# Should an unwanting father pay child support? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 2, 2008, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716 "2008-11-02T13:50:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/41 "2008-11-03T00:21:42Z")
> [@CutterJohn](#): > > The disparity of choice strikes me as completely unfair, with the woman calling all the shots, and the man having absolutely zero choice, once the act has been completed. It’s fair to a child, though, which is the most important issue. Once born, the child has a moral and legal right to parental support. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/42 "2008-11-03T00:23:44Z")
> [@treis](#): > > The OP is 100% right. Men get absolutely hosed in the family courts in this country. Imagine the following scenario, a women who is unable to breast feed (simply to remove the biology argument) and a man have a one night stand, and end up with a baby. They are both employed, stable, no criminal history, etc. In short, they are both ideal parents. What do you think the chance of the man getting full custody of that child is? Absolutely zero. The OP is about whether men should have the right to sire a child and then just walk away, with no further obligations whatsoever. This topic has come up here in GD a LOT, every couple of months it seems, and there are always plenty of men who jump in to say that they do indeed believe that they should have the right to totally abandon any children they don’t want. I wonder if maybe, just maybe, this sort of attitude might contribute to a certain judicial reluctance to grant men full custody of their children? I don’t think that decent, responsible fathers should be judged based on the behavior of deadbeats, but I really cannot understand complaining both that men cannot more easily gain custody of their children AND that they cannot more easily abandon all responsibility for their children. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/43 "2008-11-03T00:49:03Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > It’s fair to a child, though, which is the most important issue. Once born, the child has a moral and legal right to parental support. That’s the problem with these debates. It starts out as “woman’s body, her choice.” You point out some inequalities then the fallback is “think of the child!” Which is it? The woman’s body, or the child? Well, who was it that brought the child into the world? It was the woman’s body. The woman’s rights over which, society considers sacrosanct. When we protect women’s bodies we end up with kids to pay for. Who should pay? The willing parents, or, the society that believes in a women’s right to control life. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/44 "2008-11-03T00:58:05Z")
> [@CutterJohn](#): > > What are peoples opinions of safe haven laws like Nevada has, for dropping off unwanted children to be raised in foster homes? > > Or a single mom(or dad.. i suppose its happened) putting a child up for adoption. Sounds fine. Sometimes that’s the better choice for the child as well. > [@](#): > > A single mother has ample opportunity to absolve herself of responsibility.. She can, at any point, decide that she no longer wants to have it. She can keep her legs shut. Use birth control. Get an abortion. Place the child up for adoption at any point after its born. At any point? > [@](#): > > The guys _only_ choice is keeping his dick in his pants. I would add use protection, but even if he takes every reasonable precaution, and it fails, he’s still on the hook despite the fact that his use of a condom means he didn’t want a kid. > > The disparity of choice strikes me as completely unfair, with the woman calling all the shots, and the man having absolutely zero choice, once the act has been completed. Yes there’s a disparity of choice which is based on the disparity of real life biology. Women take precautions and still get pregnant as well. Then they have to deal with real life choices based on their morals, beliefs, and many other considerations. Abortion, adoption, a commitment to a child, aren’t casual choices for most people. If she keeps the child she has to accept the possibility that she may well be taking care of this child on her own. The man has moral choices to make as well. He can decide to be a part of the child’s life or not. He can decide to go for custody if she decides to put the child up for adoption. He can decide to pay a portion of support without being a part of the child’s life emotionally. IMO What he shouldn’t be able to do without repercussions , is decide he wants the fun of having sex while sharing none of the responsibility of what he knows is possible. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/45 "2008-11-03T01:02:18Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I’m not quite sure what this means. Of course we want both genders to be morally responsible, and it’s good to teach that but history shows us that children will be born out of wedlock and have needs. That costs us. If we raise another generation of boys who avoid their parental duties and another generation of girls who keep having babies society must support then it’s an issue we must address. I’m suggesting that “wanting both genders to be morally responsible” might cost us more than it benefits us. Our _concern_ is that women bear too much cost in raising children. Going after fathers is just _one way_ of dealing with that problem. I am 99% sure it is not a good way even though, after all, I desire that men should be responsible for their actions. > [@](#): > > What tax are you talking about and exactly how does it increase her cost of having the child? The increase in taxation that will have to pay for the system she may use to pursue a deadbeat dad. > [@](#): > > Please clarify. Aren’t enough children,…in the world, or what? There aren’t enough children in the world, yes. > [@](#): > > A child being born into the world has needs and that imposes a cost on someone. The question is who will be responsible and what do we as a society do about it? We agree on this point exactly. > [@](#): > > My “real life” comment was about men who avoid child support by skipping the state or working under the table, but then want to settle down and live a more traditional life. And my point is if there is a burden over their heads, it will change the point at which they will choose to do this, which does affect all of society. We’ve increased his cost of reentering society at a level which utilizes his abilities best. > [@](#): > > Society is asking fathers to contribute by paying their share of the financial burden of having a child. If they actively avoid paying it is they who are placing an additional burden on society not the child or the Mom. If they want to contribute they can do so by being a responsible adult. More people are a benefit, not a cost. More people are good for a country. Maybe some day in the distant future we will have population growth that strains our resources, but we’re nowhere near that level and there is a possibility that it will never happen because more people drive more innovation in things like resource use. In short: more people are good for pretty much everyone. It sucks for the family that suddenly has to cut way back on spending to support a child (but it’s great to have a child you want, which is why people have children at all). So society expects to reap all the rewards of an extra body running around inventing things and paying taxes and making other people happy through friendship and romance, but only the mother and, maybe hopefully if we spend enough money, the father, will pay that cost? This would not help me sleep at night, regardless of my feelings on deadbeat dads. > [@](#): > > Perhaps not, but let’s not forget it is irresponsible people who place the extra burdens on society. These laws are needed because people are imperfect and it’s imperfect people writing and trying to enforce the laws. These laws are needed to pacify people’s questionable desire to align law with morality. > [@](#): > > I’m waiting in these threads for good alternatives. Got any? I already mentioned it, but I’ll rephrase it. Australia had a good one, I don’t know if it is still in practice because I don’t normally pay attention to such things, but it was brought to my attention in a book. Pay mothers to have their first child. If they want a second child, and the second child is close enough to the first, go ahead and pay them for that, too. For those fathers who stick around, this helps. For those fathers that don’t, well, this helps, too. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/46 "2008-11-03T01:06:46Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > The only men I’ve known who paid child support were fathers who wanted custody of their kids but were denied. These aren’t deadbeat dads, they’re good fathers who just split up with Mom and lost custody of their children. > > _Real_ deadbeat dads simply don’t pay child support, court order or not. I agree that it is a waste of time and money for our legal system to try and fail miserably to force losers to financially support their kids. Social pressure seems to do the trick just as well. In other words, as far as I know, the only guys who pay court-ordered child support are guys that would pay anyway. I doubt that’s the case. Men have their wages garnished for non payment of support. In some states they will pull driver’s license and professional license for non payment. Men are sued for non support on a pretty regular basis. That usually means they didn’t pay voluntarily. In some cases the state is supporting the child and then goes after the Dad to be reimbursed. ---
**Author:** ![dgrdfd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eb8c5e/32.png) [@dgrdfd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dgrdfd)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/47 "2008-11-03T02:05:43Z")
To those that argue men should have no say because of the inherent biology even though it isn’t completely fair, would you also support allowing discrimination against woman in employment and pay? Woman take and need more time off because of biology and their inherent need to take lengthy time off for pregnancy. To me it’s a similar idea. Men get no say after the deed is done about whether to keep the child or not even if the child is not yours. Woman get all the power. And it’s all about the inherent biology “it’s her body, etc.” But couldn’t companies argue that due to biology women are higher risk? You would hate to put a woman in a position of power only to have her need months or years off to have and raise children. Seems one could argue that “it’s biology, baby” and not hire the woman or keep her “low level”. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/48 "2008-11-03T02:19:51Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > I’m suggesting that “wanting both genders to be morally responsible” might cost us more than it benefits us. Our _concern_ is that women bear too much cost in raising children. Going after fathers is just _one way_ of dealing with that problem. I am 99% sure it is not a good way even though, after all, I desire that men should be responsible for their actions. So far I haven’t heard about a better solution. > [@](#): > > The increase in taxation that will have to pay for the system she may use to pursue a deadbeat dad. Isn’t our court system there to serve the law, and the public. Won’t she be paying taxes to support that system whether she uses it or not? Is it possible the dead beat might have to pay court costs as well as support? > [@](#): > > There aren’t enough children in the world, yes. Hmmm I’m not sure this opinion has much place in this discussion. There are certainly far too many unwanted and uncared for children. It’s bad enough when parents are doing all they can and it’s barely enough. It’s worse when one parent actively avoids support they can afford. > [@](#): > > And my point is if there is a burden over their heads, it will change the point at which they will choose to do this, which does affect all of society. We’ve increased his cost of reentering society at a level which utilizes his abilities best. How much support they pay is based on their income. It will become significant if they actively avoid paying and let it accumulate. It’s not meant to discourage them from working and contributing. Responsible men have paid it for years and still been a valuable part of society. > [@](#): > > More people are a benefit, not a cost. More people are good for a country. Maybe some day in the distant future we will have population growth that strains our resources, but we’re nowhere near that level and there is a possibility that it will never happen because more people drive more innovation in things like resource use. In short: more people are good for pretty much everyone. It sucks for the family that suddenly has to cut way back on spending to support a child (but it’s great to have a child you want, which is why people have children at all). So society expects to reap all the rewards of an extra body running around inventing things and paying taxes and making other people happy through friendship and romance, but only the mother and, maybe hopefully if we spend enough money, the father, will pay that cost? This would not help me sleep at night, regardless of my feelings on deadbeat dads. Now you’re making stuff up. More people are not automatically a benefit. To many people who can’t or don’t support themselves creates a burden on those that have to support them. I don’t mind my taxes going to provide some support to those truly in need but I’m not crazy about paying the bills when a father is out there and able to pay his share but simply avoiding it. You might want to look at some of the stats on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadbeat\_dads](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadbeat_dads) before you declare it a waste of time and money. > [@](#): > > These laws are needed to pacify people’s questionable desire to align law with morality. yeah! Laws, who needs em anyway? > [@](#): > > I already mentioned it, but I’ll rephrase it. Australia had a good one, I don’t know if it is still in practice because I don’t normally pay attention to such things, but it was brought to my attention in a book. Pay mothers to have their first child. If they want a second child, and the second child is close enough to the first, go ahead and pay them for that, too. For those fathers who stick around, this helps. For those fathers that don’t, well, this helps, too. I’d have to see that in context to understand why they did that. I don’t see any reason to think that would be a good idea here in the states. We don’t have a population problem here that I know of. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/49 "2008-11-03T03:07:07Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Isn’t our court system there to serve the law, and the public. Won’t she be paying taxes to support that system whether she uses it or not? Is it possible the dead beat might have to pay court costs as well as support? If a government agent has to track down a deadbeat dad, that agent can’t be doing something else. If we have no available agents to track deadbeat dads, we have to get more. In either case we are bearing additional costs. I am being charitable and assuming that you’re not suggesting we should drop everything to chase deadbeat dads, and that we’ll hire new people to go get 'em. Contrary to common jokes, government workers aren’t just sitting around waiting for more laws to be passed so they can earn their paycheck. So, yeah, _everyone_ is paying a little to chase down this dad, including the mother, for whom _I’m_ hoping to decrease costs, not increase them. > [@](#): > > Hmmm I’m not sure this opinion has much place in this discussion. Then you shouldn’t have asked, I guess. I’m not going to go through another point-by-point. It’s clear that your main concern is getting fathers to pay whatever they can. My main concern is helping mothers pay for their children. We will almost surely never see eye to eye, coming from two entirely different goals. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/50 "2008-11-03T03:37:53Z")
> [@phouka](#): > > Because biology isn’t fair. > > Men get one chance to decide whether they want to father a child - the decision to have sex. > > Women get two chances - the decision to have sex and the decision to carry a pregnancy to term or to abort. > > Even if there were some miracle of medicine that allowed men to carry a pregnancy to term and give birth, it would still be unfair, because you can’t force a person to undergo a medical procedure, even one that would transfer an embryo from a person that didn’t want it to one that did. Agreed on all of this. But, if we want to keep giving the woman the full, complete, and 100% of the choice, then it is only fair that if she seeks no input or is held to no legal standard in this decision making process, then she shouldn’t be able to turn around and expect money from the father. With freedom comes responsibility.. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/51 "2008-11-03T03:46:22Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > agreed. > I haven’t seen anyone remotely suggest this. Women have an equal responsibility for what they choose to do with their bodies and the consequences of their choices, but it normally takes two genders to make a baby. Two parents, with equal responsibility for the child. How is that a double standard? The woman is legally entitled to a mulligan. The man is not. The system in place is what is best for the child. It is not a fair system, but sometimes the good of the innocent overrides what is fair. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/52 "2008-11-03T03:53:01Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > The only men I’ve known who paid child support were fathers who wanted custody of their kids but were denied. These aren’t deadbeat dads, they’re good fathers who just split up with Mom and lost custody of their children. > > _Real_ deadbeat dads simply don’t pay child support, court order or not. I agree that it is a waste of time and money for our legal system to try and fail miserably to force losers to financially support their kids. Social pressure seems to do the trick just as well. In other words, as far as I know, the only guys who pay court-ordered child support are guys that would pay anyway. I used to work with two guys who had zipper issues - one had THREE children with three different women he had nothing to do with - and held a job and paid child support and lived with his mother. Miserable existence since there was NO chance for him to get ahead, nor on his income split four ways were any of those children getting supported in a decent fashion. The other one had a girlfriend and they were in LURVE…and she got pregnant - and he discovered it was a case of “accidentally on purpose” - and broke up with her - trust had been broken (as it should have been). He made the difficult decision not to have anything to do with the child as she then moved out of state and was discovered to be a raving loony bitch (in his opinion, I never met her) - but sent child support every month. There are guys out there performing their obligations as - not sperm donor, those get off the hook for child support - sperm provider. ---
**Author:** ![placebo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e274bd/32.png) [@placebo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/placebo)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/53 "2008-11-03T05:47:36Z")
If women had to take a fertility pill (and have sex) in order to get pregnant, rather than a birth-control pill not to, would unwilling fathers still be on the hook for child support? ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/54 "2008-11-03T06:49:10Z")
> [@placebo](#): > > If women had to take a fertility pill (and have sex) in order to get pregnant, rather than a birth-control pill not to, would unwilling fathers still be on the hook for child support? Would the babies still need food & clothing & diapers? The child’s need to be supported trumps the mom’s or dad’s desire not to spend money. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/55 "2008-11-03T07:05:01Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > The man may have to give up a portion of his income for 18 years. > > The woman may have to give up a portion of her income for 18 years AND be pregnant for 9 months. > > I fail to see where the man is somehow getting a greater burden. If the woman doesn’t want the baby, but the man wants it, she could go through pregnancy, have the baby and give it to the dad to raise it (with him being fully financially responsible for it). So, she would give up 9 months of being pregnant and not 18 years + 9 months. The flip side, if the woman wants the baby, but the man doesn’t want it, she could have the baby, and raise it herself (with her being fully financially responsible for it). In the above two cases, if either the man or the woman can’t raise the kid while being fully financially responsible for it, with no outside help imposed by the courts, then they shouldn’t have the baby. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/56 "2008-11-03T07:44:58Z")
why can’t the man give the child up for adoption to another father? ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/57 "2008-11-03T07:47:48Z")
I was reading a recent interview with Gore Vidal in which he was asked about a rumored daughter- a 60-ish woman living in Florida conceived shortly after WW2 when Vidal was in Germany. He stated that he’s aware of her but has never met her, that he honestly doesn’t know if she’s his or not, that he was involved with her mother but so was at least one other man, and that on the chance the child was his he sent the mother money to have an abortion. The mother instead used the money to come to America where she married and had more kids. (Vidal as usual comes across as an emotion free narcissistic old bitch.) Anyway, raises an interesting twist to this: if a man in this situation paid for and had reason to believe the child had been aborted, would the mother’s acceptance of the money for an abortion represent a contract? Should he have to pay child support, or supposing it’s a year or two before she tells him the child was born, should he have to pay back child support? ---
**Author:** ![CutterJohn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/91b2a8/32.png) [@CutterJohn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CutterJohn)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/58 "2008-11-03T12:58:48Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > It’s fair to a child, though, which is the most important issue. Once born, the child has a moral and legal right to parental support. It does? Fathers have a responsibility towards children they sired, even though they want nothing to do with it, and have expressed this from the start, and took precautions to prevent pregnancy. If they don’t pay their child support, then they are stigmatized socially, and suffer legal penalties. Ok, fine. But why is it ok for a single mother to completely abandon their child to foster care, and let the state take care of it? Do we call these mothers deadbeat moms and stigmatize them, fining them, sending them to jail?(I say mother because I’m sure this case is far more likely for a woman to find herself in) So if there is only one parent, they can just toss it aside, SEP. If there are two, and the mother chooses to have the kid, all of the sudden, responsibility pops into existence out of nowhere. Fuzzy logic. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/59 "2008-11-03T13:19:57Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > So kid grows up without a farther and a much statistically higher rate of poverty. Nice. I was one of those kids. The accidental sperm donor did me a favor though. The kind of person that would do that has no business being anywhere near kids. The state of Michigan ever finds him and he’s so bankrupt though 🙂 I can’t wait till they do. > Look kids need parents. If you’re not ready to be a parent you need to use protection. Yes you. No matter what she says. People forget to take pills sometimes. If she does get pregnent you need to take care of your kids. Yes you. They’re your kids too if you slip one past the goalie. Without a “farther”. My kid had one of those, too. Farther away from his responsibilities than anyone thought possible. ---
**Author:** ![Oregon\_sunshine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/50afbb/32.png) [@Oregon\_sunshine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oregon_sunshine)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2008, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716/60 "2008-11-03T13:26:52Z")
> [@](#): > > So if there is only one parent, they can just toss it aside, You pretty much just made this up. That’s where the fuzzy logic comes in. Women whose children are in foster care also get charged (and garnished) for child support. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-an-unwanting-father-pay-child-support/470716.md?page=4)