Right, so it is totally like a Presidential election-- two options, both painful in their own way and you end up getting fucked in the end regardless of which you choose.
But seriously, whenever I hear men complaining about women trying to lure them into a lifetime of support with their dastardly vaginas, I wonder why these dudes aren’t getting vasectomies. If it was as easy for me to be sterilized as it is for men, I’d have done it ages ago.
Unless, the birth mother can be legally proven unfit there is really nothing the birth father can do even though he has the more stable environment. Less stable =/= unfit parent, necessarily. Right now they share custody on the bio-mom’s terms with my friends doing all the leg-work and transporting back and forth. Utah does not recognize bio-father’s parental rights equal with the mother’s since they were never married. If they had been married, I think the birth mother would have had to get permission to move out of state and he would have more say in custody. Utah may be strange in that by not marrying, the bio-dad has less standing than the bio-mother when it comes to parental rights and Utah’s antiquated “family values” laws is why a lot adoption agencies here are allowed to operate as nothing short of baby traffickers and unwed fathers have little to no parental rights because they should have married the mothers. :rolleyes:
My point, balancing ‘the best interest of the child’ when parental rights come into conflict is not always so clear cut. Let’s say a bio-mom wants to adopt out the kid, but bio-dad says no he wants the kid - should he be able to take guardianship of the kid and sue the bio-mom for child support? If she kept the kid, she would have the right to sue for child support, no? Or should the child be adopted out to a stable two parent family in the “child’s best interest” against the bio-dad’s (or bio-mom’s) wishes?
Las Vegas isn’t in Utah.
Abstain or use birth control. Condoms not comfy, snip it. Never have to worry over paying support again. What exactly is your problem with these simple and foolproof solutions?
Your point? Custody was initially set up in Utah (where the child was born and where both parents lived), thus Utah is the state that has jurisdiction despite the mom moving to Las Vegas.
Please see the The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJEA) enacted in 1997 to prevent parents from ‘forum shopping’ for jurisdictions that would favor them during custody issues.
In the case I was describing, the mother is not necessarily legally unfit, but the father can provide a more stable home. Should all child custody agreements be awarded based on who can provide the most stable home? What if the mother is poor and unmarried, but the father is married with more financial resources? Neither parent is necessarily unfit, but the father could likely provide a more stable home. Would it be fair to award him custody? Unwed fathers are typically only awarded physical custody if the mother is unfit, particularly of young children under 5.
Honestly, maybe there’s some MRA paranoia on the board, but as rabid feminist as I am, I still recognize shit mothers and laws the treat unwed fathers unfairly. Not every father is a deadbeat, nor is every mother automatically the ideal parent. If the mother is the non-ideal parent, laws are still more likely to lean in her favor as long as she is not deemed unfit. Refusing to recognize this doesn’t do anybody any good.
Just to clarify we’re talking about child support, not alimony. Spouses are free to waive their rights to alimony in prenuptial agreements or divorce settlements and have those clauses enforced by the courts. Of course even then the court can set that aside if one spouse would end up a public charge.
Call me old-fashioned, but I think a man consents to potential fatherhood (or at least consents to go along with whatever the woman decides) the moment he willingly ejaculates inside a vagina. If you don’t want to be a father either refrain from vaginal sex, use a condom (your own condom) or get a vasectomy.
An interesting idea would be that if a man gets a vasectomy, they are given documentation that protects them from unwanted child support in the event that the vasectomy fails (it can happen, rarely).
Then the state would step in to provide support in the rare cases where a vasectomy failed, the man didn’t want any relationship with the child, and the mother could not support the child alone.
I wouldn’t say it is necessarily “unfair” that the one and only option for a man to avoid child support is abstinence. But it is unfortunate, and an idea like this might be able to give them an option that allows sex but does not put much burden on the state.
I’m female and potentially fertile. When I don’t wish to conceive, I take precautions to guard against pregnancy. If I were certain I didn’t want children, or paranoid about condoms or contraception that my partner prefers, I’d abstain, seek permanent sterilization, or have a back up contraception plan. Why are men here asking for special favor or consideration? Why shouldn’t they follow the same steps we do to avoid pregnancy?
Actually, my idea works equally well for both men and women.
Anyone, man or woman, who undergoes sterilization would be deemed immune to child support. If a woman who was sterilized still had a child, they would be able to choose to let the father raise it and not have to pay child support.
Again, I’m not saying anything about fairness. I just think it is unfortunate that the one and only method to avoid paying child support is abstinence, even if you are 100% sure from the start that you never want a child. If we can create a better situation with minimal burden on the rest of us, it could be a good idea.
They aren’t. The present laws are notoriously biased against them, not fair.
And it’s amazing how much of the rhetoric from women in this thread sounds like some gender flipped version of a Republican ranting about how women who need abortions or child support are sluts, and they should just “keep their legs shut”.
As far as I know abortion is 100 percent effective. And the womans choice. Other methods not so much.
I’m not a guy, but there’s on one thing I can picture that would be deemed fair by fathers and mothers: if a new insurance industry was created to cover fathers against accidental pregnancies. Pay a monthly premium like your car insurance, and be covered against a completely different sort of accident, and the insurance company pays out a monthly support payment for you.
Of course, I doubt you could keep your coverage if you had more than a couple “accidents,” so that’d be an incentive for guys not to tell their partners ‘don’t worry I’m covered’ and expect to have as much unprotected sex as they like on the insurance company’s dime.
That would be a pretty awesome deal for couples who are planning a baby.
If I don’t agree to have a kid with you - said agreement normally being indicated by marriage - don’t have my fucking kid.
I didn’t ask you for a fucking kid.
Why do you feel entitled to sex with zero risk or repercussions?
:dubious: Because that’s an obvious thing to want? Why would someone want sex or anything else to not have “zero risk and repercussions”? Should they avoid wearing condoms to increase the risk?
This is a pretty basic example of rational self interest here.
What’s next, a tantrum? I don’t care if you want sex; sex exists to propagate the species. Are you under the impression that sex serves to entertain men?
You aren’t entitled to sex without repercussions, and neither are women. No one is owed sex. You also are not entitled to make decisions about another’s body or health. You have exactly the same option that women do to permanently avoid parenthood: sterilization. You also have barrier methods and abstinence. No one can steal your sperm; you must put it in or on a fertile woman willingly. When you do so without taking precautions, you assume risk.
She said “feel entitled to”, not “want”.
Who is stopping you from having an abortion? Certainly not me. You are quite welcome to undergo any medical procedure on your own body that you see fit. However, you may not make that decision for another.
That’s not true. It can be recovered from a condom, or the male can be raped. The difference being that the victim will owe his rapist child support if she gets pregnant.