(CNSNews.com) - The Pennsylvania judge who last week prevented a pregnant woman from having an abortion at the behest of the woman's ex-boyfriend has reversed himself. The latest order, issued Monday by Luzerne County Judge Michael Conahan, effectively gives the woman the legal ability to proceed with her plans to abort her child.

In his ruling, Conahan admitted that his previous order, blocking the abortion, had "inflicted significant and extreme emotional distress" on Tanya Meyers, who is about ten weeks pregnant with ex-boyfriend John Stachokus' child. Conahan also cited several legal precedents in writing that "neither an ex-boyfriend nor a fetus has standing to interfere with a woman's choice to terminate her pregnancy."

Stachokus' attorney, John P. Williamson, is "currently working furiously to protect the life of the child and the mother," according to a spokesperson for Williamson. The lawyer was busy Monday working on an appeal of Conahan's decision. However, any appeal would be moot if Meyers obtained the abortion before the appeal was filed.

"Unfortunately, it seems that the courts continually side with whoever chooses to terminate, whether it's destruction of human embryos [or] whether it's the destruction of an unborn child," stated Serrin Foster, president of Feminists for Life, a group that describes itself as simultaneously "pro-women and pro-life."

"Whatever the scenario is, whoever wants to kill wins," she added.

While pro-lifers are disappointed at the turn of events, abortion advocates such as National Abortion Federation (NAF) president Vicki Saporta say the judge's reversal is only a correction of "judicial activism at its worst."

"I think that there are those who would like to make an issue out of this, but there is very clear Supreme Court precedent. The judge was very mistaken in ignoring the precedent. The situation has since been corrected, and I think the woman will [be able to] have an abortion," Saporta told CNSNews.com.

But Erik Whittington of the American Life League said the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and other court precedents render the unborn child "a slave to his or her mother's wishes regardless of the father."

Whittington said there is a lack of legal resources available to people trying to prevent abortion. On the other hand, abortions are a "big money-making industry," he said, that ensure an "endless amount of cash" for pro-abortion activism.

While he does not expect Stachokus to be able to file an appeal before Meyers goes through with her abortion, Whittington said the public debate over the issue would continue.

"You're going to see in the public how ridiculous abortion rights is because a father has no say in his child's life, and that's just totally ridiculous," Whittington said.

Fathers' rights organizations are weighing in as well.

"I think that this is just a good illustration of the enormous barriers that fathers have placed between them and the relationship with their children," stated Dianna Thompson, executive director and co-founder of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. She refers to "the plight of the father" as "the next civil rights movement."

"Oftentimes fathers do try to be responsible, but they have no choices," Thompson added. "So therefore it makes it extremely hard for them to be the men and fathers they want to be."