Tennessee Lawmakers Introduce Bill To Allow Fathers To Veto Abortions
Source: HuffPost
A bill introduced in the Tennessee General Assembly this week would allow a man who gets a woman pregnant to request an injunction barring her from having an abortion.
The legislation, SB0494 in the Senate and HB1079 in the House, would require a court hearing to be held within 14 days of a petition being filed by the individual seeking an injunction.
At the hearing, if the man can prove that he is the biological father and that there is a reasonable probability that the woman would obtain an abortion, the court shall issue an injunction prohibiting her from terminating the pregnancy. Proof of parenthood requires only that the petitioner acknowledges paternity. A DNA test is not required.
If the woman violates the injunction by obtaining an abortion, the court may hold her in civil or criminal contempt. There are no exceptions for rape or incest.
Read more: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tennessee-lawmakers-introduce-bill-allow-fathers-veto-abortions_n_6025ae58c5b6f88289fa797a
...no exceptions for rape or incest. ?!?! WTAF?!! Who are these legislators working for?
judesedit
(4,437 posts)child pornography or molestation. Funny how they never mention that part. It should go hand in hand automatically, if these types of laws are passed. And if he does have that type of record, he shouldn't have a say at all.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)would want to go through a whole pregnancy in order to hand it over to him.
nebby70
(471 posts)... but judesedit has a totally great point ...
... the onus of raising/funding must be there for men ....
... if only men had half an idea of responsibility ...
(of course, the men here at DU are not included in this statement - but the kind of guy who wants to subjugate women stink)
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)as long as the men were willing to pay for it.
J_William_Ryan
(1,736 posts)The Supreme Court has previously ruled that such legislation is un-Constitutional in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
cstanleytech
(26,087 posts)Unfortunately considering the makeup of the current SCOTUS I would not be willing to wager that they will be reasonable and unbiased.
BlueMTexpat
(15,350 posts)enough bond that will feed, clothe, nurture and educate that child through his/her college education?
No, their only concern stops at birth!
Enough of these assaults on women!
Alwaysna
(574 posts)mezame
(295 posts)Arkansas, now TN, losing track honestly, but in addition to the hundreds of voter suppression and redistricting bills, the GQP is intentionally clogging the courts with garp on purpose. They KNOW this shit is Unconstitutional. Classic redirection tactic to keep us busy fighting on all fronts. But this Religious Liberty mindfuck should be used to strip medical qualifications from doctors who swore their Hippocratic Oath. But from what they've seen in the Senate Chamber yesterday, they're certainly emboldened to disregard oaths entirely.
... spot on, but ouch ...
hadn't thought of it in that light... but you're most likely correct ...
.... sigh..... when does it get better?
.
mezame
(295 posts)...when we GOTV. The Blue Tsunami is here. Keep the Faith!
avebury
(10,946 posts)their partner and obtain an abortion. No doctor, I don't know who the father is.
Judi Lynn
(160,219 posts)Scalded Nun
(1,231 posts)Finding a doctor may not be an easy task.
roamer65
(36,739 posts)Women have full rights to their bodies and this crap law wont stop it.
mwooldri
(10,291 posts)... for an embryo or foetus to be transferred from a mother to a father for the father to carry to term, give birth to, and care for... Then at that time we can discuss fathers having the right to "veto" abortions. Until then... Just nope. Unconstitutional.
safeinOhio
(32,532 posts)Great answer.
bucolic_frolic
(42,681 posts)I see some holes there. The woman must consent to DNA testing, the in vitro technology must exist, and all this must occur quickly. Or the woman must swear he is the father, and if he drags you into court to force you to have his child, things are not going so well, are they? So the woman would say, 'you can bet your sweet ass you're not the father'. i think this whole legislation is destined to an epic fail.
papa3times
(150 posts)a case many years ago that went to the Supreme Court where some guy tried to keep his wife or girlfriend from getting an abortion and the case ruled in favor of the woman?
gab13by13
(20,881 posts)to take this to the Supreme Court to overturn Roe?
Lonestarblue
(9,881 posts)The goal is probably an attempt to get another case before the SC to give them an excuse to overturn Roe. I dont think this would be a case the SC would accept if a lower court blocks it because it so clearly violates a womans rights and the only proof of paternity required is the mans word. I can easily see some anti-abortion men hanging around Planned Parenthood and then claiming theyre the father to prevent abortions. And if the woman denies she even knows the man, what proof does the court have if its just his word against hers? What a stupid law.
ananda
(28,783 posts)...
Ford_Prefect
(7,830 posts)The courts would see it from that view. The law makes a special subjugated class of pregnant women, and disallows their receiving correct and proper medical care to the favor of those men who claim presumed fatherhood.
In another view any man who makes any woman pregnant effectively owns her body and her life for at least 9 months. That seems to be slavery by impregnation or rape, which I think is covered under the treaties and international war crimes laws we are party to.
In either case this is a repeat of what we have seen before: dominating women's lives through absurd and unconstitutional legislation as a part of the larger distraction.
It is inaccurate to say these legislators do not care about the effect on women. They are quite passionate about having women as servants to childbearing and raising. They treat women as cattle to be bred and as comfort agents to be used for a purpose. They are equally passionate about women owing men a duty to service them and bear children. It seems to me what they are most consistently passionate about is that women exist as a sub-set of male owned society. They are also certain that women should accept this position and indeed vote for it.
I'm full of contempt for men like these, and for women who support their abusive actions and bad lawmaking. The institution formerly known as the Republican party has now gone backwards once more and are being well paid to do so.
sinkingfeeling
(51,280 posts)her salary for all nine months? Is he required to show the court he is financially able to pay for child support, all insurance needs for the child, and all necessary child care for 18 years?
Those should be conditions before he's even allowed to petition the court.
Efilroft Sul
(3,573 posts)No exceptions for religion or party affiliation.
Tennessee doesn't have a state income tax, but the rider should triple taxes on men for municipal items such as first responder services, infrastructure, roads, schools, etc. Let's see how long they support this bill when taxes are involved.
colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)As I think Rosie ODonnell said if men were the ones having the babies Abortion Clinics would be on every Street corner in the Country like McDonalds.
bullwinkle428
(20,627 posts)red states are competing to see who is the biggest shit-show. Iowa is pushing another "bathroom bill", along with an effort to prevent anything related to the 1619 Project from being taught in the classroom.
AllaN01Bear
(17,384 posts)and yet they still do it. how does this pave roads . pay for schools and ballance the budget?
niyad
(112,440 posts)Rights And Issues? Thanks in advance.
niyad
(112,440 posts)July
(4,750 posts)WTAF?
So what is to stop a malicious anti-abortion male from claiming paternity even if he is not the potential father, just to halt or delay an abortion?
This cannot be constitutional.
sarchasm
(1,009 posts)Perhaps, knowing it would be challenged, most likely a ruse to get it before the SC.
Warpy
(110,913 posts)They obviously don't give a flying fuck about women or children. What they do want is absolute control over all of it.
NotANeocon
(423 posts)- and then has his arse sewn shut until the watermelon is brought "to term" and delivery is completed by episiotomy (cut the opening to about 6" without anaesthestic.
He must also have created a trust account containing enough money to maintain and educate a child to the age of 25 and enough to support the human incubator for another 60 years or until death since the fetal blood will attack her immune system that long.
Griefbird
(95 posts)to a couple that wants a child.
thucythucy
(7,986 posts)before a dead beat dad can ever have sex with any woman again after his first missed child support payment?
And every time thereafter?
kimmylavin
(2,284 posts)And I completely understand the calls to force the man to be able to pay, or prove he can pay for a child.
But please step back.
That view is - once again - erasing the pregnant person from this picture.
This is forced birth, at the direction of someone who - due to the inevitable legal issues that would come from a man forcing a woman in to court to have his baby - would not have the best interests of the woman in mind.
Women DIE during pregnancy, and during childbirth.
Pregnancy takes an enormous toll on our bodies.
Not to mention the mental strain that comes from a pregnancy, no matter what outcome you're planning for.
That's why decisions about pregnancy should only include the pregnant person and their doctor - with any asked-for input from a partner or family member.
This bill is disgusting, and clearly ripe for abuse.
Reproductive coercion is already a major problem - this would just trap people!
Who ARE these people, devoting so much time and energy to controlling others?
Marthe48
(16,696 posts)that's for damn sure. Not when I was young and not now. While I'm out of the running for women's rights to affect my life, I'll never stop supporting women's rights and encouraging women to take and use what they already have.
mdbl
(4,972 posts)are they going to do a DNA search to verify?
Marthe48
(16,696 posts)Oh, wait. Roe v. Wade
CRK7376
(2,190 posts)impregnators are going to pay the bills and raise the children once the child leaves the womb..., bet they try to add something to that bill that would force the women into financial responsibility too.....