Welcome to Gaia! ::

I believe that if the father wants to be apart of the child's life, then he has to pay something depending on how much he makes, even if it is only $100 a month, BUT this money does not go directly to the mother. I want this money to go into some kind of fund, such as an education fund for the kid to use when he or she reaches 18.

I've seen too much of the money my father pays on child support for me go towards my mother's wants and not my needs. Then I am the one who gets to deal with my mother who comes home with a new coach purse and stand her wrath when I ask for lunch money for the week.
I know a fair number of people who are in my position.

Just because the lady gave birth to you and she's your mother doesn't mean she's an honest and respectable person. That child support money is like a free extra pay check at the end of the week/month for some people.

On a second note, if he does not want to be in the kid's life, he needs to sign a little wavier or something and that be the end of it, no child support.

"But what about the kid & mother!?!"

Aha!
I want the damn govt. to step in an offer her money. ******** tax breaks do not put food on the dinner table. All mothers regardless of their relationship status should be offered some type of finical aid for their kid. Not only that but free child care, medical care for the kid etc.
Basically a socialized health care system for those under 18.

Oh and don't say that we don't have the money,

WHEN we've dropped THOUSANDS of million dollar BOMBS on iraq & Afghanistan.

Children don't have a say into which home they are born or who are their parents and they can't do very much to alleviate their position. They're innocents. Why make them victims? [/rant]

Daddy Dearest decided five years after I was born that he didn't want to be a father.

I fail to see why he should get out of paying child support because he decided that I was just a toy to be thrown away after I got boring, and that my mother was just a ten-year stand that he didn't have to call again. The exact same applies.

Sorry if I seem just a little hostile. I really hate my dad.

agreed.

I don't think anyone's saying that a man who's played father for five years should be able to just walk away because they don't feel like playing daddy anymore and not help (at least financially) raise the child.

I believe the main idea is that a man should have the right to say he doesn't want to be a father when the woman is pregnant and not be forced to pay Child Support for 18 years for a child he never wanted.

I think that's fair. I mean, we get the chance to stop an unwanted pregnancy but they can't. From the moment of conception they are legally held to that fetus 'till the day it hits 18.

It just doesn't seem right to me that they don't have a say on if they want to be a father or not.

I'm not sure really where I stand on this. There are cases such as one where I had a customer come through my line who had a grandaughter that had a heart condition, she's only 8 years of age and has never left the hospital since, she's gone through several pace makers and blood transfusions. Her mother works as much as she can but cannot pay the $50,000 a month hospital bill. The bio-father has the money to pay for the child's needs, but has not been paying his part of the child support because he didn't expect her the live that long. I believe from what the grandmother has said that they were once married (the mom and dad that is). This is a case where I believe the dad has to pay no matter what especially when there is a major medical problem with the child.

There is another circumstance where I have seen the the dad shouldn't be paying child support and shouldn't see the kid period. Many times the child support can be used as leverage in court as a way to spend time with the child. I've seen a majority of more fathers than mothers who are not fit to be around children they have created. I have seen many family friends where this has happened, where the father spends too much time with the child and they corrupt the child. It's cases like these where I believe that the father has no place in even paying the child support.

I may remind you it isn't always that the woman wants to keep the baby and that she really wants to abort it. Many times the same man who wants to get out of paying child support who has threatened the life of the mother if she aborts or gives the child up for adoption.

In whole, I am on the fence in this one, leaning one way or the other depending on the circumstances. But I believe is the father doesn't want to pay for their child, then the government needs to help those women rather than taking away these children because of poverty that the government could have stopped. Many states actually do have child support cards, the problem is they are debit cards that you can get what you want. I've seen these cards abused by women and men buying paintball guns, make-up, hair products, contraceptives, and other items not specially for the well being of the child. Perhaps less men and women would be against paying child support if there were more restrictions about how the money is spent. Such as setting them up like some food stamp cards to allow and not allow certain items. And if they want to buy something like a toy or movie ticket for the child, they need approval first.

I've often had this same discussion with people, and from a personal experience, this is what I think should be done.

A man should have every control over his life that a woman does. If he does not want to be a father, why force him? Just like we pro choicers often say to pro lifers, we deserve the right not to put ourselves (and possibly a child) through psychological stress. As does a man. If a woman want to have a child, GREAT, but she should only do so if she's really prepared to take care of a child on her own. I consider myself an equalist, and any woman, with enough determination, can take care of a child just find on her own. Sure, if the father wants involved, good for him, but in the end, if he is opposed it is the womans decision to keep that baby, and she should be the only one responsible for it.

I think if the father pays a fee equivilant to the going rate of an abortion in his area and signs away his paternal rights, then hell yeah, leave him be. Heck, even give the money he pays to the mother so she can use it to help pay for medical costs through the pregnancy or for supplies for the baby.

I've just seen too many men whose girlfriends lied and told them they're on the pill and aren't because they want to get pregnant and trap the man in their life. Granted, he should have been a little more careful, but you really can't say thats all his fault that she was conniving and decietful. Or girls who pop holes in condoms or whatever else. Its sad, but it really does happen. What about those poor guys? Not their fault. Not their responsibility.

No, it's not equal, and no, it's not always fair. There are an alarming number of women who use pregnancies to trap men as well. It's not fair that a couple who made it clear they didn't want children, can have an accident, and then all of the sudden the mother changes their mind and the father is stuck paying for a kid he didn't even know was a possibility. It's crap.

But that swings both ways as well. My daughter's father talked at length about how he wanted children (with me) someday, and when I got pregnant, he was happy and excited and vowed up and down to stand by me and help me with our new family. Well, 3+ years later, me and my daughter haven't seen him since she was 6 months old, and the only financial assistance he's provided consists of one cannister of formula. That's crap too.



Ideally, there could be a pre-intimacy contract deciding who's responsible for what before there's even a chance of a problem. Or even better, people could be honest with each other and follow through with promises. But life ain't so simple...and so the best solution anyone can come up with is what we've got. And it's greatly flawed...but what else can we do?