Submitted by Sibonginkosi Hlabangana
South Africa has been and still is a highly patriarchal society. In the past, women did not have many rights. They could not vote, for example. However, over time and with the advent of the Constitution, a change can be seen. Women’s rights are gaining more and more recognition.
There is, however, still a long way to go. Women still need to be protected. Some statistics show that one in every two women in South Africa will be raped in her lifetime. That, among many other issues, makes it clear that women’s rights and the protection of such are important. I do not wish to take anything away from that. That being said, I have an opinion that might upset some (probably many), but I’m going to go ahead and share it.
The Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Act (38 of 2004) gives every woman the right to choose whether to have an early, safe and legal termination of pregnancy. In the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a woman can have an abortion for any reason at all.
The rights in the Constitution protect all South Africans — men too. It gives everyone the right to make decisions concerning reproduction. However, it seems to be benefiting women only. It is through this right that women have the choice to have an abortion. In so doing, the rights of the father of the child are ignored. It might be the woman’s body; however, once she has a child, the father also bears responsibility for that child. It does not seem fair for men to be unable to decide whether a child should be born or not, but then later have to take care of such child.
I do not seek to argue for or against abortion, but should men not also be allowed a say? For fathers who wish for their child to be born, it is a gruelling experience to know there is nothing they can do to prevent a woman from aborting the child. Of course, in cases of rape, incest or where the pregnancy will endanger the mental and physical health of the mother or the life of the mother or the foetus, it is understandable that an abortion is essential and the mother can make the decision on her own.
Husbands risk imprisonment if they try to prevent their wives from having an abortion. Marriage is meant to be a union built on equality. How then can this be the case when only one of the parties has a say in the reproductive process?
The Maintenance Act (99 of 1998) states that the duty of supporting a child is an obligation that the parents have incurred jointly. Where, however, a woman decides to have a child even though the father was not consulted, he still needs to pay maintenance. Why does a woman get to decide, and the man pays for the consequences of her decision? What about a situation in which a man requests a woman to have an abortion and she refuses, but afterwards claims maintenance for the child? Shouldn’t the father be allowed to say that he did not wish to have the child in the first place?
Where a man realises he cannot afford to maintain a child, he should be able to ask the mother to have an abortion. Should she refuse, he should be able to say he would not be able to pay maintenance. If the mother can decide not to have a child, a father should also be allowed that right, otherwise abortion should not be a right afforded to women. If we are a society that finds abortion acceptable, then men should also have a say.
According to the Constitution, a child’s best interests are of paramount importance in every matter concerning it, and rightly so. Emphasis is given to the right of children to be protected from maltreatment, neglect, abuse or degradation. A father who did not wish to have a child in the first place is likely to neglect such a child. Some may go as far as abusing their children. As stated in the Constitution, children should be protected from such neglect — in this case the foetus. Should the mother still decide to have a child, then she should do so knowing that she will be able to look after the child.
If this is found to be taking something from women and giving men control over women, at least husbands should be afforded this right. Marriage should at least give them some rights concerning the birth of their children. If allowing men to ask the woman to have an abortion is seen to be abominable, a father who wishes for his child to be born and who says he will look after such a child should be given a chance to have a say.
Men are not likely to raise these issues for fear of being called gender insensitive and seen to be taking a step back in the empowerment of women. Some things, however, need mentioning. I’m willing to play the devil’s advocate.
Sibonginkosi Hlabangana is a vibrant young woman whose jokes don’t get too many laughs but thinks she’s funny all the same. She believes a little debating now and again is good for the soul. Born and bred in Zimbabwe, she now lives in South Africa where she works as a candidate attorney. She studied in Grahamstown and believes herself to be a true “Rhodent”!
Author
A prince with dignity and determination
Prince Ngarambe’s goals are to become Rwanda’s first transgender model and to uplift the country’s youth
The EFF’s principles are unshakeable
Unlike the ANC, the core values of the freedom fighters do not change with each leader it elects
