MovieChat Forums > Me and Luke (2006) Discussion > What happened to the father's rights?

What happened to the father's rights?


Why does the mother get to choose what she wants to do with the baby but the father does not? He has every right to take HIS baby and raise it on his own just as a mother would keep her baby and raise it all by herself. Honestly...does the court system really suck that much? There are a bunch of skanks that think they are hot shot judges out there.

reply

If you're not married, it is essentially the woman's right. It's B.S., but that's how it goes. And that comes from a woman's perspective.

reply

Although fathers' rights are generally not as strong as mothers' rights, they still have rights and ways to assert those rights. Ths movie did a horribe job of showing that. Under no circumstances should any parent (male or female) be taking a child from the hospital. I can't believe that this movie made it look like that was okay and that a judge would award custody to him after doing that.

Parental rights are tough because there can always be a discrpancy between what each parent wants. You could flip your statment around just as easily. "She has every right to place HER baby for adoption..."

reply

"There are a bunch of skanks that think they are hot shot judges out there."

Skanks?! It's just a movie. Lighten up a little.

reply

You're right. It IS messed up. Whether the couple is married or not that shouldn't have any bearing on whether the father can be a parent or whether the father should have a choice regarding what happens to his child.
It's a shame just because the woman was "assigned" the responsibility of carrying a child she should get all the say in what type of life it has. Afterall, she can't conceive a child on her own no more than the man can. So it should be a joint decision whether the child is put up for adoption, etc.

Throughout this movie I got the impression that the girl's mom was tryin to punish Matt for her daughter's pregnancy when in fact if her daughter was more responsible she would not have gotten pregnant. Why the woman always puts the task of birth control on the man is beyond me since THEY are the ones who get "burdened" or, as the mother said "give up 9 months of their life carryin that child." If it's such a burden, then why take the subject of birth control so lightly? If it's your body and you care for it, then take the responsibility of making sure nothing happens to your body that you don't want. Matt didn't rape her so she is more to blame for her pregnant state than he is. That's why birth control pills were invented.

And I'm glad the judge saw fit to give Matt custody. Afterall, BLOOD comes first and it was clear he had nothing but good intentions for what he did; he honestly LOVED that child which is more than I can say for his mother. For those who think that just because Matt took his child from the hospital without permission he is not a good parent, obviously you AREN'T a parent because if you were, you'd understand why he did it. I guess the girlfriend was being a good parent by giving her child up for adoption just so she can get on with her life and not be BURDENED anymore than she already has been by the likes of a kid!! Some parent.


---------------------------------------
"I don't love you enough to hate you!!"

reply

I didn't see the whole film, so I don't know the plot details.

A father can absolutely get full custody of his child -- though sometimes a fair amount of action and work are necessary on his part, and it can be something of a mess. The laws vary state by state, with some states rather father friendly and others not as much.

reply

i just saw this movie for the first time the other day... I don't know the laws state by state but in Missouri where i am from the father does have rights... I had a child that i put up for adoption and the father did have to be contacted and sign off his rights before the lawyers could proceed. He chose not to fight for custody. I also have to say that i didn't do an adoption because I didn't want to be "burdened" with a child... I was 19 and already the single parent of 1 child with no help so i knew it was unfair to either of my children to be raised by a single parent of 2. I gave my second child to a warm, loving family that adored him from the very beginning... they have since adopted 1 if not 2 more children that were special needs. Adoption is sometimes the greatest show of love for a child and knowing what that child will be missing out on if you keep it...It is not a decision made lightly nor without love.

reply