Well she's got a valid point !

[gasbanni]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ed-sperm-calls-spouses-consent-mandatory.html

I agree with her could be very problematical in the future!

 

[HERTS P&D]

It all depends how he is 'donating his sperm'

Andy

 

[calorific]

Presumably, in the same manner, a woman's ovum is also a marital asset and it follows that an abortion would not be permitted without the husband's consent. Thus, for example, if a wife had an affair and became impregnated then the husband could "force" the baby to be born quite punatively (for example in the event that the marriage is in the process of ending and the biological father has long gone).

This would be one potential corollary to the law being changed.

 

[Inky Pete]

It's an issue between the two of them. No need for the law to get involved.

If their relationship is such that he's fathering children left right and centre without discussing it with her, then it's kind of over already isn't it?

 

[JohnD]

If he hadn't discussed it, perhaps she wouldn't know.

It is generally said that a woman's body is hers to do with as she wishes, and she has the right to have an abortion if she wants, or to stop using contraception and get pregnant if she wants, and a man has no right to prevent it.

Does a woman have rights over a man's body?

 

[mark vincent]

Abortion is a crime against humanity, once a life has been created it has the dna of both the father and mother and is a seperate entity in it's own right and should be respected as such.

 

[securespark]

If their relationship is such that he's fathering children left right and centre without discussing it with her, then it's kind of over already isn't it?

I disagree.

 

[EddieM]

Abortion is a crime against humanity, once a life has been created it has the dna of both the father and mother and is a seperate entity in it's own right and should be respected as such.

I tend to agree, but what about conception after rape or if the foetus is severly disabled? Difficult issues. But a bit off topic.

 

[calorific]

What other things should be included as "marital assets"?

 

[UriBentMySpoon]

Abortion is a crime against humanity, once a life has been created it has the dna of both the father and mother and is a seperate entity in it's own right and should be respected as such.

I tend to agree, but what about conception after rape or if the foetus is severly disabled? Difficult issues. But a bit off topic.

Abortion is not a crime, it is a difficult decision.

Most "preganancies" naturally abort anyway without the woman realising she is pregnant.

 

[Crickleymal]

It's an issue between the two of them. No need for the law to get involved.

If their relationship is such that he's fathering children left right and centre without discussing it with her, then it's kind of over already isn't it?

That's not quite what the article said. He's supposed to have sufferd Post Traumatic Stress after the birth of one of their kids. Christ knows how the mother felt if the husband's got PTS!

 

[wobs]

Presumably, in the same manner, a woman's ovum is also a marital asset and it follows that an abortion would not be permitted without the husband's consent. Thus, for example, if a wife had an affair and became impregnated then the husband could "force" the baby to be born quite punatively (for example in the event that the marriage is in the process of ending and the biological father has long gone).

This would be one potential corollary to the law being changed.

-This.

There is no limit to what some women will claim, and what the Daily Fail will print.

 

[Inky Pete]

It's an issue between the two of them. No need for the law to get involved.

If their relationship is such that he's fathering children left right and centre without discussing it with her, then it's kind of over already isn't it?

That's not quite what the article said. He's supposed to have sufferd Post Traumatic Stress after the birth of one of their kids. Christ knows how the mother felt if the husband's got PTS!

And yet despite being aware of her strenuous objections, the husband has not withdrawn his permission for further use of his donation - something he has the right to do at any time.

He has decided that this is something he wants to do, and has maintained that in the face of her objections. She now wants the law changed so that she can force his hand - on the grounds that his actions may have a future detrimental affect on their family life. What about the detrimental affect of dragging him through the courts and forcing him to do something against his will????

What, I wonder, would be her interpretation of the ownership of his sperm if he'd simply gone out and fathered a number of kids with local slappers? Would she claim partial ownership of them on the basis of her marriage to their father? And pay child maintenance for them in the event her marriage to their father breaks up?

 

[AronSearle]

From my own personal experiences, the overly restrictive laws in this country regarding donor anonymity and rights cause far more grief than they prevent.

I'd tell the woman to go sit on a rusty pole.

 

[calorific]

... so that she can force his hand

Or indeed force him not to use his hand without her permission