Talk:Paternal rights and abortion

message: This article reads like a position paper.  Even in the lede, it says "Men, it is argued, should (x y and z)."  Argued by whom?  I have removed that content and much content which is now placed below.  Also, where is the criticism?  And the laws which support full decision-making on the part of the woman are not mentioned here at all. Joie de Vivre 14:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: In this edit you described the "History" section as "unsourced." However, the section is in fact based on a number of reliable, academic sources. It's also completely relevant, as it adds historical context, rather like the "History" section at Abortion law. I will restore the "History" section, as I don't see a logical reason for limiting coverage in this article to the modern period, because this standard isn't being observed in other abortion-related articles.
When this article began, it could've certainly been described as a "position paper," as all it included at that time were two "Arguments" sections. I have tried to expand this article and make its content more encyclopaedic — thus, the "Laws" section, and the "History" section. As for the content in the "Debate" section, I will try to find sources for it, which shouldn't be too difficult. There is criticism in the "Debate" section already in the third paragraph. Intelligent design and Atheism, both Featured Articles, consist largely of arguments, so, obviously, there is a place for this type of content on Wikipedia, so long as it is attributed and adds context to the article as a whole (as if to answer the question, "Why do people think this?"). 
The original title of this article was simply Paternal rights. I moved it to Paternal rights and abortion to better reflect its scope. However, if this title is conducive of a specific position, we could change it to Men and abortion. This would be consistent with the titling of Minors and abortion. -Severa  (!!!) 19:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, I did not intend to refer to "TIMELINE 3rd CENTURY" as a "reliable, academic" source. The academic sources in question would be the book by John M. Riddle and Cicero's speech. Riddle isn't specific about the timing of Septimius Severus' ruling, refering only to the length of his reign, and the 3rd century timeline was used only to confirm a specific year. The majority of information in the "History" section was taken from the book by Riddle (pages 62 to 63). -Severa  (!!!) 19:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: I do not think it is necessary to retitle the "Legal cases" section as "Legal cases which failed." The fact that the outcomes of the cases currently featured in this section were likely not what the plaintiffs had hoped to achieve is already apparent from the text. Readers are capable of ascertaining this for themselves. Stating what is obvious in this manner verges on trying to prove a point. Also, do we have evidence to state, conclusively, that all such legal cases, ever, have failed? I don't think we should preclude the possibility that, given different legal and cultural settings, similar lawsuits might have turned out in the man's favour in other countries. I don't see a reason for content forking based on success or failure of the case; all cases should be incorporated into a single section. If the length of the section becomes prohibitive, then we could select a more objective manner of dividing up cases, such as by time period. -Severa  (!!!) 02:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that this article systematically avoids mentioning the laws that prohibit anyone else deciding whether or not a woman will have an abortion is far more problematic than offering a summary of a lengthy section.  Joie de Vivre 02:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing is preventing information on countries which do not have spousal consent legislation in effect from being added to this article. But, looking at Late-term abortion, I do not see a list of countries which do not restrict abortion in later pregnancy. This information should be readily discernable by process of exclusion from the list of countries that do, so, arguably, it's already in the article. -Severa  (!!!) 03:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal cases

message: Does this seem out of place or biased to anyone else? - "In this way, men's rights groups are seeking to control women's bodies, not gain rights for themselves."
It seemed like it shouldn't be in here to me, but I thought someone else might have another opinion.
168.18.83.155 03:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The text in question was inserted into the article only 17 days ago, and, as such, I have reverted it. I have also restored two sources, which were removed under the explanation "Blogs are not reliable references," as neither source meets the definition of a "blog." "Aborting Equality: Men's Odd Place in the Abortion Debate" is from the magazine Reason and "Should men have rights in abortion?" is an excerpt from the book Abortion Law and Politics Today by David Nolan. It isn't helpful to simply replace an actual citation with a "citation needed" tag. If you believe that there is an issue with a source, then, please, at least look for a replacement citation first. -Severa 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent changes

message: Can someone include statistics on the issue of how often women seeking abortions actually face opposition from the man whose child they are pregnant with? From what I've read, of the women who told their partners of their intentions, only 10% were actively opposed. Can someone research this and add some info? I'm not the best at this sort of thing. 203.45.95.236 (talk) 13:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed addition to article

message: "Male Abortion" redirects here - even tho it has little to do with this article. Apparently an actual article on the matter does not exist?
Male Abortion deals with a fathers right to relinquish parenthood - not his options in avoiding his partner having an abortion.
It's the exact opposite thing. 87.145.246.3 (talk) 16:05, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading Redirect

message: The section on laws states that:
::"Egypt, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Republic of Korea, Kuwait, Malawi, Morocco, Nicaragua, Syria, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates all have laws which require that an abortion first be authorized by the woman's husband."
The source used is from 1998, and is therefore very old. In Nicaragua, for instance, abortion has been made completely illegal (see Abortion in Nicaragua). I'm modifying that paragraph.2A02:2F0A:503F:FFFF:0:0:5679:C217 (talk) 12:52, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laws - outdated information 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Paternal rights and abortion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.bpas.org/press-office/archive_2001/30_03_2001.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060621220503/http://www.catholicdoctors.org.uk/CMQ/May_2000/consent_for_caesarean_1.htm to http://www.catholicdoctors.org.uk/CMQ/May_2000/consent_for_caesarean_1.htm
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120730060031/http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kwiley/mindRamblings/abortion.html to http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kwiley/mindRamblings/abortion.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified