Sadly, I think there would be takers. Think of the number of women who go on to create more babies with child support deadbeats. Besides, there is no way for it to be legally enforceable, IMO. Same way with surrogate agreements including clauses requiring the surrogate to abort in the case of severe fetal abnormality. Unenforceable. Even birth mothers who intend to adopt out can’t legally sever their parental rights and obligations until birth.
If you are making the point that somebody can divest a father of their parental rights by completely disappearing and making extrajurisdictional flight, I wouldn’t exactly consider that the “easy” route, but I’m not arguing that. I was responding to a poster who said that a mother can simply give any child up for adoption or drop it off at any local fire station and a father has no recourse, none whatsoever, and there is nothing the father can do under any circumstances. That’s just not the case - even if it’s arguably “easy,” it’s not that easy.
That’s not at all what I said, though. I said that in a termination proceeding unknown parents are generally required to be represented by an attorney ad litem paid by the parties to protect the absent parent’s interests by making a duly diligent effort at finding and notifying the birth father, or at least there must be a showing that one of the parties has made an honest good faith effort to do so, even if it’s just some attorney being paid $100 to check the paternity registry and swear out an affidavit saying “yup, can’t find him.” If the father is known or if someone intervenes in an adoption alleging that they’re the father, then no, that person doed not get a free lawyer. If no law in your jurisdiction compels that anyone make any effort at all to notify the birth father in a termination proceeding, then I’ll agree that’s that’s messed up, but I’ll be surprised if there’s a jurisdiction that doesn’t require some minimum effort.
That’s pretty much exactly what I was saying, or was trying to. A father can protect his parent rights, but it takes positive action on his part, like being aware of paternity registries and termination proceedings. In my jurisdiction a birth father answering and appearing will indeed torpedo termination and adoption proceeding absent grounds for termination; a mother here can’t simply tell the court “yes, he’s the father, but I want to put the baby up for adoption anyway so please don’t listen to him.” I understand if the law elsewhere says a father is out of luck if he misses a deadline for filing on a paternity registry and that stinks, but again, my point is only that fathers are completely not completely without recourse to contest a termination, even if the current situation could be improved…and yes, I agree that some fathers in Utah are royally getting the shaft, but that doesn’t mean every father everywhere is powerless.
You know you are kind of ridiculous. We want more people in North America. That’s why we have pretty open immigration policies that have limited skills requirements. It’s silly for you to be so against funding bastard children.
Yeah, I know it wouldn’t work. But I still like all the twisting and back peddling people do when you suggest that the tell women before, rather than after, that they are the type to abandon their kids.
Yep, that’s exactly it. Just riding the ol’ gravy train.
If you can not be bothered to read any of the links I provided, this discussion is truly pointless. No, it is not just the mother making an extrajurisdictional flight (which is quite easy as the adoption agency and prospective adoptive parents will pick up the tab). It is the location of the adoption agency, the state where the adoption proceedings are initiated, where the putative father registers, etc. Adoptions commonly occur over state lines. Adoptive parents are usually so eager, they are willing to fly to Russia, China, South American, etc, they will easily fly within the states in order to secure the infant – even though proceedings are initiated somewhere else. This was the case in the VA cased I linked to.
I find it highly unlikely ad litems are used in these types of adoption proceedings because the unwed fathers rights are not terminated in their separate own proceeding, as unwed fathers do not generally have any parental rights to begin with.
The termination of parental rights of known fathers whose rights were secured via marriage, child support, custody decree or other proof of familial relationship to the child may involve an ad litem, but these are totally different types of contested adoptions. Like when a step-parent is attempting to adopt a step-kid with a known biological father out there, adoption of foster kids, kids in the child welfare system, or grandparents/aunts/uncles or other familial relation are competing/contesting for adoption rights. Or when the sole parent dies, is incarcerated, or otherwise incapacitated and no immediate family relation is available to assume guardianship.
Generally, just being named on a birth certificate doesn’t even compel notification of the father (outside of Indiana).
The court does not need to check the putative father registry, nor the adoption agency in order to proceed with the adoption. There is no law that compels them. *Being registered as a putative father just compels the court to notify you of adoption proceedings – it does not confer parental rights. *
Are you channeling Rush Limbaugh or something?
As I said, I’m not arguing that.
Yes, that’s right, not until they establish them. There is a presumption of paternity with children born in wedlock, and no such presumption outside of wedlock. That’s why paternity registies exist. They don’t confer parental rights; that takes a court order. They only provide a mechanism to give people claiming parental rights to notification of proceedings. In spite of the fact that nobody is a legally recognized father yet, the law generally requires that due diligence be taken to find an unknown father. Just to pick a state at random:
That is literally the entire purpose of having a paternity registry, to provide notice to those alleging paternity prior to the finalization of an adoption.
Yes! Yes! A thousand times yes! It notifies the person who has alleged that they are the father of the proceedings! It does not confer parental rights! Only the court confers parental rights! You can’t make yourself a father just by filing a form with the state! You have to prove it! He still has to show up and contest it!
No, I’ve never willingly listened to him in my life. Nor is pointing out the well known bias of the courts on such issues as child custody even a right wing issue. The Left tries to portray it as somehow All Mens’ Fault, but outside of that most people along the political spectrum admit it exists whomever they blame for it.
That whopping $400 a month or so a month. Unless the non custodial parent is below the poverty line, then you’re riding high on $125 a month. Think of all the shit I can buy with that while feeding my bastard loaves of bread or whatever was decided on earlier in the thread. *C’mon. *
I could rent the spare room in my house and make a cool $500 a month, but I don’t do it because it would be a pain in the ass not worth the money. A kid would be a WAY bigger pain in the ass than renting out the guest room and, statistically, a shittier payout to boot. Unlike renting the room out, the kid comes with all kinds of miserable unexpected costs, too.
And like I’ve been saying throughout this thread-- all of you folks whining that she can get an abortion, remember: abortion is quickly become a less viable (heh) option throughout large chunks of our country. I guess I’m just saying I wouldn’t bank on it as my birth control method, even if your partner loves aborting clumps of cells.
I don’t see how this would work. Getting 300 dollars a month in child support would mean not needing public assistance entirely? Do you mean that all an unemployed single parent gets a month for food, housing etc from the state is 300 dollars a month?
I know quite a few people paying child support for completely accidental children. I don’t think it’s that uncommon.
Opting out of parenting prior to conception is a terrible idea because people do often change their minds when it’s a real pregnancy rather than a theoretical one, and that applies to men as well as women. It also just wouldn’t happen very often; are people really going to put the brakes on a drunken hook-up using protection that has a low rate of failure in order to sober up and go to an attorney? An unverified and/or inebriated contract is worthless.
My daughter was conceived by a condom apparently breaking. I don’t even remember it breaking (and I was sober) - he told me afterwards when I told him I was pregnant. I was also taking the pill, but had only been back on it for a week, so I discount it, and it was the day after my period. The condom broke on us both, not just him. I’ve never actually pursued him for child support, though I’m considering it now.
He would have had the easy parenting you mention. Seeing the kid now and then, paying minimal support, getting lots of kudos for being a great Dad just for taking his kid out for the day once a month, or more if he wanted it. All the fun parts of parenting with little of the downsides. But he chose not to.
All that said, of course I also support men having parental rights particularly wrt adoptions and would support any change in laws that made that easier. That’s not incompatible with thinking men should pay child support even if the child was unintended. I’m really not sure why they appear to be so separate in this thread.
An aside: in the UK you have to have the father there with you when you register the birth if you’re unmarried. Seems odd to me that in at least some US states you can just name someone the legal father without their consent. Are there hundreds of kids with, say, Elvis listed as their father on their birth certificate?
What? Did someone say you could do that? Because I don’t think that’s true. In my state the father has to sign an affidavit of paternity in the hospital, or it can be done through the courts later. If you’re not married I think the only way to do it without the father’s consent is with a DNA test (or if he refuses to take the test, he’ll be declared the father by default).
That handful of attractive, promiscuous men with a really good game would not be able to spread unwanted babies like wildlife, if women would not be so stupid as to continue gestating babies with no support system. As an aside, do you actually think the possiblity of paying child support is inhibits the behavior of men like that?
I had also gotten the impression from reading through the thread that, at least in some states, you could just name the father and get him on the birth certificate. I know that’s not the case here in Oregon, as I was told that the father had to be present at the birth and sign something agreeing that he was the father. If that doesn’t happen, a voluntary affidavit is required from the dad. Or the mother could could go through the courts to prove his is the father and get his name on that way.
I think ultimately the child loses in all these babymomma/babydaddy spats. You may not want children, but everytime you have sex you run that risk. Yeah, the woman may/may not get an abortion and the guy has no say in it but that’s life. Ultimately I think the woman has far more at stake than the man- a lot of guys here are paranoid about being on the hook for child support, but given the number of guys getting by for years without paying a dime in support the woman loses out in the end. There is also much less social pressure on the father vs the mother in regards to keeping the baby.
For these guys complaining that $300 is TOO MUCH, think about the woman with the baby. Getting an abortion isnt as simple as clicking your heels three times.
I’m fine with that too, but that’s of little difference when the result is still a child being uncared for. Look at the big picture, you’re basically saying its ok for parents to not support their kid given that they agree to it. So what’s the big deal if they agree to it afterwards? It will discourage some from sex, which I think is the real purpose, but for many it won’t. For them, it changes nothing. So might as well let them do it after a kid is conceived too
Your argument sounds religious in nature, using parental payment as punishment for sex that wasn’t for the purpose of conception. “Responsbility” is just a code word for telling people they can’t have premarital sex, or sex that doesn’t result in a baby.
Like you said, life isn’t fair right? Limits on women are biological, but on men there really isn’t a limit. Going by your rationale above, we should accept that. Going by my rationale, we should still accept it because I think this way, its still more fair. The point isn’t how many children there could be had by one party, its how many times one can give up their parental rights. That is a legal, non-biological function that should be equalized, it just so happens men might take advantage of it more.
That won’t happen because you’re discounting the women’s consent. She has to agree to allow him to give up parental rights. At best, you’ll have a bunch of men who have to support some of their kids because they weren’t able to convince all of the women they sleep with to let them off the hook. A fair solution I think
It sounds so bad the way you put it. I would have said that if two parents can both agree to absolve one or the other of parental responsibility and child support, they are free to do so and the state will raise the child in orphanages or foster homes.
On this thread it was said that only one state even notifies a man if he’s listed as a father on a birth certificate. The discussion was about unmarried men. That would presumably mean he wasn’t aware of it. It’s also come up a few times in other threads on here.
There are two different issues. There is putting a man’s name on the forms used to complete the birth certificate, and then there is the man being the legal father. In some states ( and probably in more states in the past) , the first can be done without the father’s permission or even knowledge but that is not enough to make him the legal father.
And it certainly costs more than $300.
It’s funny, a few times where I’ve needed Plan B because of a broken condom or something, it was quite difficult to get the guys to pay for half (about $20). Not every time, but a few guys tried to convince me I didn’t really need it, blah blah blah. Upstanding, college educated, otherwise normal, “good” guys.
If I had that much trouble getting $20 out of dudes for half of the morning after pill, good luck getting $250 to $1000 for half of an abortion. Of course, that assumes 1: I live somewhere where I can actually get an abortion safely, legally, and easily and 2: I have the money to pay for that.