Celebrity
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 13, 2016
- Messages
- 5,257
- Reaction score
- 761
- Location
- VT, USA
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Ladies: how does it feel to be used for your biological function?
A Texas woman contracted a sperm donor without the use of a physician and then tried to excommunicate the child's father. According to the courts, the father retains paternal rights.
My criticism is not of this analysis. One should certainly exercise caution. However, for men to become fathers does not require "assisted conception." Therefore, my criticism is of the Texas legislature's dereliction of duty. It is unconscionable to not revisit the choices it made decades ago.
Men and women should not be forced to become unwilling parents. In a sense, men do not have the privileges that are extended to women according to Roe v Wade. This columnist's advice to women and men seeking to conceive is: bring a lawyer. However, men who wish to preserve their civil rights should not require a lawyer present any time they interact with a woman in a way which might empower that woman to conceive, whether it is artificial or natural insemination. I am not describing the existence or non-existence of any set of civil rights in present day society, but I am describing an abstract form of civility within a legal construct by which rights may or may not be extended to men and/or women.
There has been talk on the forum of requiring a notary public or a contract to permit a "financial abortion." I don't think that it should be necessary for only men to protect themselves with release forms and legal counsel, so as to not inconvenience women. The Texas woman in question thought that "my body, my choice" meant that she could completely disregard the donor's wishes to have a relationship with the child. For the purposes of this discussion, the difference between disregarding a sperm donor's wish to not become a father and disregarding a sperm donor's wish to become a father is a moot point (even though forced fatherhood is legal).
Please share your thoughts on either men or women disregarding each other's wishes, but do not feel compelled to write about both.
https://verdict.justia.com/2016/11/...exas-man-donated-sperm-friend-parental-rights
A Texas woman contracted a sperm donor without the use of a physician and then tried to excommunicate the child's father. According to the courts, the father retains paternal rights.
One could argue that the Texas legislature should revisit its parentage laws to see whether the choices it made decades ago are still wise. But that is not relevant to the trial or appellate court, both of which made the right determination in this case. The cautionary tale, then, is for donors, mothers, and husbands everywhere: Bring a lawyer to every assisted conception.
My criticism is not of this analysis. One should certainly exercise caution. However, for men to become fathers does not require "assisted conception." Therefore, my criticism is of the Texas legislature's dereliction of duty. It is unconscionable to not revisit the choices it made decades ago.
Men and women should not be forced to become unwilling parents. In a sense, men do not have the privileges that are extended to women according to Roe v Wade. This columnist's advice to women and men seeking to conceive is: bring a lawyer. However, men who wish to preserve their civil rights should not require a lawyer present any time they interact with a woman in a way which might empower that woman to conceive, whether it is artificial or natural insemination. I am not describing the existence or non-existence of any set of civil rights in present day society, but I am describing an abstract form of civility within a legal construct by which rights may or may not be extended to men and/or women.
There has been talk on the forum of requiring a notary public or a contract to permit a "financial abortion." I don't think that it should be necessary for only men to protect themselves with release forms and legal counsel, so as to not inconvenience women. The Texas woman in question thought that "my body, my choice" meant that she could completely disregard the donor's wishes to have a relationship with the child. For the purposes of this discussion, the difference between disregarding a sperm donor's wish to not become a father and disregarding a sperm donor's wish to become a father is a moot point (even though forced fatherhood is legal).
Please share your thoughts on either men or women disregarding each other's wishes, but do not feel compelled to write about both.
https://verdict.justia.com/2016/11/...exas-man-donated-sperm-friend-parental-rights
Last edited: