|
|
|
|
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:04:48 AM | Obisidian71, what about the CHILD'S rights post conception?
All I see in here is men v. women's rights. It's the child rights that need to looked after. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:06:37 AM | I pretty much come from a large family where arguing at Holiday dinners is the norm. If you don't speak up you're buried. It's always love though which is why I can disagree with you all fine ladies and harbor absolutely no ill feelings for your. I certainly don't want to "biatch slap" any of you.
Back somewhat on topic ..I don't really expect to change your views. Life presents a lot of options and I'd be foolish if I thought my way was the right way to anyone else but myself.
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:08:55 AM | rjpeagles
I agree. I have never suggested an abortion to anyone. In the end the human spirit can overcome just about anything. Success in life is a decision. In ways I'd love to see Roe v Wade repealed because it's done little but make people lazy about contraception but at the same time I HATE seeing kids attached to shitty parents.
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:16:58 AM |
All I see in here is men v. women's rights. It's the child rights that need to looked after.
Yep. Abortion aside, I've seen the argument that once the baby is born the parents should each get 50% of the time with said baby. In MY OPINION babies need to spend most of their time with their primary caregiver, NOT be shipped back and forth between houses every other day. I believe the first year is the most crucial time for bonding. I'm also somewhat "crunchy" (into attachment parenting among a few other things in that category) which affects my stance on that. And we all know that Baby runs the house for the first several months at least. What if BABY decides he doesn't want to be shipped back and forth? Do we listen to Baby's needs or do we do what's "fair" for the parents? | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:20:58 AM | In ways I'd love to see Roe v Wade repealed because it's done little but make people lazy about contraception
Ouch! That is a broad sweeping statment there. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:27:28 AM | when you play there sometime a process and you will have to pay, but it is up to the two of you not one, because it took two to make the idea happen. but if things are not working then that when you should make the move and go the way in life you think is best for you  | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:40:56 AM |
People!! Get back on track. The question was about child support not about whether reproductive capabilities are unfair to men. You've run off on personal debates about other topics. And you've got a bit silly about it.
Nutt
Actually the question does introduce productive rights by stating a woman has a choice to abort or keep the fetus which correlates with child support I guess the intrepation of the question is subjective.
In ways I'd love to see Roe v Wade repealed because it's done little but make people lazy about contraception
Ouch! That is a broad sweeping statment there.
Miz q as broad sweeeping as child support isn't for the child, it's to increase a woman's income and keep her in a lifestyle should couldn't possible provide for herself. After all the exact amount of child support paid is the cost to raise a child. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 11:49:06 AM | Roe v Wade wasn't originally promulgated as some sort of
11th hour get out of motherhood benefit. Very few people back
then thought we'd be seeing 1.5 million abortions happening in the
USA back in '73.
Today's abortion numbers usurp the total numbers of women impregnanted
via rape and other vagaries.
Since Roe v Wade passed in 73 more than 40 million abortions have occured.
That's over 10% of our "current" population.
If my statement was sweeping and broad then please point out where. Note I
did not blame women only for being lazy with contraception. This is definitely
a joint issue between the genders.
Ms. B- If a man doesn't want to be a father the only thing you CAN do as a mother is attempt to attach his wages. Therefore it "is" a lifestyle issue. Whether it's right or wrong depends on a person's personal belief.
O | |
|
| |
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 1:37:12 PM | Obsidian71
Do you have any idea the expense involved of raising an self actualized child. That is the purpose of child support to give children more opportunity thus make them want to achieve more then the basic needs to live. The average child who participates in activities that promote life goals are less likely to put those goals at risk, which helps them develop forethough, which carries throughout life.
Child support is not balanced in all cases and I can't deny there are woman who see children as a means to catch the right meal ticket. But the creation of most of these women who believe children provided entitlement are the product of a previously flawed child saftely net.
Centuries of women being held solely accountable for procreation and child rearing did create a backlash towards men no doubt. The gov't only became involved in the enforcing child support once they realized they could reduce dependancy on social programs and reduce costs. So laws governing child support still need to be fine tunes since women had to bring forward change based on a denial of rights, I guess it's time for men to do the same.
Justifying not paying support by using the logic the money isn't for the child, it's to keep a woman in a lifestyle is weak, which I guess is why the courts don't agree. To want to assert domain over a woman's body because forethough was not present at the moment of conception is backward and irresponsible. Seriously I don't see how complicated it is, if you couldn't live with the risk of impregnanting a woman or trust her to respect your rights then keep it in your pants. Women and many non western cultures have been doing this for ages, it's not a new concept.
Since birth control traditionally was a female problem, some men still don't quite get that they are as reponsible for preventing a pregnancy. Of the men I have had sex with in the last year, not one wanted to use a condom, that is insane since I disclosed I'm not on birth control. These men were all single men without children who are well educated and employed. And my experience is not isolated, actually a thread on the stupid reasons men use to not use a condom would be very interesting and amusing.
On a personal note, I believe if you chose to have a child, then you must take into consideration if you could raise that child solo. Dependancy on another person could reduce your childs quality of life in the event something happened to that person. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 4:08:09 PM | MissB, you raise some good points and the number one stupid reason you will get is "it just feels better"
I agree that raising a child is not inexpensive and for some one to do it without financial assistance from a partner can mean a life without a lot of extras and perhaps less opportunity for success in life.
I raised that point earlier about why someone would continue on knowing that this may be the hand that will be dealt.
Never stating that success is not possible how can anyone justify the risk?
I would think the male dominated medical field made birth control a womans problem. It you want a good example of oppression that would be it. Condoms have been around for long time but like you said about stupid reasons they don't wear them enough and that really has to do with the pathetic school programs which fail at preparing anyone for the real world.
I think the rules have to change. it seems that unless we see a resurgence in committed relationships at least ones that last until you can kick the kids out of the house or relationships without marraige but still contain two commited parents this fight is not over.
Your recent experience with lack of desire to use a condom baffles me too.
Did you know that in New York City that 26 percent of the population has some std. Take out seniors and kids and yow! | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 7:29:41 PM |
I raised that point earlier about why someone would continue on knowing that this may be the hand that will be dealt.
Never stating that success is not possible how can anyone justify the risk?
I can justify the risk because my children are not a burden but an amazing gift that made me a better person. Also I do believe narcissism plays a part.
Did you know that in New York City that 26 percent of the population has some std.
I guess that stat would based on diagnosed cases which is scarey since many std have few symptoms for men. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 8:34:13 PM |
@harley so tell me what are the differences in the death rates when you compare abortion and full term pregnancy. I would think that more women are at risk giving birth.
Wellll...considering there are more live births versus abortions performed...I don't know that there are any statistics to compare with. And frankly, I don't feel the need wasting my time in seeking out such. :)
Obsidian...I did not look at what parts you are from...but to my knowledge, ALL U.S. states have put caps on the timeframe that one can receive TANF. In Missouri, it is 60 months. TOTAL. So if a person receives benefits for 25 months...then goes to work for a while...they still have 35 months remaining. Did you ex do that?
Also, yes...typically you cannot receive BOTH CS and TANF. However, if the CS is greater, they kill the TANF. If the CS is lower, you can receive a partial TANF supplemental check, Medicaid, Food Stamps. When I worked as a case manager, we handled clients in three different states and it was basically the same in all. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 9:07:40 PM | [re: man choosing to support child when no choice is available about whether that child is born]
This is a tough spot. I really do think this is a risk you take when you engage in unprotected sex. Do I think its fair that a woman can get pregnant, have the baby, turn around and tell the man, who wanted nothing to do with this child that he now has to pay for, no. But on the other hand, he chose to have sex with her, one would assume he would know the type of person she is, and whether or not this would be a risk he is running.
On the other hand, i watched a friend of mine go through watching his GF abort his child, because she felt it wasn't the right time. For her it wasn't , for him, he would have been an amazing father. But he backed off, with the understanding that it was her body that would have to go through the trauma of carrying, and birthing a child. No matter how much he wanted that child, he felt he could not invade on her body against her will.
This is such a hard subject that could be debated over and over, and in a perfect world it could go on a case by case basis. But we don't live in a perfect world, unfortunately i think the system we have , requiring the father to support the child, is the best we can get for the moment. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 9:47:40 PM | | ok, i only got one page into this, but i wanted to add my two cents in. i was in an abusive relationship. i got pregnant. he was planned, yes, but in a dirty conning "this baby will make everything better" sort of way. THAT BEING SAID i admit that yes, it wasnt the smartest decision i ever made BUT it was the best thing to ever happen to me. if it wasnt for the desire to protect my son from my ex i dont know that i would have ever left him, or at least as soon as i did. while i was with him i worked, paid bills, kept a roof over our heads, food (though not much) in the fridge and the utilities on. he also stole every penny that was left, sometimes more, to buy drugs. yes, i filed for child support. but i do not expect him to pay (he owes A LOT on his other kids) it would be nice. but he also doesnt see his son, at least not in the last 7 months. and i'm not sure i would let him see him with out a court order. part of me filed hoping he would pay, part of me filed hoping he woulndt and his rotten arse would go to prison. that being my story i think child support has a lot to do with the situation. my best male friend recently had his kids adopted so he didnt have to pay. his ex is remarried and they dont let him see the kids. there are two able bodied adults in that house to care for those kids, and he was paying so much in cs that he would have never been able to even support himself. i dunno... i think it all boils down to individual situations, which, unfortunatly, laws cant be passed accordingly. hope that makes sense and sorry it was so long | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 10:23:34 PM |
On the other hand, i watched a friend of mine go through watching his GF abort his child, because she felt it wasn't the right time. For her it wasn't , for him, he would have been an amazing father. But he backed off, with the understanding that it was her body that would have to go through the trauma of carrying, and birthing a child. No matter how much he wanted that child, he felt he could not invade on her body against her will.
This is absolutely ridiculous. For many people there is NEVER the ideal time to have a child. It's such a life changing event ...only the independently wealthy could say they are really prepard. I don't think the consensus views the right to abortion being something that should be applied in this scenario. I doubt people in 1973 thought that it would be ideal for adult women within a committed relationship to have abortion based on the "I'm just not ready yet" escape clause. There's no excuse for a committed women getting pregnant knowing she's not ready to have a child. We have too much technology to allow such. It's really unfortunate
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 6:20:48 AM | There's no excuse for a committed women getting pregnant knowing she's not ready to have a child. We have too much technology to allow such.
The "excuse" might be that there is no such thing as 100% effective birth control. I know of a number of pregnancies that resulted from birth control failure - including a friend who had two kids after her tubes were tied.
If you operate in a world in which technology never lets you down, then you must not have a cell phone, or cable TV.
BTW, what about the man in the committed relationship who decides he isn't ready, and wants her to have an abortion? Think that never happens? | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 6:30:21 AM |
These debates always end up vagina vs. penis. Always.
Yet, the two are soooo compatible! ;)
OK...so it has been said, to KEEP THIS ON TOPIC...to not bring other issues into the topic at hand, which is, should a woman be allowed to make the bottom line decision to bring a child into the world, in spite of the father's protests...and still collect child support.
So...aside from whether the pregnancy occurred due to stupidity, carelessness, or deception....and despite the fact that one partner decides he does not want to parent...and definitely aside from the fact that a woman cannot be forced to abort, adopt...is it "fair" for a man to be "forced" to pay??
I have a question for you guys who are sooo adamant about this being unjust!
How does it feel knowing there is a biological part of YOU, in the world...a piece of your own history...which you know nothing about...and which you have not contributed to the success of?!
This just brings about visions of those "fathers" we read about who, finally stake their paternity association once the child is famous and/or rich! | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 7:11:37 AM | Harley
I wouldn't know how it feels to have a child out in the world going virtually ignored. However I've seen this
happen over and over again and I think the cleanest thing to do is corral the men up who will not step up and
basically erase them from the childs history. This of course is as early possible in the childs life. For all intents
and purposes the opt out father would basically be dead.
I think a derelict father that has no intentions of ever supporting their child in any way isn't worth the time and effort.
A mother is likely better to consider that a sunk cost and find the ideal mate to fulfill her and her childs life with.
I read the threads about dating issues for single mothers/fathers and I think it's important to note that this is a
cultural issue for us and not a natural issue. There have been plenty of cultures that do not view assisting someone
in rearing a child as something extraordinary hence the phrase "It takes a village to raise one"
American Culture has grown lazy and selfish. Men don't even want to take care of their own and other men view this
as a burden to their needs. It really doesn't have to be that way.
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 8:28:01 AM | But O...a woman CAN choose a positive mate to help raise her children AND still receive the financial support from the Bio Dude.
This is where I am confused. Some act as if accepting the child support is a negative to the child?! I can tell you this...MY children never had a clue about the financial aspect of things...I did not share grown up info with them.
Now, if later in life when they become adults...if they needed to know or asked or it was somehow relevant, I would be more than happy to explain that their father financially submitted...whether it was voluntarily or not. | |
|
| |
| |
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 11:35:21 AM | | Maybe I missed something here Harley....... my daughters mum has no part in our daughters life, financialy or otherwise, but she is always mum to our daughter. No other woman will ever come close to that.... | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 11:49:45 AM | LesPaul...I was not replying to a post of yours, specifically. :) Sorry!
Obsidian and Soccersweep...did not mean to make this about *my* personal situation, but will volunteer such info! :)
I have two children as products of my one marriage...and two children (twins) as products of a LTR. BOTH carried the "out of mind, out of sight" mentality...when the relationship between the two adults ended...they terminated their relationship with the children. (I can pick 'em!) I consistently attempted to keep them informed of what was happening in their children's lives. My ex-husband made an appearance at my 25 year old sons high school graduation...apologized for not being in their lives for the last 15 years...vowed to do better...did not follow through. He did not make it to my 23 year olds graduation. The twins father pulled the same sort of thing...appeared at their graduation...but he HAS maintained some semblance of contact, though it is typically initiated by them, or on something like Father's Day. NONE of my children ever heard a bad word about their father's...they have since, as intelligent adults, come to their own conclusions. I was mom AND dad to my kids...I even was blessed to get Father's Day cards! ;)
All my children knew while growing up...is that Mommy provided for them. Now, because the twins father has contact with them on occassion, and because he has to continue paying CS while they are in a higher education institution...they are aware that he pays CS. He will pay CS for a long time however, as he owes me something in the realm of in excess of $50,000. By the way..."current" support is handed over to THEM for their college expenses...PAST DUE is utilized to pay past debts inflicted when they were children, such as medical bills, personal loans to my parents for school supplies, clothing, etc.
Oh...and it should not make a difference, but I have never been on TANF/welfare except for a short time during my pregnancy with the twins, and to get medical coverage for such since I had relocated and was considered "an existing condition."
Hope this answers any questions, or calms the curiousity piqued! :) | |
|
|
| Page 13 of 43
|
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 |
|
Home
login 
