of my providing a possible contextually significant argument for what ole Mom was really preventing Dad from being there.

10.) meaningless to her rights

Click to expand...

No, an actual history of abuse or a clear and present danger are actually very good reasons to leave Dad out of the birthing process. Since I saw none, then what other possible reason would she not want him there?

11.) its her right to her privacy and medical situation, sorry you dont like her having rights but she does

Click to expand...

Ok, so there we go, so you think her privacy rights trump his equal protection rights to be a parent? Again, I thought you were for equal rights? How is that being for equal rights?

The issue is i stick to facts, reality and actual rights not opinions

Click to expand...

No, I think I am convinced now that you really don't have a very good grasp on how this all works on a debate forum? I've told you countless times this and it doesn't seem to register with you, so not sure why, but we don't have the facts sparky, and if we do, it is very, and I mean very rare that we do have them. But I argue that if we have the facts, why debate the subject at all. What we usually have is an interpretation of events that reflect the experiences we've gained over our lives, and our brains arrange this into a logical format for us to process the truth of any series of events. We tend to avoid going against the grain when our truth experiences over time, and have evolved our opinions to represent how we believe something should be or currently is.



Tim-

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

I know you're probably replying to my post, but let me ask you this.

Laws are intended to prevent material harm to the innocent, correct? Rights are provided to prevent the government, or any other entity from harming you by abridging those rights, correct? With me? So, may I ask what material harm would come this women by having Dad in the room to witness his child being born? Answer me this, and convince me that I'm wrong? The judge apparently didn't use this as her test for this case, but she should have, in my opinion.


Tim-

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

1.)Parental rights are fundamental rights, look it up skippy. Is he not a parent at the moment of birth?
2.) Real rights means to you rights that you agree are worth supporting. Gotcha.
3.) He has a protected legal right to be a parent free of interference from the government provided there is no MATERIAL harm to the child being done. I can't believe you're arguing this point, there are thousands of legal precedence for fundamental parental rights. This is a new one, granted, so that's why we're debating the rightness or wrongness of this legal decision. You agree this is a debate forum, right?
4.) Well, I'm arguing that if I was in the4 same position as this father that I would and should have the right.
5.) See what I'm doing is taking a side and arguing with merit why I think I'm right.
6.) Now, you're supposed to do the same, but from the other point of view.
7.)Yes, that's what the judge said, and I articulated why I think that her decision was wrong.
8.) Why do you think it was correct,
9.) and specifically how does that apply to your stated goal of equal rights for everyone?
10.) Yes, now you're getting it. See, at least you're recognizing the basic principles of debate.
11.) What you now need to do is actually provide a logically coherent argument as to why you think I'm wrong. It really not that complicated a concept.
12.) This judge's feelings impacted the rights of this man. Did you read the decision? It's an opinion of an interpretation of how SHE felt who's rights should prevail in this matter.
13.)Well, it might not, but it could add context to why this women for no other rational reason decided to exclude the father from the birthing process. Now if she did have a legitimate reason, perhaps you can enlighten me? Materiality matters in law, superficiality has no weight usually, and that was the basis of my providing a possible contextually significant argument for what ole Mom was really preventing Dad from being there.
14.)No, an actual history of abuse or a clear and present danger are actually very good reasons to leave Dad out of the birthing process. Since I saw none, then what other possible reason would she not want him there?
15.)Ok, so there we go, so you think her privacy rights trump his equal protection rights to be a parent? Again, I thought you were for equal rights? How is that being for equal rights?
16.) No, I think I am convinced now that you really don't have a very good grasp on how this all works on a debate forum? I've told you countless times this and it doesn't seem to register with you, so not sure why, but we don't have the facts sparky, and if we do, it is very, and I mean very rare that we do have them. But I argue that if we have the facts, why debate the subject at all. What we usually have is an interpretation of events that reflect the experiences we've gained over our lives, and our brains arrange this into a logical format for us to process the truth of any series of events. We tend to avoid going against the grain when our truth experiences over time, and have evolved our opinions to represent how we believe something should be or currently is.



Tim-

Click to expand...

1.) his parental rights are fully 100% intact. Fail
2.) false
3.) see #1
4.) your wants are meaningless to peoples rights
5.) yes i see what you "think" but you are factually wrong. But thanks for sharing.
6.) no im not "supposed" to do the same lol I simply understand her factual rights and i agree with them and he doesnt get to infringe on them.
7.) your opinion is meaningless to the facts, his rights are 100% in tact he has no right to see her private parts or be in the room.
8.) what i think doesnt matter to facts
9.) he has the same rights has her its already equal
10.) theres nothing to debate here, im going with facts and her rights, YOU want to tell me why you think her rights should be violated, i simply dont care lol
11.) already done
12.) nope, her rights were simply held up, while the man has none at stake
13.) still all meaningless to her rights
14.) nope whether he was a woman better or a saint is meaningless to her exercising her rights
15.) nope wrong again his parental rights are 100% intact this doesnt impact them, another fail. they both have . . . .wait for it . . . wait for it . . .privacy rights and are already equal LMAO.
16.) sorry that you think your opinion matters but somethings arent simply up for debate. I mean you can TRY but ill stick with the law and her rights and facts. You are free to tell me your feelings but again they dont impact her rights.

good luck

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

I know you're probably replying to my post, but let me ask you this.

Laws are intended to prevent material harm to the innocent, correct? Rights are provided to prevent the government, or any other entity from harming you by abridging those rights, correct? With me? So, may I ask what material harm would come this women by having Dad in the room to witness his child being born? Answer me this, and convince me that I'm wrong? The judge apparently didn't use this as her test for this case, but she should have, in my opinion.


Tim-

Click to expand...

LOL i couldn't possible care less about convincing you, why would i ever?

but theres an easy and factual answer for that whether your feelings agree or not doesnt matter

him forcing himself in her medical situation, in her private matters and to see her privates (since you said witness the birth) would abridge her rights, while him not being in there and seeing her privates has ZERO impact to his rights.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

AGENT J said:

LOL i couldn't possible care less about convincing you, why would i ever?

but theres an easy and factual answer for that whether your feelings agree or not doesnt matter

him forcing himself in her medical situation, in her private matters and to see her privates (since you said witness the birth) would abridge her rights, while him not being in there and seeing her privates has ZERO impact to his rights.

Click to expand...

Ah but you did not answer the question. What "harm" would come to her for allowing it? He's already seen her naked, and he already knows her most intimate vulnerabilities, so again I ask, what material harm would it have been to allow him in there? The fact that she was pregnant was no secret, the fact that she was giving birth was no secret, and father was partly responsible for the whole situation in the first place. Without him, she's not even there at all. So, the question really is; when does someone's rights begin and when do they end when conflicting? What should be the test legally?


Tim-

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

AGENT J said:

1.) his parental rights are fully 100% intact. Fail
2.) false
3.) see #1
4.) your wants are meaningless to peoples rights
5.) yes i see what you "think" but you are factually wrong. But thanks for sharing.
6.) no im not "supposed" to do the same lol I simply understand her factual rights and i agree with them and he doesnt get to infringe on them.
7.) your opinion is meaningless to the facts, his rights are 100% in tact he has no right to see her private parts or be in the room.
8.) what i think doesnt matter to facts
9.) he has the same rights has her its already equal
10.) theres nothing to debate here, im going with facts and her rights, YOU want to tell me why you think her rights should be violated, i simply dont care lol
11.) already done
12.) nope, her rights were simply held up, while the man has none at stake
13.) still all meaningless to her rights
14.) nope whether he was a woman better or a saint is meaningless to her exercising her rights
15.) nope wrong again his parental rights are 100% intact this doesnt impact them, another fail. they both have . . . .wait for it . . . wait for it . . .privacy rights and are already equal LMAO.
16.) sorry that you think your opinion matters but somethings arent simply up for debate. I mean you can TRY but ill stick with the law and her rights and facts. You are free to tell me your feelings but again they dont impact her rights.

good luck

Click to expand...

Is the man a parent or is he not a parent at the precise moment of birth? You claim his rights are not being abridged, yet you agree he has a fundamental right to be a parent to his child, so is he a parent at birth or not?


Tim-

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

1.)Ah but you did not answer the question. What "harm" would come to her for allowing it?
2.) He's already seen her naked, and he already knows her most intimate vulnerabilities, so again I ask, what material harm would it have been to allow him in there?
3.)The fact that she was pregnant was no secret
4.) the fact that she was giving birth was no secret
5.) and father was partly responsible for the whole situation in the first place. Without him, she's not even there at all.
6.) So, the question really is; when does someone's rights begin and when do they end when conflicting? What should be the test legally?


Tim-

Click to expand...

1.) your subjective opinion of harm doesn't matter to her rights, good grief lol :shrug:
but infringing on her rights is harm
2.) I hope this isnt an argument because its a mentally retard one if it is. ill tell the next guy that rapes an ex to use this in court or one the one that peeks through an exs window, i mean he seen her before whats the big deal LMAO
3.) good thing nobody ever said it was
4.) see #3
5.) also meaningless to her rights
6.) correct that is the question, very good, you are learning!
there is no conflict here, thats the point.

him not be allowed to witness the birth doesn't violate or conflict with his rights at all, you answered your own question
facts win again

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

1.)Is the man a parent or is he not a parent at the precise moment of birth?
2.) You claim his rights are not being abridged
3.) yet you agree he has a fundamental right to be a parent to his child
4.) so is he a parent at birth or not?


Tim-

Click to expand...

1.) is the man a parent or is he not a parent if he does not witness the birth?
2.) no i dont claim that its just simply a fact
3.) no i didnt claim that either i just said his parental rights are intact, which they are.
4.) so is he a parent without seeing the birth or not?

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

Parental rights are fundamental rights, look it up skippy. Is he not a parent at the moment of birth?

Click to expand...

Yes he is, and that's why he has the right to visit the infant in the nursery.

I'm a dad, and for all her faults there will always be a part of me that love my ex, because she is the mother of my children. Out of respect for that, if she didn't want me in the delivery room for whatever reason, I would be very disappointed but I would respect that. She is in medical need at that moment, I am not. I, the father, am a bystander. I'm honored that I was allowed to be present during the berth of my sons, but if she didn't want me there then she had every right to keep the birthing private.

It would suck and I would not be happy about it at all, but I would respect her privacy, I would not hold it against her, and you bet your ass I would be there to hold my new-born son the very instant the staff allowed me.

As a father, as a man, as a Conservative, I tell you that delivery is not the time or place for men to make a stand on father's rights. That is a time to honor and respect the mother of your child and give her all the privacy she requests. If she wants the mother-in-law that you hate there, and not you, be a man and graciously step aside and take your anger and disappointment to the grave.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

Parental rights are fundamental rights, look it up skippy. Is he not a parent at the moment of birth?

Click to expand...

But when a child is still in the womb how can one have parental rights over that child? In an ideal situation there may be a place for a father in the delivery room but it is not a parental right. Does he even have any parental rights until it has been legally established that he is the child's father? I am not sure that he has automatic parental rights in New Jersey.

Hicup said:

Real rights means to you rights that you agree are worth supporting. Gotcha.

Click to expand...

No, real rights are the kind of rights established in laws or by judicial decisions about what are and are not rights. The right of someone to be inside the delivery room does not exist. That has been decided by this decision and should have already been obvious to anyone except this jerk who wanted to violate this woman's right to privacy during the child birth.

Hicup said:

He has a protected legal right to be a parent free of interference from the government provided there is no MATERIAL harm to the child being done. I can't believe you're arguing this point, there are thousands of legal precedence for fundamental parental rights. This is a new one, granted, so that's why we're debating the rightness or wrongness of this legal decision. You agree this is a debate forum, right?

Click to expand...

I do not think parental rights are automatic, especially not for the father or else fathers would not have to prosecute against the mother if she decides to put him up for adoption. Especially if they are unwed like in this situation there is no automatic parental rights for fathers, also because paternity has not been decided.

Hicup said:

Well, I'm arguing that if I was in the same position as this father that I would and should have the right. See what I'm doing is taking a side and arguing with merit why I think I'm right. Now, you're supposed to do the same, but from the other point of view.

Click to expand...

Then that would make you disrespecting the only person who has the right to decide who is in the delivery room, aka the mother. Nobody has the right to encroach on the right of that woman to have the best delivery conditions possible for her giving birth to her child. And if that means not having an ex-boyfriend in the room who may or may not be the father, then so be it. This woman has the right to expect privacy in the hospital room she is inhabiting, nobody who has no business to be there should go and get lost if that woman so chooses.

Hicup said:

Yes, that's what the judge said, and I articulated why I think that her decision was wrong. Why do you think it was correct, and specifically how does that apply to your stated goal of equal rights for everyone?

Click to expand...

Him being there against her wishes would be an invasion of privacy.

For example she could argue intrusion of solitude, something that his invasion into her delivery room would most certainly be.

It is her body, it is her child and it is her choice as to who is allowed in, there is no "right to be present at the moment of birth" for anyone except the mother, medical staff and person or persons that the mother needs/wants in there for her moral support.

And if some father does not like it, then who cares, he is not the one having to push out a baby out of a space not normally meant/big enough for it. And that mother needs no distractions from some jerkwater possible father who she does not want to see in her life and especially not in her delivery room.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

Yes, now you're getting it. See, at least you're recognizing the basic principles of debate. What you now need to do is actually provide a logically coherent argument as to why you think I'm wrong. It really not that complicated a concept.

Click to expand...

But this is not a point of discussion or subject to debating, this debate was done in a court of law and a judge just clearly decided that this is not even debatable according to the US laws. All the people who support the mother have to do is point at the arguments used by the judge and those are the only arguments who have any merit.

And debate is fine and dandy, you can proclaim you opinion but this opinion is not based on reality but on some men's wishful thinking and nothing more. Because most people, especially the reasonable ones and not "activist male agitators" would agree that a woman in this situation has a very reasonable expectation of privacy and no person has the right to interfere with that.

Hicup said:

This judge's feelings impacted the rights of this man. Did you read the decision? It's an opinion of an interpretation of how SHE felt who's rights should prevail in this matter.

Click to expand...

No, this man has no rights. He is not married to her and even then he does not have the right to be present at childbirth. In the past men never were in the delivery room. Delivering a baby is not a spectator sport and if someone does not have a real and obvious reason for being there in that deliver room, medical staff or one or more people who are supporting the mother who is lying there is a whole heap of pain and effort, should go and wait in the hall and respect the privacy of sanctity of this woman giving birth.

Hicup said:

Well, it might not, but it could add context to why this women for no other rational reason decided to exclude the father from the birthing process. Now if she did have a legitimate reason, perhaps you can enlighten me? Materiality matters in law, superficiality has no weight usually, and that was the basis of my providing a possible contextually significant argument for what ole Mom was really preventing Dad from being there.

Click to expand...

The legitimate reason? She does not want him there. That is the only legitimate reason she needs. She does not want this person there and that is that, parental rights are not automatic for men and even if they were, even automatically becoming a father gives this father no right to intrude on the woman's right to choose the people she wants/needs in the delivery room. A reasonable person would understand and respect the mother but the arrogant jerkoff cares more about himself than the health of the mother or the child. This kind of arrogance and selfishness disgusts me. Nobody has the legal or moral right to harass a mother in childbirth, not him, nobody.

Hicup said:

No, an actual history of abuse or a clear and present danger are actually very good reasons to leave Dad out of the birthing process. Since I saw none, then what other possible reason would she not want him there?

Click to expand...

Reason one, he has no frigging business to be there if the mother does not want him there

Reason two, his presence might lead to complications during the birth (stress can lead to longer labor and increased risks to both mother and child)

Reason three, SHE DOES NOT WANT HIM THERE. Yes, this is the same reason as reason one but it is the only one that counts, she does not want him there so he has no right or business to be in the delivery room.

And maybe she does not feel safe with him there. Not that I suppose this will be the case here but what if they are married and the baby comes out a different race as the father? That could lead to danger to both mother and child if it becomes clear that the woman has birthed the child of another man.

Also, and I will keep saying this, the woman does not want him there and that is all the reason necessary.

Hicup said:

Ok, so there we go, so you think her privacy rights trump his equal protection rights to be a parent? Again, I thought you were for equal rights? How is that being for equal rights?

Click to expand...

Her privacy rights trump his rights as a parent because he does not have any rights as a parent before birth. Even after birth he has not automatic rights. And again, even if he did have those rights, that still does not give him the legal right to be present at the moment of birth. Equal rights do not mean anything in this situation. Him not being present is not violating his (at that moment non-existing parental rights), his being in the delivery room against her wishes is a violation of her right to privacy.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Hicup said:

I know you're probably replying to my post, but let me ask you this.

Laws are intended to prevent material harm to the innocent, correct? Rights are provided to prevent the government, or any other entity from harming you by abridging those rights, correct? With me? So, may I ask what material harm would come this women by having Dad in the room to witness his child being born? Answer me this, and convince me that I'm wrong? The judge apparently didn't use this as her test for this case, but she should have, in my opinion.


Tim-

Click to expand...

Why on earth would the judge have used this as her test for this case?

You may have that opinion but that opinion is based false premise that someone has the right to be present at birth. That right does not exist, not from the father, not from anyone.

Laws are also there to protect the rights of people, the rights of the woman are clear and righteous, she has the right to a safe and carefree delivery with only the people she wants as a support beside her. This man has no relationship to this woman, and even if he did, that does not give him special rights that should usurp her right to privacy.

There is no valid reason, legal or moral to force a mother in labor to be confronted with a selfish ex-partner or anyone else she does not want around her at child birth.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Aunt Spiker said:

New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room - ABC News



Thoughts?

So the elements in question:
1) Is being a witness to a birth essential to bond with said child?
2) Is the birthing room a matter of the mother's personal privacy?

Of course, this isn't a broad ruling that applies to everyone (every state, etc). Hospitals have their own rules and guidelines they follow - and so forth. States can rule to the contrary. If hospitals they want to change their guidelines they must make an effort to do so. Most err with the side of the mother (which is what led to this case).

I support the ruling and the concept: Being a witness to a birth is not a right. It is a privilege that should be extended to fathers at the decision of the mother per her comfort.

Click to expand...

Disagree.

The child is just as much a part of him than it is her.

It's absolutely a right.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

roguenuke said:

And it would be pretty pointless for him to be in the delivery room for the birth if he wasn't actually seeing the birth itself since it isn't very likely that he is going to be a comfort to her (which is the real reason most men are mainly in the room for the birth of their children, to comfort the mother, not see the actual birth). And there is no way for him to witness the actual birth without looking at her privates. And he doesn't have a right to dictate exactly how long after the birth he gets to see the baby. So what if he has to wait an extra 5, 10, or even 20 minutes after the baby is born to actually see the baby? Who gets to decide which child gets to hold the baby first? Whose right is that? And how long does each parent get for those first bonding moments?

Click to expand...

obviously the mother has all the rights and the father just gets to STFU and write the check.......

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

OscarB63 said:

obviously the mother has all the rights and the father just gets to STFU and write the check.......

Click to expand...

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.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

TheGirlNextDoor said:

Disagree.

The child is just as much a part of him than it is her.

It's absolutely a right.

Click to expand...

Disagree.

The child is physically a part of her, as it is attached to and living off of her body. After the birth you would be correct, but not until then.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

OscarB63 said:

obviously the mother has all the rights and the father just gets to STFU and write the check.......

Click to expand...

We are not talking about what happens after the parentage has been decided but purely about the moment of delivery.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

roguenuke said:

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.

Click to expand...

the problem is that for decades there has been a prejudice in the courts against the father. the assumption has been that a woman is automatically a better parent than a man. the father has to prove beyond a doubt that he is a better parent. it was just assumed that the mother was. and, unfortunately, many of the old timers with that opinion are still sitting judges in many courts.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

OscarB63 said:

the problem is that for decades there has been a prejudice in the courts against the father. the assumption has been that a woman is automatically a better parent than a man. the father has to prove beyond a doubt that he is a better parent. it was just assumed that the mother was. and, unfortunately, many of the old timers with that opinion are still sitting judges in many courts.

Click to expand...

I actually agree that there has been favoritism toward women/mothers when it comes to child custody in courts, and I would like to see that changed. But it is not going to happen overnight. It is changing. But in many cases, there really is no "better parent", and that is the problem with parents, children, and the parents not being together to raise them, deciding how much time and what time each parent gets with the child and how much money each must contribute. It is not a simple problem to fix.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

MildSteel said:

They are taking money from the father when they get child support. The money goes to the mother.

Click to expand...

At the time of delivery, child support has not started.

You still have given no reason why the mother should be able to make a unilateral decision that the father cannot be there. You have made a declaration without giving a reason.

Click to expand...

Because she has the right to medical privacy.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Gipper said:

Short of "deadly communicable disease" or "he killed a dude", I doubt you could come up with a good enough reason.

Click to expand...

He could have been abusive to her......

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Gipper said:

Maybe he's a bitch and would stick around after that. I know a real man would wipe his hands clean of her.

Click to expand...

A real man wouldn't have gone to court to try to force his way into the delivery room.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Scrabaholic said:

A real man wouldn't have gone to court to try to force his way into the delivery room.

Click to expand...

I agree. A REAL man would have respected her wishes and would be concentrate on having a relationship with the child after it's birth, instead of filing frivolous lawsuits.

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

Scrabaholic said:

He could have been abusive to her......

Click to expand...

He could also simply be clingy, overbearing, and/or bossy, none of which she would need while trying to give birth.

It makes me wonder how many would object to a woman kicking a man out of the room while she was giving birth if he started telling her she was breathing wrong or correcting her on posture or technique in relation to what they learned in a birthing class. What if he was constantly touching her when she was telling him she didn't feel like being touched right then. What if he was simply annoying, constantly wanting to talk about him even at a time like this? And would it not be better if she knew he was going to be like this or a chance that he would, to keep him out of the room altogether? Sure, his feelings might be hurt by this, but her comfort for the sake of the baby more important at this particular time than his feelings?

Re: New Jersey Judge Blocks Dad From Delivery Room

roguenuke said:

He could also simply be clingy, overbearing, and/or bossy, none of which she would need while trying to give birth.

It makes me wonder how many would object to a woman kicking a man out of the room while she was giving birth if he started telling her she was breathing wrong or correcting her on posture or technique in relation to what they learned in a birthing class. What if he was constantly touching her when she was telling him she didn't feel like being touched right then. What if he was simply annoying, constantly wanting to talk about him even at a time like this? And would it not be better if she knew he was going to be like this or a chance that he would, to keep him out of the room altogether? Sure, his feelings might be hurt by this, but her comfort for the sake of the baby more important at this particular time than his feelings?

Click to expand...

Great point. It might not be that she "dislikes" him, but that perhaps he has a personality type that would not be supportive to her in such a scenario and might even make matters worse and more stressful for her.

Just think of all those movie scenes where the guy passes out, and the doctors and nurses have to go tend to his sorry arse. :lamo