It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New law lets husbands sue to stop wives having abortion

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   
One lawmaker believes that the new law makes sense.


"I think a woman does have control over her own body, but when you have created a life, you created a life with someone else," said state Sen. Missy Irvin.


A new law in Arkansas will let hubby sue a doc to stop an abortion. Is this a father's rights being recognized or is this stepping all over a women's right to choose?

In Arkansas a husband can now sue a doc to stop his wife from aborting a baby. This is what a new law called Arkansas Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act says, and it will take effect later this year.


A new Arkansas law will let a husband sue a doctor to stop his wife from getting a particular type of abortion. And it makes no exception for cases of spousal rape.
The law, called the Arkansas Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act, was passed and signed by Gov. Asa Hutchinson, and goes into effect later this year. It prohibits dismemberment abortion, the most common procedure used in second-trimester abortions.
[/quotewww.cnn.com...

The ACLU claims the new law to be unconstitutional and will be challenging it. Also there is no exception for rape or incest.


A clause in the law states that the husband of a woman getting the abortion can sue the doctor to stop his wife's abortion. The husband has to be the father of the child. And because there's no exemption in the law for rape or incest, a woman's rapist could theoretically file suit to stop the abortion.
The ACLU of Arkansas claims the law is unconstitutional and plans to challenge it in court before it goes into effect.


Looks like that part of the new law passed with out much debate or fan fare


One Arkansas lawmaker said there wasn't much debate about those parts of the law.
"It was not something that was talked about on the Senate floor," state Sen. Joyce Elliott told CNN affiliate KARK. "If we cannot make headway on something like an exception for rape and incest, I think it just felt kind of fruitless to make some sense out of the rest of what was in the bill."



edit on 7-2-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



+9 more 
posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:00 PM
link   
It should have always been between father/mother together if they want to kill their unborn child. They were both adults during the construction process no?
Yes it's her body, but their child!
edit on 2 070107 1717 by WUNK22 because: More



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal


It prohibits dismemberment abortion, the most common procedure used in second-trimester abortions.

What other kind of abortion is practiced that is 'acceptable' according to the state?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: WUNK22

If a man wants a vasectomy, he needs his wife's permission.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Not sure, is there still a saline solution that is used to "burn" the baby?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:07 PM
link   
The law will probably be ruled unconstitutional like many others before it.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

This is a decision that MARRIED couples ought to be making TOGETHER.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: WUNK22

If a man wants a vasectomy, he needs his wife's permission.

You serious, or yanking? If serious, that's the biggest load of utter BS I've ever heard next to this law. I didn't need permission from mine to have my tubes tied, but he needs my permission to get snipped? WTF?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Agreed,

Things don't always go the way they should though.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

In Mich, 11 years ago the Dr required wife's OK for the procedure.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I can see the validity of a law that lets the father stop an abortion,because if one parent cares enough to save the baby's life-then the kid might have a chance.

In that case I am 100% in agreement with the law.

However-even though I am pretty conservative-I grew up in a really bad area and unfortunately feel that abortion is almost necessary.Just thinking of the rapists or murderers that weren't born to junkies that didn't want them or were thrown into orphanages/foster care to get abused.

In the latter case-there is almost never a "father" to contest an abortion-much less even give a damn that they got someone pregnant.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:14 PM
link   
I like the decision. Fetus' shouldnt be able to go from women's property to joint property/responsibility once it exits her body.
If the man has no say, then he shouldn't have to pay child's support.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: intrptr

Not sure, is there still a saline solution that is used to "burn" the baby?

Ewww, hadn't heard that one.

After six months of pregnancy, is there a rash of this in Arkansas?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:15 PM
link   
STUPID proposed law. Husband/Wife can't work it out on their own? Wife does what she wants.

What other Husband/Wife decisions should the GOVERNMENT get involved with???



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Seems logical to me, isn't the child both of theirs? Wouldn't you file a lawsuit if it could stop your child from being killed? If you don't want kids, there is a very easy way to avoid creating them.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I would agree if anyone actually honored their vows today.

Now it's "My sister got married,so now I have to get married so I don't feel left out".

1-2 years later comes a divorce,infidelity,and bankruptcy.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: intrptr

Not sure, is there still a saline solution that is used to "burn" the baby?


After six months of pregnancy, is there a rash of this in Arkansas?


YES. Bill Clinton says that "rednecks" are responsible.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: angryproctologist

Not ideal situations.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Nyiah

In Mich, 11 years ago the Dr required wife's OK for the procedure.

Was trying to edit my post, page timed out. I did google this, what a load of utter bulls# that is. A doctor can refuse to perform a vas if the wife doesn't consent. From what I could google of the reverse, no permission needed for women to get a tubal. That's such s#, when someone's done spreading their genes, they're done. You don't get a say in whether the plumbing remains functional or not. Period.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

A rash of abortions? Or of using saline?

Again I'm not sure of the saline, that could be pro life stuff I read long ago.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join