The Right to Be a Father (or Not)

NY Times Week in Review ^ | November 6, 2005 | PAM BELLUCK

[libertylover]

The article is not about the PA case that Alito heard, it's a broader discussion about the husband having a say or not. Since the article explores permission and not notification, perhaps the PA case should not have been mentioned at all. The fact that it was mentioned was an attempt to make it timely and, arguably, to distort the reader's view of Alito, and I think now that that was YOUR broader point.

But strictly in the part about Alito and husband notification, the writer correctly states that the case was merely about notification.

It's interesting that our discussion is a microcosm of the Alito/PA case, i.e., broad vs. narrow interpretation.

[Pharmboy]

Yes...my point was that for people not following this as closely as you and I (and most other Freepers) it was disingenuous at the very least for the writer to start off with a discussion of the husband's consent and then morph the discussion into Alito's opinion on notification. Perhaps I should have been clearer.

[Pharmboy]

Thank you for adding such an informed post to this thread. You raised several points that I, for one, had never thought about.