Child Support is an Artificial Social Policy

[Grand Mal]

In a word: divorce ... A nasty one. She moves 6 hours away with his children and then sued him for extra child suppor claiming need ... The court obliged

Did he contest custody? If he had custody she'd be the one with support payments, right?

 

[Celebrity]

The chance of a condom failing is so miniscule that it doesn't need to be considered here.

That's a bit like saying: the chance of a condom failing and resulting in a woman becoming pregnant is so minuscule, that it doesn't need to be considered here. I can only imagine what would be going through a woman's mind in the event of condom failure.

But this is the Sex and Sexuality forum where I wanted to come talk about an artificial policy which does result from condom failure, or improper use, i.e. failure to properly use a condom. This is very common, according to NBC News.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

baloney....have you read this thread...

read it through and then get back to me

you jumped right into the middle of it

this has nothing to do with hating men and everything to do with a few guys who think women are there for their deposit

a child is not something to walk from

I did jump into the middle of the thread, but some of the posts denigrating men got to me. I don't think it's fair to just assume the worst about a man because he has sex. This Thread is almost enough to make me rethink my position on abortion. I don't think a woman should be forced to carry a fetus to term by the state or face imprisonment. But apparently having sex is consent to being a parent. So I guess neither man or woman should have the right to choose right?

 

[Celebrity]

not at all. the only thing that a court see's or cares about is that there is a child that need support. The responsibility of that support falls on the people that
created that child. since it takes a women and a man to have a baby remember biology 101 he is responsible for supporting the baby.

Indeed, it is. The court finances decisions that women make, without regard for decisions men make. This results in an economic imbalance among heterosexual men and women who have sex.
Again, in an equal economy which puts men and women in competition with one another, it is not ok for either party to be at a social disadvantage which causes them to disproportionately be treated as patrons, without a say in the matter.

 

[Celebrity]

Did he contest custody? If he had custody she'd be the one with support payments, right?

Oh, ok, so in order for this to be an economically fair playing field, men who have sex must not be able to choose whether or not to become parents, they must choose whether or not women become full time parents. Still not a real choice. Contesting custody in order to dodge a child support order is really bad parenting.

Perfect condom use has a 2% failure rate. Are you implying that by using a condom you shouldn't have to pay child support if a woman gets pregnant anyway?

By my calculations: .02 chance of -$200,000 is an average net loss of $4,000 every time a heterosexual man engages in vaginal sex. That's some deep pockets.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Did he contest custody? If he had custody she'd be the one with support payments, right?

Probably so, but the mother is most often awarded custody regardless. Admittedly the courts have been improving in this area and joint custody agreements or more common, but the non-custodial parent still usually has to pay child support according to a-state formula ... It works out to between 300 and $500 per child per month.

Any voluntary support doesn't count against that figure. Most often that money is taken directly out of the non-custodial parents paycheck and is fully taxable. The system essentially encourages non-custodial parents not to provide any voluntary support.

Try telling a child that you can't buy him the Spider-Man backpack he wants, and you'll have to ask his mother for everything he wants because you already paid for it through child support. Try going weeks at a time without seeing a child that you love with all your heart. See if you can explain to a child the nuances of court proceedings in monetary obligations and custody arrangements.

My point is simple and it's not really gender-specific. Why should one parent have full control and full Financial autonomy and the other be forced to Simply Be a paycheck behind the scenes?

I know that's a slight deviation from the thread but it informs my beliefs that the child support system is a freaking joke

 

[Grand Mal]

Perfect condom use has a 2% failure rate. Are you implying that by using a condom you shouldn't have to pay child support if a woman gets pregnant anyway?

No.
Are you implying that the woman should bear the consequences of a condom failure?

 

[Celebrity]

I know that's a slight deviation from the thread but it informs my beliefs that the child support system is a freaking joke

No, you pretty much hit the nail on the head.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

No.
Are you implying that the woman should bear the consequences of a condom failure?

I'm saying they should both have a say and whether or not they become a parent. I believe in a woman's right to choose, but I don't believe that that choice should come with an automatic $100,000 payment from her sexual partner.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

I'd like to add another wrinkle to this thread in some food for thought:

My friend since high school got in a fight with his ex-wife over money. He was pressuring her to start a college fund for his two children. She refused on the grounds that that wasn't fair. She instead decided to buy a house ... a rather dilapidated old house with a leaky roof, so she was now paying a mortgage and paying out for repairs. But she's not living in the house. she actually lives with her boyfriend and the kids live there with her.

She's able to do this because his child support payments are subsidising her. So when all is said and done and his children are adults, they're not going to have a college fund and he's not going to have a retirement fund but she is going to have a freakin house.

Why should this man not have a say in how his children are being raised?

He can't refuse to pay or he goes to jail. he can't put the money in escrow or fund their college on his own. He could get a second job, but he will have to immediately report any new income to the state and that will likely result in increased child support payments. In fact the state will send her a letter indicating that her ex's income has increased and she is entitled to more.

Shouldn't he at least get partial ownership of that property?

Is this not an abusive system? Can anyone justify this?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Yes, but those are natural consequences and the law allows her to get out of them if she wants.

Which you have been completely opposed to.

Natural versus artificial is a moot argument, I don't want to live in nature, I want to live in a society. societies have rules. sorry you can't live with that

 

[ludin]

It isn't for women. :shrug:

I see you can't deal with the argument but then again you haven't been able to deal
With it so far.

 

[ludin]

Indeed, it is. The court finances decisions that women make, without regard for decisions men make. This results in an economic imbalance among heterosexual men and women who have sex.
Again, in an equal economy which puts men and women in competition with one another, it is not ok for either party to be at a social disadvantage which causes them to disproportionately be treated as patrons, without a say in the matter.

He made a decision when he decided to put sperm inside of her. What part of that don't you get?
Nope no imbalance at all both are responsible for the care of the child.
No competition at all.

You just keep making crap up.
You did have a say when you got her pregnant.

 

[ludin]

I'm saying they should both have a say and whether or not they become a parent. I believe in a woman's right to choose, but I don't believe that that choice should come with an automatic $100,000 payment from her sexual partner.

They did have a say.
You don't have to be a parent you don't have to see her or the kid ever.
However you don't get to dump your kid on the rest of society to take care of.

 

[Celebrity]

He made a decision when he decided to put sperm inside of her. What part of that don't you get?
Nope no imbalance at all both are responsible for the care of the child.
No competition at all.

You just keep making crap up.
You did have a say when you got her pregnant.

There is an imbalance, because women who abort are not responsible for the care of a child. What part of that don't you get?

Men and women compete in an equal opportunity economy, but a double standard exists for sexually active, heterosexual men and women.

 

[Northern Light]

Here we go again.

How are children provided for, if not by the people who created them?

Why should the rest of society foot the bill when the default responsibility for creation of children goes to the parents? There are plenty of countries where deadbeat parents get to shrug off responsibility. We don't need to theorize what happens to children in the absence of mandatory support systems... the experiential evidence exists everywhere in the world.

This debate is so redundant and goes in circles for no real reason. Children need to be cared for, they shouldn't be allowed to die of poverty and neglect. Any moral society knows that. I don't really care much for the "parental abortion" non-sense. Children take priority over that.

If there are flaws in the system of how payment and awards are figured out, then criticize those systems. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Our imperfect system is better than none. Take a stroll down the streets of Mumbai in India and you'll be thankful that our courts give a crap about the well-being of children.

 

[ludin]

There is an imbalance, because women who abort are not responsible for the care of a child. What part of that don't you get?

Men and women compete in an equal opportunity economy, but a double standard exists for sexually active, heterosexual men and women.

That is her choice. If there is a child then both people have the responsibility
To the child or at least a financial obligation.

Nope no double standard at all both people, have a choice.
If you decide to put sperm in her vagina then you agree to whatever
Happens next. If you don't understand you should probably avoid this activity.

 

[Celebrity]

That is her choice.

Nope no double standard at all both people, have a choice.

When women have a choice that men do not have, and when that choice results in a financial cost, and that financial cost is disproportionately attributed to men, that is a double standard.

Men do not have a say in the matter of pregnancy, they do not control what happens inside a womb, and child support is an artificial social policy which attempts to remedy that in such a way that the state is not responsible for the birth of new people.

The purpose of this remedy is so the state does not have to budget in the upbringing of its citizens according to their welfare.

 

[ludin]

When women have a choice that men do not have, and when that choice results in a financial cost, and that financial cost is disproportionately attributed to men, that is a double standard.

Men do not have a say in the matter of pregnancy, they do not control what happens inside a womb, and child support is an artificial social policy which attempts to remedy that in such a way that the state is not responsible for the birth of new people.

The purpose of this remedy is so the state does not have to budget in the upbringing of its citizens according to their welfare.

Did you choose to sleep with her or not?
Is that a choice?

Did you decided to cover it up or not?
Is that a choice?

You have plenty of choices your failure or you choice to go that route is. NO ones fault but yours.
Don't like it to bad get over it.

You don't get to dump a child on the rest of society to take care of.

You control what goes inside her womb ol yes you do.
Why should the state be responsible for you?

No the purpose is to make the people responsible for the child responsible for the child.

 

[Celebrity]

Here we go again.

How are children provided for, if not by the people who created them?

How are children provided for, if not by the people who voluntarily provide for them? The answer is: they are provided for involuntarily, by a state which is oppressive of men. One parent is better than none, two parents are better than one, etc. Providers of involuntary servitude to a state which mandates service in the name of children do not parents make.

Why should the rest of society foot the bill when the default responsibility for creation of children goes to the parents? There are plenty of countries where deadbeat parents get to shrug off responsibility. We don't need to theorize what happens to children in the absence of mandatory support systems... the experiential evidence exists everywhere in the world.

Here's why: when you can come up with a better idea, let us know. Until then, coercion and forced service on a particular class of society is not an acceptable option. American courts should not discriminate against heterosexual men.

If there are flaws in the system of how payment and awards are figured out, then criticize those systems. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Our imperfect system is better than none. Take a stroll down the streets of Mumbai in India and you'll be thankful that our courts give a crap about the well-being of children.

The situation in India is different. You are comparing apples to oranges in an attempt to justify an artificial policy. I'm sure that the people who held contracts on indentured servants did the same thing when they justified their actions by imagining the savage world their poor servants would have to face without jobs. Can't make it in India? Come on over to America, where you can hear the sweet sounds of the smallest violin in the world playing a sad melody as you get paid dirt, but enough for us to say it's better than nothing.

Abject poverty does not justify an absence of public accountability for social welfare. This is not a matter of "you break it, you bought it" with women's hymens. If this was really about the children, the childcare would be bought and paid for, the prenatal care would be bought and paid for as well. This is a financial matter, and the government privately exploits men for resources to funnel into social welfare.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

So it's OK to shame men for having sex? Huh? Any person who is pro-choice and makes this type of argument is a hypocrite.

For clarity - I would like to state that I only support abortion in the first trimester. After a certain point you HAVE made a decision to have said child and cannot just up and decide you no longer want to care for it. (With health issues being a

The only time I feel it's justifiable to 'bail' on your child is if you cannot support them adequately (and by 'bail' I mean annulling your parental rights / giving child up for adoption - things like this. either planned before the child is born, or very shortly after).

So I don't support a mother being able to just walk away ... just like I don't support the father being able to just walk away. The non custodial parent should pay child support, man or woman.

Decision making time was A LONG time ago. The born baby is now the top priority.

People can try to diminish that to some silly compare and contrast with slavery and whatever . . . but that's just being trite at that point.

 

[Celebrity]

Did you choose to sleep with her or not?
Is that a choice?

Did you decided to cover it up or not?
Is that a choice?

You have plenty of choices your failure or you choice to go that route is. NO ones fault but yours.
Don't like it to bad get over it.

Regardless of choices made before sex, the law discriminates against men who are sexually active. The trivial case in which men are celibate is not a matter of debate. No one is arguing that celibate men don't reproduce. The question is: why is it necessary to exploit men according to how accurately they can be legally identified? Sperm donors do not owe child support. That's because this is not about children, this is about funding social welfare according to the desires of people in the government. Follow the money. Who makes the decisions about how much is paid, who pays, when they pay it, and how they pay it? No one, but the government. Once your information is in their hands, you can kiss your privacy and autonomy goodbye. The state is taking advantage of men for public benefit.

You don't get to dump a child on the rest of society to take care of.

So, society gets to target a class of individuals according to their gender, upon which the cost of child rearing is applied without negotiation? Don't tread on me.

You control what goes inside her womb ol yes you do.

False, sexual activity and reproduction are not the same. Men do not control wombs, only women do.

Decision making time was A LONG time ago. The born baby is now the top priority.

People can try to diminish that to some silly compare and contrast with slavery and whatever . . . but that's just being trite at that point.

Would you agree that forced abortions are acceptable? What about forced birthing? Should women be forced to accept men's bodies and men's choices?

 

[Henrin]

Which you have been completely opposed to.

I'm not opposed to abortion being legal. I'm opposed to women practicing it in most cases though.

Natural versus artificial is a moot argument, I don't want to live in nature, I want to live in a society. societies have rules. sorry you can't live with that

So according to you it's perfectly logical to compare natural and artificial consequences as if they are equal?

 

[Henrin]

I see you can't deal with the argument but then again you haven't been able to deal
With it so far.

All you have been saying is that men are responsible over and over and over again.

 

[iguanaman]

Yes, but those are natural consequences and the law allows her to get out of them if she wants.

Actually it is not laws at all. Women have been choosing when to bear a child since time began laws not withstanding. It is their body that is being invaded and their choice goes without saying. All you are asking for is to create a market for illegal and often dangerous abortions. It is inhumane beyond words.