|
I get that the way child support is set up is totally backwards and punitive, but I don't see how that translates to "you don't get to be a father anymore if I say so" Again, abortion has a few crucial differences
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
Danger posted:Is this for real? I'm not familiar with the prior conversation. That kid deserves child support you doofus. Just like if the roles were reversed. No, there is no such thing as "just like if the roles were reversed", because only one of them is carrying a fetus to term, or deciding not to, in both cases processes with potentially risky medical consequences. If the potential mother decides early in the pregnancy that she wants to give up the baby if/when it's born, and then at month 8 the father digs his heels in, she no longer has the choice to abort. He, meanwhile, at no point was carrying a fetus, with all that entails.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Biology is unfair. Her body, her choice. Right and if she wants to choose to give the baby up to a loving adopting home by going through the struggles and dangers of bearing a child then it's her body and that should be her choice. Whatever we've gone through this before I'm not gonna argue it again. We're not talking about a 4 year old, a healthy newborn is the holy grail of adoption and the baby would absolutely not be the one suffering if this was how the law worked. There's no slippery slope here. ArbitraryC fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Jul 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
It's like an MRA strawman come to life
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
Pull up, thread! Me [24 F] with my boyfriend [32M] of 3 years, he explains simple poo poo to me and it's driving me bonkers quote:Throwaway because. A few details have been fudged for anonymity's sake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:It's like an MRA strawman come to life Yeah, because you can't read. I didn't say he should unilaterally be denied paternity, I said that if he wants the baby he should be able to have it without putting a burden of parental duties on her. First dibs on adoption or whatever. Because the biological situation is inherently lopsided, that doesn't translate if roles are reversed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Yeah, because you can't read. I didn't say he should unilaterally be denied paternity, I said that if he wants the baby he should be able to have it without putting a burden of parental duties on her. First dibs on adoption or whatever. Because the biological situation is inherently lopsided, that doesn't translate if roles are reversed. Problem is, if he ever needs financial assistance he may have to ask for child support. Like it's not as simple as "just don't ask" a lot of the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:Pull up, thread! Mansplaining.txt, aggravated further by the age gap.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:Pull up, thread! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
I feel like if we just called backseat driving the whole concept of the frustration of someone telling you poo poo you already understand would be a lot less political.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Yeah, because you can't read. I didn't say he should unilaterally be denied paternity, I said that if he wants the baby he should be able to have it without putting a burden of parental duties on her. First dibs on adoption or whatever. Because the biological situation is inherently lopsided, that doesn't translate if roles are reversed. I don't think that's the issue people were having; It's about the function of child support itself. Child support is to care for the kid. If the mother decided to keep the child herself while the dad wanted nothing to do with it, the dad still has a duty of support if needed. Neither mom nor dad need to take any part in raising the kid, but the kid deserves the financial support of possible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Nowhere can you legally force a woman to take a baby to term. How sure are you about this?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Right and if she wants to choose to give the baby up to a loving adopting home by going through the struggles and dangers of bearing a child then it's her body and that should be her choice. At the point the child is born it no longer matters who incubated it and the point of child support isn't to compensate mothers for carrying children to birth, it's to support the child. Mom has to pay child support if she doesn't want to raise the child and doesn't get to unilaterally adopt out the kid to avoid that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:How sure are you about this? if he's talking about the US, then he's right (in theory, anyway)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Danger posted:I don't think that's the issue people were having; It's about the function of child support itself. Child support is to care for the kid. If the mother decided to keep the child herself while the dad wanted nothing to do with it, the dad still has a duty of support if needed. Neither mom nor dad need to take any part in raising the kid, but the kid deserves the financial support of possible. Then why are parents allowed to give a child up for adoption without being required to then pay child support? Warbadger posted:At the point the child is born it no longer matters who incubated it and the point of child support isn't to compensate mothers for carrying children to birth, it's to support the child. Mom has to pay child support if she doesn't want to raise the child and doesn't get to unilaterally adopt out the kid to avoid that. Why not? Why are parents allowed to do this bilaterally, where one of them gets this right just out of his having provided some semen ~9 months prior?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
My GF and all her friends/family [26 F] thinks I[28M] am weirdquote:A bit of a background. I have never had a gf before my current relationship. I am a prototypical nerd and I am currently a Grad Student just about to get my PhD. I met my girlfriend while she was an undergraduate and when I just joined grad school. We don't have much in common in terms of interests/occupations either. I am a Computer Science student while she was in graphic design. quote:EDIT - I had a long convo with my girlfriend yesterday. I confronted her with the issue. She was apologetic about the talking about me behind my back. Then I asked her why she did that, she explained that she was getting frustrated not being able to "mold" me into who I am. I was very sad about this. I am by no way the most charming lover but I tried hard to do little things to please her. So I explained to her there is only a limit she could change me and after nearly 5 years it's unlikely going to happen. So yeah bottom line is we broke up. I wanted to shout or scream why she didn't tell me this before but I couldn't. That's not my style. It hasn't still me yet I guess. I'm trying to look at the bright side of things but it's really hard. I kinda hated the time before I was dating her. But I am really close to my dissertation. I am most likely going to be in the west coast this time next year (I'm in Pittsburgh now). So there's a tiny bit of me that's looking forward to embracing the change as well. Today, I met one of my oldest friends after like 2 years(we planned on meeting for the last 9 months). We hung out a bit and I'll be going to grab some beers with him in half an hour. I also got confirmation that I'll be travelling to Montreal later this year. So I'm just trying to take my head away from thinking about the situation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Then why are parents allowed to give a child up for adoption without being required to then pay child support? Exactly. Parents can choose to give the child up for adoption. One does not have unilateral say once the kid is born.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
Danger posted:I don't think that's the issue people were having; It's about the function of child support itself. Child support is to care for the kid. If the mother decided to keep the child herself while the dad wanted nothing to do with it, the dad still has a duty of support if needed. Neither mom nor dad need to take any part in raising the kid, but the kid deserves the financial support of possible. Setting this as a complete aside from the other part of the argument this system sucks terribly as is. I'm generally an advocate of a dude's ability to just peace out of a pregnancy and it's not because of men's rights or anything it's because I grew up under and have known plenty of single moms that have so much of their time, energy, and resources tied up in courts fighting over child support rather than just getting money from the state. Perhaps the worst example I know of this is an ex-girlfriend's sister who cares the world about her son but her dad is a deadbeat on disability and spends pretty much all of his free time (which is plentiful as he doesn't work) making her life a living hell via lawyers. he's constantly late on payments while spending thousands of dollars constantly fighting over custody he doesn't even want (the kid is old enough to talk about how he neglects him whenever he's forced to trade off during the summer or w/e). If it's about the child's needs then the child needs a consistent home and income and I'd be happy to pay extra in taxes to provide it rather than a dumb system that turns into an expensive slapfight over who owes what.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
I can't imagine the poor hell a child would go through where the parents determine what kind of sorry they'll provide based on what's "fair" to them rather than what's best for the child.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:My GF and all her friends/family [26 F] thinks I[28M] am weird Mid 20's you have to graduate to Digimon otherwise women will think you're too childish, everyone knows this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:31
|
|
Cat Army
|
Danger posted:Exactly. Parents can choose to give the child up for adoption. One does not have unilateral say once the kid is born.  Stop saying "one" as if they're interchangeable. Only one of them carries the fetus who becomes the kid. Ride The Gravitron posted:I can't imagine the poor hell a child would go through where the parents determine what kind of sorry they'll provide based on what's "fair" to them rather than what's best for the child. Then force parents to pay child support when they give a child up for adoption. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Then why are parents allowed to give a child up for adoption without being required to then pay child support? Because both of your parents are your parents and the law recognizes this fact. Mom doesn't get this right just out of her having provided the egg and incubator for 9 months.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Dump the girlfriend; Pikachu will never make fun of you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Because both of your parents are your parents and the law recognizes this fact. Mom doesn't get this right just out of her having provided the egg and incubator for 9 months. Oh, right, "providing the incubator", as it is well-known the womb is a detachable thing that has no health consequences for the mother.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
This womb is your womb, this womb is my womb From the California to the New York island From the Redwood Forest, to the gulf stream waters This womb was made for you and me
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:If it's about the child's needs then the child needs a consistent home and income and I'd be happy to pay extra in taxes to provide it rather than a dumb system that turns into an expensive slapfight over who owes what. Yea, that's all well and good, but you know drat well that America ain't going to do anything like that anytime soon, we can't even get loving healthcare right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
The whole concept of child support is problematic. Why must a child rely on their parents for financial support? For the best interest of the child, child support should be provided by the state and financed by higher taxes on everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
doverhog posted:The whole concept of child support is problematic. Why must a child rely on their parents for financial support? For the best interest of the child, child support should be provided by the state and financed by higher taxes on everyone. That I do agree with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:
When the kid is born he or she has two parents who have equal custodial responsibilities. I'm sort of baffled this is even an argument. Is this really the new .99=1 debate or something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
doverhog posted:The whole concept of child support is problematic. Why must a child rely on their parents for financial support? For the best interest of the child, child support should be provided by the state and financed by higher taxes on everyone. Yea, this would be great and make the argument moot. But at the moment once a child is born neither parent gets to sign away the others rights.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
Danger posted:When the kid is born he or she has two parents who have equal custodial responsibilities. I'm sort of baffled this is even an argument. They only have one parent who carried them to term, though. I'm saying the current legal landscape is hosed up, leading to situations like earlier in the thread, when this dude forced his ex to sign over parental rights to him instead of giving it up for adoption, and then hit her up for child support.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Oh, right, "providing the incubator", as it is well-known the womb is a detachable thing that has no health consequences for the mother. Which is probably why mothers have abortion as an option while father don't. The womb also ceases to be a health factor w/r/t children right after they drop out of it - before which things like "adopt out the child" can't happen. Absurd Alhazred posted:They only have one parent who carried them to term, though. I'm saying the current legal landscape is hosed up, leading to situations like earlier in the thread, when this dude forced his ex to sign over parental rights to him instead of giving it up for adoption, and then hit her up for child support. You don't get child support for carrying a child to term. You also don't get sole parental rights for carrying a child to term. The person doesn't belong to you, it's your responsibility. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Jul 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Which is probably why mothers have abortion as an option while father don't. The womb also ceases to be a health factor w/r/t children right after they drop out of it - before which things like "adopt out the child" can't happen. LOL, yeah, mothers` bodies bounce back to normal the second they give birth. What the gently caress are you even arguing here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Which is probably why mothers have abortion as an option while father don't. The womb also ceases to be a health factor w/r/t children right after they drop out of it - before which things like "adopt out the child" can't happen. You say this as if there's not a reasonably strong faction in america campaigning against access to abortions and in many states they have mostly succeeded if not through outright outlawing it but through a series of of smaller laws that restrict access to basically everyone that can't afford to bulldoze through them with money. If there's one thing i've learned from these recent discussions it's just how insidious and frankly disgusting pro-life proponents are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:LOL, yeah, mothers` bodies bounce back to normal the second they give birth. What the gently caress are you even arguing here? Mostly that you're stupid and have a incredibly stupid argument that boils down to a common MRA strawman indicative of a vast misunderstanding of the purpose of child support and the legal role of parents. TLDR: It took two parents to create the child, neither parent owns the child, both are responsible for it. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Jul 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:They only have one parent who carried them to term, though. I'm saying the current legal landscape is hosed up, leading to situations like earlier in the thread, when this dude forced his ex to sign over parental rights to him instead of giving it up for adoption, and then hit her up for child support. Yeah and that's a hosed up situation but I think it's unfair to respond to every case of a parent not carrying an unborn child wanting to raise the kid instead of having the kid go out for adoption as doing that to control the other parent. I think part of the issue comes from pregnancy being framed as like, a gift from god, so wonderful, glowing from within. Obviously pregnancy is natural and also necessary to reproduction, but it is also a huge physical strain that can and will go wrong a lot of the time. And unfortunately sometimes even the medical profession falls into the trap of 'pregnancy is natural and everything will be fine', like with pre-eclampsia, where the commonly cited cure is give birth and everything will clear up, which is actually not true, the mother needs additional medical care after birth and if that's not given it can be fatal pretty fast. So... I dunno! The base problems here go deeper than parental rights and child support.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:LOL, yeah, mothers` bodies bounce back to normal the second they give birth. What the gently caress are you even arguing here? What the gently caress are you even arguing here? From the moment the child is born they have two parents with equal parental responsibilities. Is that not the case? ArbitraryC posted:Setting this as a complete aside from the other part of the argument this system sucks terribly as is. I'm generally an advocate of a dude's ability to just peace out of a pregnancy and it's not because of men's rights or anything it's because I grew up under and have known plenty of single moms that have so much of their time, energy, and resources tied up in courts fighting over child support rather than just getting money from the state. Perhaps the worst example I know of this is an ex-girlfriend's sister who cares the world about her son but her dad is a deadbeat on disability and spends pretty much all of his free time (which is plentiful as he doesn't work) making her life a living hell via lawyers. he's constantly late on payments while spending thousands of dollars constantly fighting over custody he doesn't even want (the kid is old enough to talk about how he neglects him whenever he's forced to trade off during the summer or w/e). This would be rad though
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:They only have one parent who carried them to term, though. I'm saying the current legal landscape is hosed up, leading to situations like earlier in the thread, when this dude forced his ex to sign over parental rights to him instead of giving it up for adoption, and then hit her up for child support. Maybe I'm not familiar with the story, but it sounds like that dude didn't want to give up his parental rights? Did he force her to get be up hers? I'm pretty sure that's not legal and exactly what we are talking about shouldn't be if it is. The woman has control over her own body and the dude shouldn't have any kind of absolute say in whether she decides to carry the baby, but when the kid is born it has a dad and a mom and neither has like a controlling stake. I know capitalism is pretty much cynical to its core but that kid isn't property.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Mostly that you're stupid and have a incredibly stupid argument that boils down to a common MRA strawman indicative of a vast misunderstanding of the purpose of child support and the legal role of parents.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:24 |
|
|
That said if the concern is parental fairness getting first dibs on adoption would probably be the way to go, and then you get into the whole debate of like, maybe there should be a baseline of care for infants and children that the state helps provide, because otherwise it's really easy to say that poors just shouldn't have children because they can't responsibly care for them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 21:48
|
|