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

Del Zeppnile said:

She was naked when she made the baby, she should be used to it by now. Besides, I've been in three delivery rooms and the last thing a woman is thinking about is her naked butt when she in that much pain.

My wife could have been on the 50th yardline at the superbowl game giving birth and modesty would have been way down the list of her worries while pushing out a 9.5 lb baby.

Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:

Before my kids were born it was made fairly evident that mother came first. She chose the maner of delivery (drugs or not, bathtub or not etc etc). She chose who was and wasn't in the room. Everything was about her. Even after the kids were born and we were still in the hospital everything was about the mother and baby. I was literally treated like a suspected pedophile. I could not even hold the baby unless my wife said it was ok to the nurse and had to get permission to sleep in a chair in the hospital room with my wife.

Click to expand...

roguenuke said:

Just as in consent given for sex in prior cases when it comes to rape, prior consent is not an automatic ticket to future consent when it comes to seeing someone naked.

And it doesn't matter whether he would be thinking about her sexually or not. She has every right to maintain her privacy from people that are not necessary in the room, including the baby's father.

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

Okay, I went back and read your post #709 but I don't see your point? What does that have to with the other person's quote about a rapist having parental rights in response to my quote which he took out of context and then you parroted, and then added a challenge?

When the other poster made the ridiculous remark about a rapist's parental rights because I used the term "any father" within a context which I was speaking about any father who is not an estranged ex fiance; meaning any father who would normally be in a delivery room; I called that post a typical liberal move; the post was ridiculous. Why you chose to use that same quote was baffling to me, but hey you are the one that did that. If it was your intention to dispute my position on a father's rights, I don't think that comment was in itself very useful. If you wanted me to respond to your position as stated pages back in post #709 was your intention, then you could have raised those points again to me and I would responded to them directly. But that is not what you did is it? The part about "get over it" and "life goes on" was also not exactly a debate point was it?

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

Well, I have a difference of opinion on waiting 25 minutes to respond. If something is said and it is taken a certain way, it doesn't take 25 minutes for the perceived intent of a comment to sink in. Usually in my experience the way something comes out the first time is the way the person intended it to be taken. In a debate people usually don't go back and say, "oh, what I said a half hour ago, I want to change" and expect to be taken seriously. Of course if that same person wishes to go back and correct something I suppose they are free to do so at any time.

Click to expand...

year2late said:

Exactly!

I would question why he would want to force the woman attempting to give birth to his child into a more stressful situation. HIPPA aside, upping the stress level in an already stressful situation is just a messed up thing to do.

Click to expand...

year2late said:

Your perception of being in the delivery room with someone who wants you there. Think beyond your personal situation for a moment.

Click to expand...

Jerry said:

We agree that you are confused on this topic.


Which is why pointing out that someone edited their post doesn't serve any purpose. It's like saying "Oh and I see you brushed your teeth today" as though you noticed deception. Editing is perfectly normal and you seem to be the only one who cares.

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

1.)So let me ask you, if a mother decides she doesn't want the father in the delivery room, would you say that should apply to any delivery? Lets say a mother had an argument with her husband about the baby name, and then ordered the father out of the delivery room because she said so. Do you believe she would have an absolute right to that as well?



2.)Obviously none of us knows what all of the personal issues there are between these two people. But we do know that the father had to hire a lawyer and go before a judge, so he felt very strongly about being present during the birth of his child. And who knows, maybe if there had been more time to appeal the lower judge's ruling, and higher court may have instituted a different decision? Not every judge gets these things right. I just believe that this woman was demanding privacy from a man who she wasn't "private with" for a long time. What would be so intrusive by allowing the father in the room, behind the woman so she doesn't have to see him, and her private area draped off? Delivery rooms do this all of the time.




3.)Why shouldn't he push it? This is a child that he was having with a woman whom he was once engaged to. They made the decision to have the baby, keep the baby, and at one point be married. She is the one who was pushing him out of being there when his child was being born. She is the one who was denying her child from having a father who wanted to be there present for the birth. This isn't about one person; it's not even about two people; this about THREE people who will only have this happen one time.

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

1.)She was naked when she made the baby, she should be used to it by now.
2.) Besides, I've been in three delivery rooms and the last thing a woman is thinking about is her naked butt when she in that much pain.
3.)My wife could have been on the 50th yardline at the superbowl game giving birth and modesty would have been way down the list of her worries while pushing out a 9.5 lb baby.

Click to expand...

Peter King said:

Your question is:



Yes, both have a right to privacy but the woman does not want to encroach on the man's fundamental rights on privacy. There is no evidence that the woman has any desire or plans to deny the man the right to claim parentage with all the obligations and rights accordingly.

The woman does not want to trump any of his fundamental rights at all, it is completely the other way around. He will become father no matter what, it does not matter if he is floating in space or downtown when the woman delivers this baby, he has gone from someone with little or no rights to someone with a lot of potential rights. There is no trumping rights in this lawsuit. His rights are non-existent as to being inside the delivery room at the moment of birth. There is no legal right and IMHO no moral right in the case of parents who have split up and who are estranged from one another. In an ideal world I would love for him to be able to support the mother of his child while she delivers the baby and see him come into this world. However, this is not an ideal world for those 2 parents. She does not want him for support and does not need him for support. His presence would be purely as spectator and that is just not a good enough reason for him to be there. It is not a legal requirement to allow her to have him be there as a spectator, there is no legal grounds for him to demands that, in my point of view there is also no moral right for him to demand this.

Now if it was a case in which there was a legal basis for his demand to be present at the moment of birth and I, as a make believe lay judge, would have to choose that the rights of the mother and child far outweigh/trump the hypothetical rights of a father to see his child born. The safety and comfort of mother and child during the birthing process deserve greater consideration than the fathers need to be a spectator at the moment of birth. That at least is my opinion.

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

I think you missed my point.

Click to expand...

Jerry said:

I ignored your point because it had nothing to do with my point.

You think opinions on this topic run down political lines, hence your 'typical liberal' remark which is what prompted me to chime in. Unlike abortion, SSM, gun-control, etc, opinions on this topic do not run down party/lean affiliation. People of very deferring political standings agree on this.

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

Jerry, I never said that the topic ran down political lines. I responded to the other person's post which quoted me out of context as "a typical liberal remark". It was not a response to his/her position, it was a response his/her illogical tactic of taking something out of context and presenting that as my position. I hope that clears this up?

Click to expand...

roguenuke said:

Del Z, the following is what I feel is relevant in this case to the previous questions asked.

There are more than just mother's (parental) rights and father's (parental) rights of a baby at play when it comes to this issue. There is also the mother's and baby's health concerns and mother's right to privacy during a medical procedure (and yes, delivering a child is a medical procedure).

So you have:

father's "right" to see child delivered vs mother's right to medical privacy and medical concerns for both the baby and the mother

Given the facts here, there is no doubt that the mother's rights/needs (and by extension the baby's as well) come before any supposed "right" there may be to the father seeing the child born.

When it comes to a child, not all parental "rights" are going to be equal. For example, given the nature of breastfeeding, the mother will have more say in this area when it comes to at her time with the child than the father. If she wants to breastfeed and can, that is going to be her right to do so no matter the father's input here. (Now, I will say that if the mother is putting the child in danger by breastfeeding her/him, such as she is HIV positive, then no, she should not be able to breastfeed without facing negative consequences regarding her parenting since breastfeeding in that case would put the child at risk.) On the same token, if she does not want to breastfeed, the father cannot force her to breastfeed, even if he feels it is best for his child. (These discussions on this case kind of make me wonder when we might see a court case regarding breastfeeding when it comes to children and parental rights.)

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

Jerry, I never said that the topic ran down political lines.

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

LOL! What a typical response from a liberal....

Click to expand...

Del Zeppnile said:

I hope that clears this up?

Click to expand...

OscarB63 said:

it's like I said, the father has little, if any, rights when it comes to a child he has helped create.

he has no "right" to decide if the fetus lives or is aborted
he has no "right" to be present during the birth
he has no "right" to contact with the child after its birth without the mother's permission

the only "right" he has is the right to write a check every month until the kid is 18, whether the mother ever lets him see it or not.

agree, disagree. like it or not. fair or not, that's just the way it is.

Click to expand...

Jerry said:

And let's not forget that the doctor has the final say on who is in the delivery room. Even if the law put the father's wish ahead of the mother's, the doctor can bar the father at the mother's request simply to avoid the distraction of drama.

Click to expand...

roguenuke said:

And that is not true. Men have plenty of rights to their child, after the child is born because prior to the child being born the child is attached to the mother, quite literally.

Click to expand...

year2late said:

Holy crap. Now the story is that he never asked to be in the delivery room. OOOPsies......:lamo

Click to expand...

Scrabaholic said:

Yet he sued to be in the delivery room.... smh

Click to expand...

RiverDad said:

It doesn't matter what you think of his reason for being there, he obviously thinks it was hugely important for him to be there. As I noted above, what does it matter that I think monogamy is not important to YOUR marriage and that it should be fine for your husband or you to have affairs. What importance does my standard regarding your marriage have? None.

It doesn't matter that if you were in this man's shoes that you would chose a different path, what matters is that he believed that this was a hugely important principle, enough to take it to court.

Click to expand...

MildSteel said:

I have already discussed both of these points in this thread.

Click to expand...