Question

Father’s Consent to Abortion Source: eText, p. 150 Jim and Sue had been planning to have a child for two years. Finally, she became pregnant. However, their marriage had been a rough one, and by the time she was in her third month of pregnancy they had decided to divorce. At that point, both parents were ambivalent about the pregnancy. They had both wanted the child, but now things were different. Sue finally decided that she did not want to raise a child alone and did not want to raise Jim’s child. She wanted to get on with her life. However, Jim had long wanted a child, and he realized that the developing fetus was part of his own because he had provided half of its genetic makeup.

He didn’t want Sue to end the pregnancy. He wanted to keep and raise the child. Do you think that Jim had any moral rights in this case, or should the decision be strictly Sue’s? Why or why not??

Answer 1

Sue finally conceived. However, Sue does not want to keep the baby because of how things are between her and Jim. She decides on getting an abortion while Jim wants her to keep the baby. According to legal as well as moral rights, Jim does not get to decide. Yes, he did partially provide for the genetic make-up. However, it is Sue who is more directly and actively involved in the pregnancy. It must solely be her decision. She has to carry the child for nine months and then go through the process of giving birth. The decision must strictly be Sue's.