B1093 – Abortion Equality Bill 2016 Watch

This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
B1093 – Abortion Equality Bill 2016, joecphillips MP

Abortion equality bill 2016

A bill to give fathers equal opportunity to abort parental rights before a child is born.

1. Definitions
(1) Father is the biological male parent.
(2) Mother is the biological female parent.

2. Legal abortion
(1) A father can abort all parental rights and responsibilities to a child-
(A) up to 23 weeks into a pregnancy; or
(B) up to 2 weeks after the father discovers about the pregnancy if the mother knew about the pregnancy before 23 weeks into it; or
(C) at any point during the pregnancy with the mothers consent.

3. Process
(1) To abort all parental rights and responsibilities a father must communicate that they intend to by sending a letter by recorded delivery that has been certified by a solicitor to the mother
(2) The message must to clearly state "I am aborting all parental rights and responsibilities to the child you are currently pregnant with"

4. Extent, commencement, and short title
(1) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom.
(2) This Act comes into force on the day on which it is passed.
(3) This Act may be cited as the Abortion equality bill 2016.

Notes
Let's do something to reduce legal inequality.

Since 1976 a right has existed for just one group of people and but not another, how in a society where people claim to support equality can this be accepted?
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
I support this personally; I believe that the father should have the right to reject all legal responsibilities to the child and not be unwillingly forced into parenting by the mother (as can happen in some cases.)

As such, aye.
0
Hazzer1998
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
I agree
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
I expect this will go the same was as the last attempt to do this, with the SJWs saying such an inequality is okay because it's the men who are disadvantaged by it.
1
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
I expect this will go the same was as the last attempt to do this, with the SJWs saying such an inequality is okay because it's the men who are disadvantaged by it.
I'm sure there will be no double standards and everyone in the house will apply there reasoning to this consistently.
0
username1751857
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
Aye.
0
CoffeeAndPolitics
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
Aye - Faultless bill
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
Aye only if there will be some kind of compensatory support from the state when the father choose to abdicate responsibility of their child.

Though I doubt the author will include such provision in the bill, so it will likely fall to the government if this passes.
1
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
I expect this will go the same was as the last attempt to do this, with the SJWs saying such an inequality is okay because it's the men who are disadvantaged by it.
I would have thought you'd read this as encouraging abortions or something.
0
Axelia
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
there should be an amendment to the abortion act then, so the mother can abort at 3 weeks i.e abort all parental rights and responsibilities to make it truly equal.
0
cherryred90s
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
B1093 – Abortion Equality Bill 2016, joecphillips MP


Abortion equality bill 2016

A bill to give fathers equal opportunity to abort parental rights before a child is born.

1. Definitions
(1) Father is the biological male parent.
(2) Mother is the biological female parent.

2. Legal abortion
(1) A father can abort all parental rights and responsibilities to a child-
(A) up to 23 weeks into a pregnancy; or
(B) up to 2 weeks after the father discovers about the pregnancy if the mother knew about the pregnancy before 23 weeks into it; or
(C) at any point during the pregnancy with the mothers consent.

3. Process
(1) To abort all parental rights and responsibilities a father must communicate that they intend to by sending a letter by recorded delivery that has been certified by a solicitor to the mother
(2) The message must to clearly state "I am aborting all parental rights and responsibilities to the child you are currently pregnant with"

4. Extent, commencement, and short title
(1) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom.
(2) This Act comes into force on the day on which it is passed.
(3) This Act may be cited as the Abortion equality bill 2016.

Notes
Let's do something to reduce legal inequality.

Since 1976 a right has existed for just one group of people and but not another, how in a society where people claim to support equality can this be accepted?
I agree.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
Ummm not sure.
Firstly it should be clear that they can't un-abort.
Second rights and responsibilities should be defined.
Third the father should prove that he did everything he could to prevent the birth. It's not fair if the guy made a baby with the intention of signing it off and I imagine that it will only increase teabag pregnancy.

Posted from TSR Mobile
5
ChargingStag
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
This is something I have felt strongly about for a long time, the current laws put men into such an unfair corner. As such, a very strong aye from me.
0
username1524603
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
To save joecphillips from waiting on members to post their responses, I have copied over the responses given by members on a very similar bill last year.

(Original post by Cranbrook_aspie)
Nay. If the father didn't want to pay for a child, he shouldn't have ****ed the mother.
(Original post by Aph)
If the father was father due to rape then nay.

If the father wasn't wearing a condom then nay.

If the father had sex with the intent of making the woman pregnant then decided that he didn't want to support the baby then nay.

If the mother cannot abort due to medical reasons or because they are in Northern Ireland then nay.

Because there is no requirement to inform the mother of the notification of intent nay.
(Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
Nay. First of all, this results in a situation where there is close to no (non-emotional) downside to a father lodging a notification of intent (for a pregnancy after a cheap **** with NSA, lodging the notification is a weakly dominant strategy whether the father wishes to keep the baby or not). This, therefore, effectively results in the abolition of child maintenance. Secondly, I echo the concerns of my learned friends above regarding the lack of distinction between the different situations. Thirdly, there are vastly more significant emotional costs of abortions on women than men. This means that it is entirely appropriate that the male ought to take responsibility when a child has been conceived whether the female chooses to have an abortion or not. Fourthly, forgive me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the payment of child maintenance is conditional upon the father being in a well enough financial position relative to the mother to justify it. This is as it should be - this Bill shifts a significant cost from rich playboys to poor single mothers.
(Original post by PetrosAC)
I can see the point of this, but the cost will just fall back onto the tax payer. If you don't want a kid, cover it, regardless of if she tells you she's on the pill.
(Original post by DMcGovern)
NAY. If the lad keeps being reckless, sooner or later he'll get his hand caught in the cookie jar. Then he'll have to deal with the consequences of his action even if he was fluther'ed.
0
PetrosAC
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
To save joecphillips from waiting on members to post their responses, I have copied over the responses given by members on a very similar bill last year.
You'll see my stance on this at least remains the same, which is why this is a PMB
0
AfricanPrinceXI
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
Sounds reasonable.
0
username1524603
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
(Original post by PetrosAC)
You'll see my stance on this at least remains the same, which is why this is a PMB
Even if the conclusion of what you are saying is do not have sex, I respect your views.
0
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
Nigel Farage MEP kindly posted my unchanged view above. Nay.
0
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
(Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
To save joecphillips from waiting on members to post their responses, I have copied over the responses given by members on a very similar bill last year.
And to cranbrook_aspie and DMcGovern I would ask if they would be willing to be consistent in their beliefs if someone proposed changing the abortion law saying that if a woman doesn't want a child that she shouldn't have ****ed the father after all it takes 2 to tango.
1
Sternumator
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
Would not support this. You shouldn't be able to wash your hands of a child. The law is their to protect the child. If you don't want children, don't get women pregnant.
4
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What was the hardest A-level paper of 2019?

Edexcel Maths paper 1 (36)
24.66%
Edexcel Maths paper 2 (51)
34.93%
AQA Chemistry Paper 2 (25)
17.12%
Edexcel Maths Paper 3 (11)
7.53%
AQA Physics Paper 3 (23)
15.75%

Watched Threads

View All