|
|
|
|
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 1:51:43 PM | Thanks Harley!
Also note that I do not support opt out for married men. I think marriage is a committment to stick together through thick and thin. I also do not think that a man should be able to opt out anytime he wishes.
My hope would be to reduce the amount of predatory "baby making" that happens yet still require mothers or fathers to own up to their responsibility.
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 3:43:38 PM | | Personally as a single mom of 2...If the girl thinks she needs help from the idiot who knocked her up then she should fight for it. But from personal experience I do me and mine on my own! I don't get help from my baby daddies! Why should I let someone who doesn't care about them have a say in how I raise them or take money from them after they have already decided to hate what they helped create. It would be selfish of me to do that. I understand that for some women this can't be possible because of financial issues but when it comes down to it would you rather show your children how much you love them or show them that their dad despises their very existence for every reason you give him? I choose to show my kids that i'll kill myself giving them the life they deserve. I don't need to show them that their fathers never wanted them. I'm not saying to bash on those dude either because when you talk trash about him you're only telling that child that a part of them is bad and thats not the case. It's not our fault as mothers that we fell for some guys lines and promises and he bailed the minute things got rough. Make sure you do things right! But hey if you want some sort of revenge sue his ass for full custody and child support and make sure the judge hears why the guy shouldn't get the kid ever but should have to provide some support! | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 7:06:37 PM | OP,"After reading several theads about child support a question occured to me. It seems that quite a few people believe that since a man has no say in a woman's right to choose to either abort, keep or give a their child up for adoption that they should not be required to pay child support. Even though they are just as responsible for the conception of said child. What is everyone's opinion on this. I am just curious to see what people think about this."
Males have the chioce of make a baby do not make a baby. If they have procreative activity with a female durring the 72 hours when a child would result they should be a man and support that child. My nephew is a single dad and a great one his ex did not want the child so he said give it to me and she did. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 7:23:38 PM |
If the girl thinks she needs help from the idiot who knocked her up then she should fight for it.
If he is an idiot for knocking her up, then she is an idiot for getting knocked up. Right? I mean, seriously. Making the woman the victim all the time is getting quite old. If women don't want the idiot knocking them up, then they should stop having sex with the idiots. Then perhaps they won't have to spend the rest of thier lives suing for support from the idiots.
JMHO. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 7:35:21 PM | ^^^ exactly
It's not our fault as mothers that we fell for some guys lines and promises and he bailed the minute things got rough.
Does "baby daddies" imply you have two fathers for two children at what 23? | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 10:21:48 PM | ^^^ This is the sort of irresponsibility that can be re-enforced when not outright encouraged I was getting at with the current system.
Not to paint all single parents with the same brush. But if we look past our own personal experiences and weight the costs and benefits of offering men the ability to opt out of parenthood post conception entirely within a given time period, we should be able to admit that this would greatly negate the likelihood of "the parent trap", or bubbleheads cranking out kids they can't care for properly but hoping to rely on a one-night stands, or a deceived boyfriend/husbands paycheque. And this still would not prevent child support in the event of a dissolved relationship where both had previously agreed to be parents(except in cases of paternity fraud.... although some courts disagree with my view that a child has the right to know at a minimum there true genetics, or that even a willing father should not be liable for the care of a child which turns out to be someone elses). | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/24/2008 10:29:09 PM | Just an odd question and i am not cutting ANYONE down but what are WE all going to do and how are WE all going to feel when the MOTHER or FATHER of our children passes away?, i know we can not see eye2eye with them right now or maybe for awhile but in the end when the mother/father passes away (wich tomorrow is not promised) how are we going to feel and react?.....Losing my father 2.22.2008 has made me realize just how short life is...i miss him so much i know i probally sound like an kid but, i'm not trying to my dad was the ONLY hero in my eyes! | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 1:29:01 AM | When an unexpected pregnacy happens....there is often absoloutely NO SUPPORT from the father's.
Even if a woman decides to terminate an unexpected pregnacy, the men have already checked out before the emotional reprucutions a woman might have after terminating the pregnancy.
Men complain it is unfair that they can't "opt out" of having an obligation to be responsible finacially or emotionally.....****NEWS FLASH***** ...........regardless of the outcome of how a woman deals with an unexpected pregnacy, she can never avoid the emotional reprucussims of being the one in that situation. A woman cannot "opt out" of the same obligations and responsibilities a man complains about in making a decision to carry a baby...or abort it.
The bitterness and stigma that is constantly perpetuated in these forums about single Mom's....leads me to believe that there are far too many men who haven't actually lived in the real world, where grown up's take responsibilities for their own personal actions. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 5:44:21 AM | Since Roe v Wade passed in 73 more than 40 million abortions have occured.
That's over 10% of our "current" population.
it seems that many more women than you think have gotten over that stigma.
Your argument is emotional and not in the least logical.
Most of the biased laws we have were based on logic in the first place or a way of deflecting responsibility away from government.
Our governments instead choose to increase immigration to keep the population growing at a desired rate to keep the consumption going.
As more and more women choose career over motherhood, North American women are having less children.
Having a child is a priveledge not a right. With that priveledge comes responsibility.
Be thankful we are not in ancient Greece, they tossed imperfect children off the cliffs. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 6:40:12 AM |
Not to paint all single parents with the same brush. But if we look past our own personal experiences and weight the costs and benefits of offering men the ability to opt out of parenthood post conception entirely within a given time period, we should be able to admit that this would greatly negate the likelihood of "the parent trap", or bubbleheads cranking out kids they can't care for properly but hoping to rely on a one-night stands, or a deceived boyfriend/husbands paycheque.
While I agree with you theoretically, I think the reality would play out differently. Even the poster to which you are referring stated that she isn’t seeking child support from the fathers of her children. In her case, I have no idea if she relies on state support, but my guess that’s what would increase. I would love to think that it would decrease the “accidental” pregnancies, but I think it would only increase the number of state supported children. This is why I think the opt out plan would never be approved. Society as a whole does not want to be responsible for people who choose not to be responsible for themselves. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 8:29:29 AM | ^^^One example of some person on the net that says they don't get CS (And most places require CS and will go after whoever she says is the father without any evidence that he is infact the father as a condition of social assistance) doesn't negate the reality that this is a system too easily used.
If you want to reduce the number of "accidental" pregnancies then shift more financial responsibility to the person with the choice on whether or not there is a child at all  . When only willing fathers can be responsibly for supporting their off-spring and the state helps people get back on their feet rather than creating a dependence situation and little incentive we should see a change.
As Ms.B pointed out there is a substantial cost in raising a child. Now, if the partner were to die what happens? Well there is still one parent and no one to sue for CS. Does the child have to suffer because of this or should/would the mother still be able to raise a child properly if she worked a little harder at it? I think she could and as it is her choice to have the child in the 1st place, she should be prepared to if she chooses to have one. We can all cross our fingers and hope all relationships last forever and that no one dies without hefty insurance policies but that isn't reality for many. As the person with ultimate control in these situations we really should expect greater responsibility for the decisions you can make and we cannot. The OP's suggestion would help create an environment where this would be more likely to happen. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 9:23:11 AM | I just love it when people swoop in every few pages, leave one post about things we've already discussed and MOVED PAST then go on their merry way just to come back in another few pages and do it all over again. 
If you want to reduce the number of "accidental" pregnancies then shift more financial responsibility to the person with the choice on whether or not there is a child at all
LOL! Men pay a few hundred a month and go about their business. Maybe if we made child support more of a priority we'd have less unwanted pregnancies. Goes both ways. Get to know who you're sticking your d!ck in so you don't get "trapped".
Now, if the partner were to die what happens?
Children in the US get social security benefits from the deceased parent. It's usually way more per month that that measly child support was. So I guess you all are better off dead for us. We get even MORE then! 
For the gazillionth time- The government shouldn't have to raise your "mistake". Just because we get more choices (those whole TWO choices we get) in reproductive rights doesn't mean we don't sacrifice and go through the emotional roller coaster. The burden of either choice will likely affect women way more than men. So you have to pay a few bucks out every month. We get to stay up all night with a sick baby and then go to work on no sleep. We have more than ourselves to get ready to head out the door every morning, more people to feed and fix dinner for, more people to bathe and get ready for bed. Virtually no time to ourselves for the first couple of years as we're taking care of this little person's EVERY need plus trying to take care of ourselves and hold down a job. Employers aren't too keen on taking off a lot of days because Baby is sick. We're more likely to lose our jobs because of having to have more time off of work. Don't for one second think that we don't "pay" for our choices; that we don't sacrifice for our choices.
But you're so right. Men just shouldn't have to take on the burden of paying child support if they don't feel like it. Poor, poor men having to give up a couple hundred of their hard earned money each month. I feel terrible that, that cuts into your date money, and you can't buy that brand new Harley now. What a shame and injustice to the men of society!
(And most places require CS and will go after whoever she says is the father without any evidence that he is infact the father as a condition of social assistance)
Harley, correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the man say "I want a dna test" and the state gives him one before making him pay? All he has to do is speak up, correct? (Being of course that he did not sign the birth certificate. If he did, then that's his own fault for not having the test done beforehand.) | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 10:09:02 AM | | Yeah, I thought I'd swoop back in and see how it's going. No change I see, but love the comments, this one caught my eye: the bit ending in"We get even MORE then" nice, real nice. Bob | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 10:21:45 AM | Rawrrrr: I hope you weren’t referring to me. I didn’t think I was off-topic in my post!
Loony: Yes, I used that one person as an example, but there are many, many women who don’t seek child support, and many others who don’t get child support. CSE will “insist” that a woman seek child support as a part of receiving TANF, but often these women will just say they don’t know who the father is, or they really don’t. I don’t think by giving the father an opt out, you are going to create a class of women who are suddenly willing to make better choices or become independent. I think we all need to be held accountable for our choices. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 11:00:08 AM |
We get even MORE then
It was obvious sarcasm. It's easy to quote part of a comment such as that one and force it to be taken out of context. I normally respect you, Bob, but you knew I didn't truly mean that, nor did I truly mean that men are better off dead.
Rawrrrr: I hope you weren’t referring to me. I didn’t think I was off-topic in my post!
Noooooo! Sorry for the misunderstanding! And you're right- everyone needs to man up and be accountable for their own adult decisions. The child (providing the child is born) shouldn't suffer because two people fecked up and one doesn't "feel" like taking responsibility. (And it doesn't matter if that "one" is Mom or Dad.) | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 11:12:34 AM |
Harley, correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the man say "I want a dna test" and the state gives him one before making him pay? All he has to do is speak up, correct? (Being of course that he did not sign the birth certificate. If he did, then that's his own fault for not having the test done beforehand.)
You are absolutely correct. Some flourishing of details...
If you live in a state where the parties are required to sign the birth certificate, the BC is enough.
If you live in a state (if there even are any left??) that the parties do not have to be present, then the man is notified...and HE ALWAYS HAS THE RIGHT TO REQUEST PATERNITY TESTING. (My ex, after YEARS, requested such just to be a jerk...and he was granted such!)
The problem with most men paying support that truly may not be fathers, is that they IGNORE the situation...and paternity can be ordered by DEFAULT as well...after him not appearing multiple times! | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 11:39:45 AM |
I just love it when people swoop in every few pages, leave one post about things we've already discussed and MOVED PAST then go on their merry way just to come back in another few pages and do it all over again.
Some of us have a life outside of POF forums. Try it.
LOL! Men pay a few hundred a month and go about their business. Maybe if we made child support more of a priority we'd have less unwanted pregnancies. Goes both ways. Get to know who you're sticking your d!ck in so you don't get "trapped".
Few hundred....over a thousand for some, No ones fault but your own that you chose a lower earning father for your kids.
Children in the US get social security benefits from the deceased parent. It's usually way more per month that that measly child support was. So I guess you all are better off dead for us. We get even MORE then!
Newsflash, the world doesn't revolve around the US, and further that attitude should be grounds for a custody reversal unless he is on the same level as yourself. Poisoning a childs' mind with your own venom is inexcusable. Worse even if your share that contempt of men, your daughters are likely to reflect that attitude and sons have little self-worth if they figure out this is how you feel. At a young age parents seem like infallible superhero's...... so act like one and do the right thing.
For the gazillionth time- The government shouldn't have to raise your "mistake". Just because we get more choices (those whole TWO choices we get) in reproductive rights doesn't mean we don't sacrifice and go through the emotional roller coaster. The burden of either choice will likely affect women way more than men. So you have to pay a few bucks out every month. We get to stay up all night with a sick baby and then go to work on no sleep. We have more than ourselves to get ready to head out the door every morning, more people to feed and fix dinner for, more people to bathe and get ready for bed. Virtually no time to ourselves for the first couple of years as we're taking care of this little person's EVERY need plus trying to take care of ourselves and hold down a job. Employers aren't too keen on taking off a lot of days because Baby is sick. We're more likely to lose our jobs because of having to have more time off of work. Don't for one second think that we don't "pay" for our choices; that we don't sacrifice for our choices.
Must I type in caps and bold so you understand it? FOR THE GAZZILIONTH TIME, I DIDN'T SAY THE STATE SHOULD CARE FOR THEM[/B] I said IF YOU choose to be a parent the YOU should bear sole financial obligations for that child, but if WE choose to become parents then WE should equally split financial obligations.
Harley, correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the man say "I want a dna test" and the state gives him one before making him pay? All he has to do is speak up, correct? (Being of course that he did not sign the birth certificate. If he did, then that's his own fault for not having the test done beforehand.)
Ummm, no CS is not required during the time when a man contests paternity, payable retroactively if he s the father. But the DNA test is an out of pocket expense for the guy. And SHE can list his name on a birth certificate, he need not sign it. Even if he did under the belief that it was his child, sorry but he should only pay support after learning a child is not his VOLUNTARILY. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 11:47:49 AM | Loony...this is NOT true. I am sure there are variations by state, and I can only reference the USA...but CS is a court mandated issue, and if a guy has concerns with paternity, he needs to raise them. About the only time that a court will order paternity at the expense of the man, is if he signed the birth certificate and cannot show proof of duress at the time, or prove he has reason (other than suspicion) to believe differently. And this is only because too many guys congest the court system and cost them money in an attempt to stall.
FOR THE GAZZILIONTH TIME, I DIDN'T SAY THE STATE SHOULD CARE FOR THEM I said IF YOU choose to be a parent the YOU should bear sole financial obligations for that child, but if WE choose to become parents then WE should equally split financial obligations.
I get what you are saying. It still has no logic to me. It should be equal financial contributions at all times. I hate to echo it over and over, but your choice starts when you have unprotected sex. Or...since so many have chosen to toss out "poor choice syndrome" that the women have...how about using the same "better choices" for your sexual encounters?? If she is someone you do not want to produce a child with, or she is so vindictive she will puncture you condoms in your sleep...MAKE BETTER CHOICES about your sexual partners!!
It would be grossly abused and far too easy if a man could just say, "Hey...I don't want this...so I choose not to pay!" Hell, you would have COUPLES doing this just to get state assistance or other?! | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 11:57:45 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
Well this wouldn't be such an egregious affair if custody was fair. If fathers got a fair chance at gaining custody then It wouldn't be much of an issue. But we all know that statistically speaking fathers aren't even in park when it comes to getting custody of their children. So as we have it now women can potentially enjoy
1. Having a custody
2. Getting Child Support
3. Finding a new mate
4. Having 3 sources of income (potentially)
If "what's best for the child" is truly the goal then shouldn't a man's support cease once the mother gets remarried? Isn't that child now being supported emotionally and financially by the "new" daddy?
What many of you seem to want to do and even relish is turning a man's child into a punative cost center.
Though this really isn't my focus. I believe that in many cases a man should be required to support his child. However Roe v Wade is unconstitutional on two levels
1. There is no verbiage in the Constitution that allows Federal usurpation of States Rights regarding abortion
2. By not having any opt out clauses a man's 14th Amendment rights are being violated.
Please do excuse me if I've grown up with a sense for following the rules. Without rules chaos prevails. And this thread is a testament to the chaos that ensues when equality is not a focus.
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 12:17:18 PM | why can you opt out for your mistake and not be held liable?
No offence but how does this justify a woman's right to opt out while a man still cannot?
As stated a couple of times 30 million have opted out without any liability since 72. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 12:38:26 PM | Loony, when I have been gone from a thread for a few days or it's already long to begin with, I read the last few pages of it to get an idea of what is being discussed at the moment. I do this so as to not bring up the same things and start that part of the debate over again. It's got nothing to do with having a life.
Few hundred....over a thousand for some, No ones fault but your own that you chose a lower earning father for your kids.
I'm not going to go into a lot of details of my personal life, but I get just under a thousand a month, so you know. Oh, and that's the amount HE OFFERED to pay. So I'm not really concerned with getting my personal child support now am I? The amount he makes is irrelevant as he knows what his priorities are.
Newsflash, the world doesn't revolve around the US, and further that attitude should be grounds for a custody reversal unless he is on the same level as yourself. Poisoning a childs' mind with your own venom is inexcusable. Worse even if your share that contempt of men, your daughters are likely to reflect that attitude and sons have little self-worth if they figure out this is how you feel. At a young age parents seem like infallible superhero's...... so act like one and do the right thing.
I never said the rest of the world revolves around the US. I said IN the US because that's where *I* live and so it's what *I* know about. I would imagine other countries have something similar in place.
Just like Bob, leave the laughing smiley out to try and justify taking it out of context. I do agree with you though that if a mother really does have that attitude and has said it, or otherwise proof of it, then yes, that should be considered in custody. It shows that the child isn't the mother's first priority.
My children aren't being poisoned by anything. I have no ill will toward men, and I'm not a money grubbing whore. The problem with letting men opt out is that it WILL put more single mothers and their children on welfare. Your rebuttal is that it will force women to make better choices when having sex. It's a round and round argument that gets nowhere because my rebuttal to your rebuttal is men should be held accountable for making better choices as well. Child support isn't always about controlling some man. Contrary to popular belief, a woman's main goal in life is usually not to rake some poor man over the coals and take everything he'll ever own.
FOR THE GAZZILIONTH TIME, I DIDN'T SAY THE STATE SHOULD CARE FOR THEM[/B] I said IF YOU choose to be a parent the YOU should bear sole financial obligations for that child, but if WE choose to become parents then WE should equally split financial obligations.
But the gov't will end up footing the bill. That's just the way it is. They are not going to change laws so that children go unfed and neglected just so a man doesn't have to pay child support. It's not gonna happen.
Ummm, no CS is not required during the time when a man contests paternity, payable retroactively if he s the father. But the DNA test is an out of pocket expense for the guy. And SHE can list his name on a birth certificate, he need not sign it. Even if he did under the belief that it was his child, sorry but he should only pay support after learning a child is not his VOLUNTARILY.
IN MISSOURI (since that's where I live and what I know) if you file for child support, the child support does NOT go into arrears until after the court ruling. If you request a DNA test and it's NEGATIVE you don't have to pay for it. If it's positive you do. (I'd be down with mothers having to pay for all of the negative tests.) Also, if you are not married at the time of the birth, you have to fill out more than just the bc. A mother could not get away with naming a father because BOTH parties have to sign all forms in front of a notary public.
When my babies were born, we were not married. We filled out all the paperwork at the hospital and went on. We never got copies of their birth certificates until they were 4 years old because we didn't have a need for them. When I got them, I realized his name wasn't on there. I inquired about it and was told there was another set of papers that we either didn't fill out or the hospital didn't turn in. They sent me the papers and we had to sign them in front of the notary public and mail them back in for him to become their legal father. They had his legal last name the entire time though which I found strange. Anyway, point is, they have precautions in place to protect men from being illegally named as a child's parent.
As stated a couple of times 30 million have opted out without any liability since 72.
30 million in 36 years. That's less than a million a year. Still more than should happen, but if you look at the number of years and not just the number of abortions it makes a difference. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 2:13:48 PM | Rawr..I was funnin with you......sorry :-(
Volgrl...grrrrr
To your first three questions
I was married to her. I couldn't imagine my life without her. No I couldn't imagine not having them. The third is unthinkable.
Yes, it would be a careless mistake, though I would wear a condom, so wouldn't be careless in that regard. "why can you opt out" because it should be agreed between the 2. No," I'm going to do what I want and you deal with it". does she carry her mistake forever? Only if she wants too, if I want to and she does not, then what happened to the part I played? My part only counts if she wants it too.
How about this, a woman gets pregnant, a man opts out, he pays child support for 3 years, time for her to get well, pre-school and start a new job. Now he has met an obligation, been penalized for sex, she decided to keep it. He has given her a start on the child's life, now he walks away. While you may not like that scenario, and it would not pay for the child's total life, it would still not be as arbitrary as no, you live with what I choose.
By the way, in case you don't know, I also believe children are not a mistake. You would not be happy with my viewpoint, I WOULD abolish the Roe v. Wade law. But that's another thread altogether. Bob
PS footnote on child support, what few hundred are you talking about? My annual child support bill for one daughter was over $40,000 not counting alimony. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 2:21:48 PM | Women can opt out of a pregnancy whenever she wants too.
Put into a statement just want to keep it simple for you volgirl try to keep up.
For those who may be interested an episode of dr phil is talking about this issue now.
Unmarried couple, she gets pregnant neither were concerned with BC.
He offers to marry her , she refuses, her parents decide to convince the woman to give the child up for adoption. He had offered to take the child, child was given up for adoption to close friends of woman's family.
she will able to see the child he will not.
Courts backed up this whole mess.
Waiting for the update where the adoptive parents take the guy to court for child support, if that hasn't happened already. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 2:54:15 PM | | Seems to me in your words of wisdom you are forgetting that you as a woman have the right to say oops my bad after stealing that billion dollars....whereas us men dont... | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/25/2008 3:11:23 PM | 30 million in 36 years. That's less than a million a year. Still more than should happen, but if you look at the number of years and not just the number of abortions it makes a difference.
Considering there were only just over 4 million births a year that's about one in four. | |
|
|
| Page 14 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 
