Bounced back to top!
Who’s your daddy?
Men’s rights activists in the US are to argue in court that fathers do not have an obligation to pay money towards raising a child they did not want. The National Center for Men is fighting the case on a behalf of a man who says his ex-girlfriend had his child after telling him she could not get pregnant.
Activists say men should have the same rights as women in dealing with the consequences of unintended pregnancy.
[Matt] Dubay says that his former girlfriend became pregnant with his child after assuring him she had a physical condition that prevented her from conceiving. He says she went on have the baby, despite knowing that he did not want to have a child with her.
He now wants the court to free him from his obligation to pay $500 (£287) in child support every month.
No comment
>>No one was holding a gun to his head forcing him to
>>have sex with her,
No, she just duped him into it, but (lying, giving false information, letting her imagination run wild, take your pick) about being infertile.
But in the end (as I have said about a million times, and as even those who disagree with me have commented), **SHE** is the one who has to carry the baby to term and go through labor. And if she became pregnant against the wishes of her duped sex partner, she should care for the baby (moth emotionally and financially) as well.
There are few enough things in this life that we are even ABLE to determine the outcome of. This one’s a slam dunk. I would think people would be all over that.
So you are saying the child should be punished for what the mother did? Gee lets go after the children of criminals while we are at it.
A couple of things. First off, the only “right” a woman has that the man doesn’t have, is abortion. That is the ONLY way she can avoid the long term consequences of her actions. The abandon-the-child issues border on the irrelevant, and once the state had custody, if the woman had the means, should pay for child support.
All other combinations are possible (if not probable) outcomes:
= the man raising the child
= the woman paying support
If the woman was rich, but the man raises the child, I’m sure child support would be ordered.
I never thought about it like that before but that makes total sense. I am against abortion but if abortion is legal then paying child support being optional kind of makes sense. If he didn’t want then child then he didn’t want the child.
“The women gets off scott free”
Spoken like someone who never had to raise a child before.
Don’t want kids by this women? Then don’t have sex with her, stupid.
No birth control and no pronouncement by a doctor is 100%.
JoAnn
Steve, I know it must be tiring, but please keep repeating the truth. I think people today have hard time “getting it” because our society has been working for decades to provide choices and protections for women while at the same time marginalizing men and their rights. It’s so pervasive and has been the trend for so long that any action to reverse direction back toward fairness just short-circuits otherwise healthy brains.
When Rosa Parks kept her seat, it offended a lot of people. I’m not going to compare Matt Dubay to her, but his suit is having a similar effect on the public that her action did — it’s got people thinking and talking about an injustice. To right a wrong, you’ve got to start somewhere and somebody’s got to be the one to stand their ground.
“So you are saying the child should be punished for what the mother did?”
They already are aborted for what there parents did. This is just another progression of roe v. wade.
Steve, you are right it is wrong that a woman can escape her responsibility, but that does not mean we would advocate for a man to be able to do the same thing. 2 wrongs do not make a right. Also remember what is legal is not always right.
“I’ll say it again, a woman can legally escape responsibility. A man never can.
Do I have to say it again? ”
Say it again Steve…
We’re pretty dense when it comes into hearing just our own side…LOL
However, yes…men do not have much, if any, rights as women do when it comes to this…but it goes along the lines of the average man making more money in this country then the average woman…hence why the burden of financial responsibility always falls upon the man, even if he didn’t want the child.
Steve I think we agree there, we do need to put woman back on the hook when it comes to responsibilities.
“the average man making more money in this country then the average woman”
That set back women’s accomplishments back 50 years.
“That set back women’s accomplishments back 50 years.”
There is no equality in this country. Laws are the reflection of the society that makes them, not the other way around. As long as there’s someone that wants to be better then anyone else or be exempt from the “norm,” this is going to be the case.
In terms of women’s accomplishments…the skew between the wages of men and women have diminished over the last 50 years, where’s the set back? It just isn’t equal (yet).
“the average man making more money in this country then the average woman”
Off topic, but I must dispel this myth. The “76 cents on the dollar” myth has been debunked, yet we still read about it in the media because it makes great copy. It has actually been shown that for equal work, women actually tend to make more than men.
Women tend to make less money not due to discrmination based on gender, but because of choices women make. Men choose to work dirtier, more dangerous jobs, are more willing to travel, are more willing to work longer hours, and take less sick leave. Women make different choices, and their wages reflect it.
“Why Men Earn More” is a book that came out last year which studies this topic in detail.
As for both parents taking care of the child I agree regardless of how the child came to be. The part of these proceedings I disagree with is how the amounts of support to be paid are decided. The courts should come up with a flat rate per child. That would make men who have worked hard to gain finacial success less of a target for gold digging women. A 50% split between both parents of an assessed national cost. Perhaps, having both parents fund an account for the child monthly and each parent having to justify the money taken from this account. We all know mothers who live off child support and give their kids far less simply because they can. The courts don’t go far enough to ensure the best interest of the child – hell if they really cared they would monitor how much money is being spent on the child by both parents not just the Fathers. How much does it cost to raise a child today?
I’m as liberal as the day is long, but ya gotta support your kid…
“The part of these proceedings I disagree with is how the amounts of support to be paid are decided. The courts should come up with a flat rate per child. That would make men who have worked hard to gain finacial success less of a target for gold digging women.”
Yes, I agree…there should be a system that monitors how the money for child support is being spent. There are needs of a child that are and can easily be documented. But the truth of the matter is, it’s expensive and takes a lot of government resources to continually monitor on a case-by-case basis.
There are many women who believe they have no other options given that the law they follow concerning respect for life comes from a higher authority than the state.
Of course, those same women probably should be following the other edicts of the higher authority, namely the ones about keeping your legs together until you’re married.
>>Don’t want kids by this women? Then don’t have sex with her, stupid.
Don’t want to have a kid you may have to raise by yourself because the man said all along he didn’t want to have children? Then don’t have sex with him, stupid.
Nothing in the article leads one to believe that this was a case of a medical misdiagnosis or birth control failure. If the woman kinda, sorta, somewhat thought she wasn’t going to get pregnant, told the guy she was unable to conceive, then got pregnant, TFB. It’s HER body, HER choice, and HER responsibility.
Misdiagnoses, good-faith efforts at birth control, and virgin birth are a whole other ball of wax.
Forrest,
If the cost are prohibitive and the job can’t be done properly than they should not be making decissions that affect so many lives
“Of course, those same women probably should be following the other edicts of the higher authority, namely the ones about keeping your legs together until you’re married.”
There is a BIG difference between having sex and making a life or death decision about a life.
“If the cost are prohibitive and the job can’t be done properly than they should not be making decissions that affect so many lives”
I certainly understand this point of view, but at what costs to the child? Leave well enough alone simply doesn’t work, people complain and complain, trying to make the system better for those that actually need it to work requires changes and imposing upon lives. What would you suggest that works in the best interests of the child that does not impose on anyone?
I believe that the only way to serve the best interest of the child is to set up an account for the child or children. Each parent would contribute their pre determined half. Each parent would use this account to take care of the child. Each parent would be made to keep receipts of withdraws from said account. If either parent feels the alocated funds are being used improperly they would have the right to ask the court for an adjustment. If their is a shortage each parent will contribute their half. If an overage each parent would be reimbursted. Notably the need of the child change and so do the expenses. For example, Fathers often pay for health insurance which goes up over time. Mothers usually pay for day care which usually goes down over time. Mothers are usually the receipants of child support based on the time they have the child. No deductions are made for time in school when neither parent has the child and tax monet is supporting the school already. Private schools, just split the cost. Lets face it the ,”who has the kids for how much time system ” dosn’t work. Mothers are forever saying the amount of support is to low. Fathers are forever saying the costs are to high. This is the only way to ensure the children get what they need. Both parties are now accountable for the child. I find it hard to belive that in the computer age this could not be easily supervised. Take welfare for instance. The receipants of these benifets get a debit card which can be used for only certian things, no cigarretts or liquor. Such an approach would ensure that the child has the proper finacial suppor from both parents.
I’ll even go a step further and address custody. Usually the child goes between homes (Moms and Dads). I feel thet the child should stay in one home and the parents should come and go. That would give real stability to the child. What needs to be recognised is that the courts are a business. Sure they will give you a divorce or assist you with your custody but the reality is over 50% of Americians will go through some sort of child custody / child support action. Nobody is ever happy with the outcome espically the children. Fact is the courts do a very poor job of protecting the children. A Russian leader once said the downfall of America will be the decay of the family unit. As long as the courts keep favoring on side of the situation their will be more cases like this – it’s a business.
Well…it’s certainly an interesting idea Anthony.
I do not agree with the child being in one home and having the parents go back and forth between each other. That opens another can of worms between the father and mother…such as who decides what sort of living environment happens in this home for the child. Another thing is that then there will be 3 homes for this situation, one for the mother away from the child, one for the father away from the child, and one solely for the child. A lot of people can barely make it paying bills and affording to pay for the one place they live now, paying for another home (even half of it) just doesn’t make any economical sense in this situation, especially where this money can be better utilized for the child, i.e. education, food, clothes, etc.
My interest was piqued to see so many men who know so much about single mothers.
I was also amused the variety of arguements offered in order to concretely establish blame for conception. These are endless and pointless debates. The man HAS a choice at the onset.. Babies are conceived a myriad of ways. But let’s be truthful, shall we? MOST of the children in question are a result of irresponsibility on the behalf of BOTH parents. Remember BIO101? It is a biological obligation to have 1 man, 1 woman. It has always been this way. But why hasn’t the issue of child support been an issue until this generation? Do you believe that there is a new conspiracy to ruin mens lives? No, because people got married. They knew a child needed 2 parents. Any single parent who tells you they want to raise a kid on their own, or can do as good a job, IS LYING.
So, unmarried pregnant women conspire to : risk great physical harm by carrying and delivering a child, suffer the scorn and rejection of family, friends, potential future mates for their state, leave their previously independent lifestyles, permanently scar their bodies, pass up infinite professional and personal opportunties due to single parenthood, be unable to prepare financially or otherwise for the future as her colleagues, suffer long term finacial harm from late fees, interest and more debt from providing for a child alone, deal with the monumental responsibility of preapring a child for life without any backup, burden the community (taxpayers) by needing help to make up for what we cannot accomplish alone or clean up what our working 2 jobs has done to our kids….and on and on and on. So we conspire for all that sacrifice so that the child goes out on his own and we can die in relative poverty, risk our health from the stress, abandon all other personal fulfillment so we can do the most important job in the world ? ( or at least not produce another social servces recipient/felon)
What kind of movies do you guys watch? Do you read the National Inquirer ? Free loading? Getting off “scott free”? What the HELL are you talking about?
So here we have some small percentage of cases on which people are fixating to try to remove themselves but having to be responsible for their actions. Women not responsible? Honey, my responsibilty’s name is Jack. He is 8 years old. His Dad and I weren’t married and so he feels as if he has no responsibility. My WHOLE existence is about that responsibility. Since he was born I have earned my B.S, my M.Ed, built a house. I have no personal life. My car is dangerous. I have lost a few teeth from poverty. All our clothes are seconds. I am a professional and am in debt for the rest of my life. IF I received child supportI would not be “living off” it. I would be going to the dentist, buying clothes, getting a safer car, buying food for pities sake….oh did I mention I am a professional? raising a child is TOUGH with money and a partner. Imagine…no REALLY IMAGINE the lives of single parents.
So, in that blaming the responsibility of conception is pointless…why is it less the responsibility of one parent than the other? So if we illegalized abortion it would be fair? Men would happily pay child support? I hardly think so. Abortion is a horribly traumatic decision to make. It hurts like hell, physically and emotionally. But I hardly think if men were able to be pregnant, abortion would be illegal. That’s like white people sayling they totally understand black racism…maybe intellectually, emotionally but not REALLY.
So fellas…study some more cultural anthropology, go out and help some single parents of volunteer to be a Big Brother, spread condoms in public places…whatever. Just quit whining that …”It’s not fair!”, because even Jack knows that (our) life is not fair, but you still choose to do what is right over what is most convenient for you.
Forrest,
I hate to tell you this but your an adult and your needs should come second to the needs of the child. Many psychologists have said that it is in fact ,very good to have one home and one home only for the child.
This is the problem with most situations of this sort. Everybody forgets about the best interest of the child. So Forrest you feel that it would be better to have your child bounce back and forth between home instead of having one stable home. If your telling me how hard it would be on you think about having to adjust as a 6 year old or a teenager. Again money clouds the issue of whats in the best interest of the child.
Kathleen,
I can see that you have it tough. My respect to you for doing what you have done. Your case seems more of the extreem. I would say that the system has let Jack down more than anything. Somethings gotta change. Good luck
Kathleen, first congrats on getting your BS and M.Ed. I wish you the best of luck in the future. I will admit I am one of those that would like to see abortion illegal, but you will also notice, I was not talking about letting the “man” off the hook when it comes to responsibility. (also notice I put the word man in quotes because I don’t think he is a real man since he is running from his responsibilities)
women have a choice to have sex
men have a choice to have sex
women have a choice to end a pregnacy
men have no choice
just because a mother can whine about how hard being a parent is, doesn’t emlimnte the simple fact that this is a double standard.
Kathleen –
To answer all of your questions….YES!
There are plenty of women who are more than happy to sit home, get fat, watch TV and yell at kids all day. How many single women do you know who are pulling in child support from 3 or more men? I have known several. Assuming that every single mother is the victim of some evil man is bull. A woman can have all the irresponsible unprotected sex she likes and walk away scott free every time if she so chooses.
This is not about abortion. There are thousands of financialy stable couples in America waiting to adopt children and give them a wonderful home.
Women should be required to notify the father of a pregnancy whithin the first 3 months. The father should then have the chance to sign away his parental rights. The woman will then know exactly what she is getting herself into before she decides to have or keep her baby.
If prositiution is the worlds oldest profession, then “accidently” getting pregnant is the worlds oldest and fastest growing scam.
David –
insert “women get pregnant”
and “men don’t get pregnant”
in your list in 73 and it perhaps explains the “double standard.” Men and women have different roles to play in reproduction. the law reflects this difference.
the real shame is not that men have no say in continuing or terminating a pregnancy but that so many of them refuse to own up to their responsibility to help support their children.