Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, we are all aware of how the court looks at it. Hence our present discussion. See, the thing being debated is how a woman has the choice to either kill or keep the child; a man has no say, PLUS.......said man can be forced by the state to give a large portion of his income for 18 years, depending entirely on the woman's "choice". This is unfair. A compromise would be ideal, where the man, assuming the woman chooses not to kill the child, can choose whether or not he wants to support said child.
And how is the father "opting out" of financial responsibility fair to the child? To tax payers? Do you not realize the women who you are so offended by because they receive state aid to help out with raising their kids is specifically because the fathers of those kids did in fact "opt out" i.e. they do not pay child support?
And how is the father "opting out" of financial responsibility fair to the child? To tax payers? Do you not realize the women who you are so offended by because they receive state aid to help out with raising their kids is specifically because the fathers of those kids did in fact "opt out" i.e. they do not pay child support?
Jesus H Christ on a moped, get a clue.
Here's the difference, pay attention. If a man can't pay, he goes to jail. If a woman can't pay, she gets assistance.
Here's the difference, pay attention. If a man can't pay, he goes to jail. If a woman can't pay, she gets assistance.
just how many men are in jail vs the ones that don't pay anything. most men never get busted or pay. men and women should take care of their children once they are born
This i just off the top of my head but this is what Ive been thinking...
if the father wants an abortion and the woman does not papers are signed stating that the woman acknowledges that she is going into this alone and is aware that the father will not help. This should cost the same as if the woman is getting the abortion.
I know it has flaws but just an idea
My only problem with this scenario is that the women can lie and say that the guy was on board and then changed his mind. So, it can be argued that she got pregnant based on his promises of support and now he's still on the hook because he misled her. Too many gray areas.
Still prefer my solution: NO child support OR welfare to ANY single mother, outside of rape/divorce/widow cases. Some may say that children will go hungry, but seriously, who else but mentally deranged women would continue to have children if they are receiving $0 support?
I grew up in the projects and there are SO many cases of welfare/public housing/poverty being a generational thing. There are mothers out there who actually "coach" their daughters about how once they have a child they can get welfare, food stamps and public housing. This avenue is taken by some teen girls as their way to "get their own place". If these options were off of the table, how many would opt to go a more successful route? You'd be surprised at the number of people who *choose* to live in poverty if it means never having to work/pay bills. I am in awe (and disgust) at what some people will settle for just to take the easy road.
Some of the people on this thread are making it seem like women don't go into motherhood so casually. But for many people, it really is the case.
Here's the difference, pay attention. If a man can't pay, he goes to jail. If a woman can't pay, she gets assistance.
If a man can't pay, it's because he didn't prioritize, did he? I'll bet he made sure to spend his money on everything he wanted first, and then he turned his empty pockets out before the judge and said boo hoo.
The judge decides in each individual case based on income and time spent with child how much the non custodial parent needs to pay.
Last edited by gallowsCalibrator; 06-09-2011 at 12:38 PM..
Reason: Please stick to the topic and not your fellow posters.
If a man can't pay, it's because he didn't prioritize, did he? I'll bet he made sure to spend his money on everything he wanted first, and then he turned his empty pockets out before the judge and said boo hoo.
The judge decides in each individual case based on income and time spent with child how much the non custodial parent needs to pay.
Why does the person that is stuck with the support payments go to jail if they can't pay, but the one that wants the child will get assistence if they can't pay? Shouldn't the man also get assistance to pay his child support if he can't make the payments?
Last edited by gallowsCalibrator; 06-09-2011 at 12:39 PM..
Reason: Discuss topic, not posters
Oh, well my praise for Rita was premature. While the ideas is brilliant from what I have read subsequently, the biological possibility actually performing such a transplant is decades away if not centuries. But it was a cool thought.
When they developed the first computer (the size of a football field), people dreamed of having that power (back then, that of a a basic calculator) in their hands. Decades later, we have smartphones capable of doing practically anything (mine even has a thermometer).
In regards to fetal transplants, 50 years ago, who would have thought that what is described in this article could have been possible? The biggest hampering to testing and perfecting the idea of fetal transplant is the concept that some babies will die in the process of perfecting the procedure. And with that, there's ethical and emotional baggage.
((Yes. Technology and its uses fascinates me. So sue me))
Because of the disparity of "fairness" involved with unwanted children and the abortion/adoption/raise debate, the only way to make it 100% is to be able to give both Genetic-Material Donors the ability to say "Yes" or "No" without affecting the other Genetic-Material Donor. And for that, the only way to do so is to remove the "It's her body" piece of the equation.
As long as she is the only person who can carry the child to term, then it is her choice alone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDirector
I really don't think so.
We have thousands in Foster care so its not like lack of babies is the problem.
I find it rather intriguing, that there are parents who wait years for a child just as there are children who wait years for a parent.
Not when it comes to Child Support they also go to jail.
Casper
That's not what I'm talking about. It's ok for a woman to have a child that they can't afford, but a man goes to jail if they can't afford the support payments.
If a female doesn't want the responsibility/financial stress that goes along with parenthood, she can get an abortion and never look back. Even if the male wants to keep the baby, the female has the power to get an abortion.
So why do the males get no say? If a female can just walk away from the responsibility if she doesn't want a baby, a male should be able to do the same thing.
If the female wants to keep the baby but the male doesn't, the male gets stuck paying child support.
In both examples, one parent wants to keep the baby. So why does the male get stuck paying for a baby he doesn't want?
Of course the male can't get an abortion. But I don't think the male should need to pay child support for a baby he doesn't want.
Sure, you might be thinking "The male helped create the baby. If the female wants to keep it, the male should pay"
But it takes two to tango. Both parents played an equal role in creating the baby. So if the male can't force the female to pay, why should the female be able to force the male to pay?
By the way, I am pro-choice. I support abortion and I don't see anything wrong with a female getting an abortion if she doesn't want to pay for a baby. But if a male doesn't want to pay for a baby, he shouldn't need to either.
Well, if the father wants the baby so bad, let him carry the little rascal around in his belly for 9 months
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
