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.
the male opt out option is to not sign the birth certificate and give up all parental rights, not force a women to have an abortion.
Men are always liable for child support and if you are married it doesn't matter if the kid is biologically yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
then what stops that man from having sex with 100 women and then fathering 100 babies (say all the women kept the babies)? How is it fair that he does not support a single one of them?
Sorry, but if he wants to have sex, as soon as he puts his penis into a woman, he accepts all outcomes of that act. Whether its to help a woman have an abortion, because they both agree, or if she decides to keep the baby, he is OBLIGATED to support the child.
IF he didn't want to have kids, then he should have kept his pants zipped up, know more about the woman before he slept with her, and/or used protection
If women made the choice to keep the baby knowing that they will not get support then that is their selfish call.
Using your own logic could we not outlaw abortion based on the premise that you should not have sex unless you are ready for a kid?
Sorry, but if SHE wants to have sex, as soon as SHE allows a penis inside her, SHE accepts all outcomes of that act.
IF SHE didn't want to have kids, then SHE should have kept HER pants zipped up, know more about the MAN before he slept with HIM, and/or used protection.
TPR's (termination of parental rights) from my knowledge would not apply in this situation. TPRs are for abandoned children for the purposes of adoption.
The very links I posted gives several examples of when TPR's are used. It seems that you didn't bother to read them. No surprise.
Quote:
Big difference. In NYS for example, if a child is removed and placed into foster care, and either of the two parents fail to comply with family court orders OR if the fail to have any contact with the said child for 2 two years, then yes a FC judge can execute a TPR if one is filed by a petitioner (usually a foster care agency).
The very links I posted gives several examples of when TPR's are used. It seems that you didn't bother to read them. No surprise.
Quote:
But a guy (to my knowledge) cannot just walk into a court house and say "I don't want to be a father--eliminate my rights."
Actually he can. If he has the agreement of the custodial parent (in you "example" I assume that he IS NOT the custodial parent). The court can grant his request.
Of course it doesn't make sense to one who thinks illogically.
Men are just as responsible for the outcome of sex as women. He should always be of the belief that pregnancy will happen, and the that she will end up keeping the baby (since that is more likely the outcome).
Quote:
You simply cannot offer a worthwhile argument to the issue without presenting yourself as misinformed to the law.
Pot. Kettle. Black. You've been squirming in this thread since the very first post. You haven't offered a single worthwhile argument on the entire issue, except to show us how misogynistic you are.
If a women does not tell a man that they have a child together then she will not get back child support. There have been cases in the news where a judge has done that, but those are exceptions to the rule, not the norm. it is not as simple as just taking a man to court and making him pay child support.
In what world are you living in? And, let's say you are correct, how does this loophole underscore your original point? The fact of the matter is, he still has to pay and exercise a willingness to be a "father" by doing so whether he likes it or not.
In what world are you living in? And, let's say you are correct, how does this loophole underscore your original point? The fact of the matter is, he still has to pay and exercise a willingness to be a "father" by doing so whether he likes it or not.
too bad. He decided to have sex, without using protection. He is responsible for the outcome.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 21 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,549 posts, read 16,536,658 times
Reputation: 6032
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679
Men are always liable for child support and if you are married it doesn't matter if the kid is biologically yours.
If women made the choice to keep the baby knowing that they will not get support then that is their selfish call.
Using your own logic could we not outlaw abortion based on the premise that you should not have sex unless you are ready for a kid?
Sorry, but if SHE wants to have sex, as soon as SHE allows a penis inside her, SHE accepts all outcomes of that act.
IF SHE didn't want to have kids, then SHE should have kept HER pants zipped up, know more about the MAN before he slept with HIM, and/or used protection.
No, men are not always liable for child support, you guys have been watching to much TV. And marriage does not change a thing unless the nonbiological takes the responsibility legally.
and LOL at SHE.
if HE willingly inserts HIS penis inside her and dispenses HIS seed, then HE accepts responsibility.
It wasn't against his will . He willingly had sex with a woman. He should be prepared for any outcome of that act. If he didn't want to become a father, he had the choice to not have sex or use protection.
You can apply the same standard to women.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
actually it can. through the court. A couple can have their parental rights terminated through a court order. A single parent can have the non-custodial parent's rights terminated (if the non-custodial agrees). The latter happens a lot in the case of re-marriage. The former because the couple is giving up the child for adoption, or leaving their child with a guardian (family member, friend ,etc)
Your first link: "Termination of parental rights is not granted by the Court as a result of a request or by mutual agreement of the parents who are seeking to solve disputes regarding support or visitation matters."
Your second link talks about modifying child support in lieu of terminating rights.
Your third link: "IMPORTANT: Termination of parental rights IS NOT granted by the courts on request or by mutual agreement of the parents as a means of solving visitation or support disputes."
No, men are not always liable for child support, you guys have been watching to much TV. And marriage does not change a thing unless the nonbiological takes the responsibility legally.
and LOL at SHE.
if HE willingly inserts HIS penis inside her and dispenses HIS seed, then HE accepts responsibility.
Exactly. No abortion. They both did the deed and they both accept the responsibility. You can't argue with that logic.
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.
The very links I posted gives several examples of when TPR's are used. It seems that you didn't bother to read them. No surprise.