From: Ellen K. 

I agree about judicial activism, but since a father is certainly legally
entitled to participate in decisions about his born child, that would be
some precedent.  Also I bet there are cases where a woman miscarried due to
assault, a crash caused by a drunken driver, or similar, where the husband
and wife were both awarded damages; if so probably such cases could be used
as precedent.

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 17:45:17 -0500, "Gregg N"
 wrote in message
:

>"Ellen K."  wrote in message
>news:v27dm1pc6d4fmhb5i6vu3jgfk3mjnocms4{at}4ax.com...
>> Re the case about a married woman's husband being notified prior to an
>> abortion being performed, isn't the baby as much his as hers?  So why
>> shouldn't he at least be informed?   Granted, I suppose this reasoning
>> wouldn't apply in the case of a woman aborting a child whose father is
>> not the husband but as a society do we really want to support that?
>>
>
>The notification is probably appropriate, but he is not supposed to be
>deciding cases based on the right thing to do, but rather on the law and
>whether it is consistent with the constitution and constitutional precedent.
>Otherwise, it would be judicial activism.
>
>Gregg

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5