Even if the child was conceived in an unconventional way, they are still the offspring of the offender. Imagine being separated from your own offspring, from your own flesh and blood. It is inhumane, and even though the act of rape itself is inhumane, adding more to the inhumanity is not the answer. Rapists are still people, albeit a bit flawed, but who doesn't have their faults.
They should be stripped of their rights upon conviction of the crime, and then executed just for good measure. We don't want that kind of person raising kids anyway.
Well, that works for male rapists. Female rapists are a slightly trickier issue, as they actually have to carry and nurse the child, so that would be better done on a case-by-case basis.
Their rights when it comes to the child should only go as far as biological connections when it comes to medical necessities for the good of the child. A rapist deserves no custody rights over the child, it would be detrimental both to the other parent and to the child itself.
When they made the decision do something to someone, that could potentially ruin how they feel about them selves for life they lost all right to the custody of their children. See their kids at times yes, but some one who does that should not have custody of a child.
Rapists are violent criminals who should be punished and treated as such. They took away a person's right to consent to sexual activity. They violated someone on a horrible level. They do not deserve any rights that may happen to arise out of their shameful, terrible act. Rapists do not deserve parental rights.
Rape is an act of violence and a shameful one at that simply because it involves the extra possibility of harm to a future child. A man who rapes is not interested in doing it in order to have a child, and it is absurd to think he should enjoy parental rights as a result of his actions. There may be individual women who would not object, but for the child's sake it should not be allowed until the child is old enough to make that decision on its own.
Generally, I would oppose a rapist having custody of his child. The only exception I could think of would be if the mother had no means of supporting herself and the only way the child could be supported was from the rapist's money, maybe in that case he should have limited custody rights but otherwise no. It will cause the mother to suffer more and the rapist might also have other problems besides being a rapist and be a bad influence on the child.
Rape is about power and control. It is an act of violence. Children exposed to violent role models are more apt to commit violent acts. As a society we have been moving away from the tacit approval that let men commit acts of domestic violence and not be punished. Hopefully, over time, children will see fewer incidents of domestic violence. Severing parental rights of rapists will be another step in this direction.
This question is preposterous on its face, an affront to decency...And yet in many States rapists are eligible for parental rights. The argument proffered in support of rapists parental rights strives to assume a veneer of legitimacy. But cannot successfully divest itself of its unarticulated and but easily identified ideological predicate- that a man may both perpetrate the most violent violation of a womans bodily integrity AND yet still be deemed a fit parent whose sustained interaction with the resulting issue of rape, and almost certainly, the issue's mother (his victim) may benefit said child and the childs interests to such a degree that the obvious risks and liabalities of the interaction are sufficiently mitigated. Such a proposition is credible if and onlyif we accept the contention that an individual man's character andl fitness