Dead Beat Dad - Completely Unfair Label?

reply to post by SearchLightsInc

They can choose not to sleep with a women and if they do, they can choose to wrap it up, it just takes some personal responsibility.

What? are you serious? only Men chose to sleep? women just lay there and take it?

No wonder this society is wreaking in double standard, because people don't even realize that they are doing it.

Yes women can choose to wrap it as well, female condoms are available to use. However, contraceptives are not 100% and sometimes it does happen, among alcohol, drugs and other instances.

Yes, people do need responsibility, that's includes women to open up for men. What nerve people thinking it is a one sided action.

Its like saying " Women should pay men for giving them sperm"

A lot of speculation in this thread about how people THINK 'the system' works. Unless you have actually had the 'pleasure' of being on the receiving end of the Family Court system you don't know what you're talking about. First, it's important to understand that the Federal Guidelines are just that --- guidelines. Every state has their own interpretation and every Family Court judge can play fast-and-loose to suit their own prejudices. I spent 19yrs in the Family Court system for one of the country's more notoriously unfair states. If you care to you can search ATS and get a blow-by-blow description of my last FC encounter.

Some facts, when my ex and I split she was earning about $50k working part-time. My two kids were both under 4. Once we were in FC she was suddenly only making $16k/yr (the 'allowance' amount). You see, the FC in all their immense wisdom believes that the custodial parent should be able to set aside $16k of their earnings for personal betterment. Anything above that gets factored into the child support equation. In 19yrs she made $16k every year. My kids didn't get so much as an allowance from their mother. Whenever they needed anything they were told to 'talk to your father'. So in addition to my paying child support, I paid for their health and dental insurance, any and every expense that came up and I drove to get and return them every weekend (6hrs each weekend).

Whenever my ex decided she wanted something (like a new sun porch) she'd drag me into court to get more child support. The first words out of the judge's mouth EVERY time was, 'what does Mother want?". She was rarely required to provide a financial statement (I was EVERY time) and those she did provide she lied on. During one court case I was able to demand financial records which clearly, unequivocally showed that she was working only 30hrs/mo and based on her own documentation should be earning $85/k annually. Court couldn't care less.

When it was time for my youngest to enter college my ex refused to help in any way --- even co-sign a loan. Despite the fact that the economy and my business of 10+ years was collapsing I was able to get financing for her freshman year including room, board, tuition, the whole 9yds. Despite the fact that the guidelines CLEARLY state that educational expenses that include living shall be considered child support, not my judge. My ex wanted child support even though my daughter hadn't lived at home, didn't even have a key, and was living year round at school. Family Court was happy to oblige. Oh, and to Big Daddy that is all that for paying $450 a month in support....I was paying almost $700 PER WEEK plus insurance, plus every little thing. My ex made over two-times in child support what she allegedly earned through her 'employment'.

I love my kids. I've always made sure they wanted for nothing. I've always been there for them and they know it. My issue with the whole child support system is that there is significant inequity in the system. My ex and I should have had EQUAL responsibility for their financial support. NO WAY should she have been able to use their child support money to build a barn, paddock, sun porch, etc. She wants that stuff? Great, work for it. There was NO financial accountability toward her. Also, I spent a fair amount of time in Family Court. Keep in mind, I've always PAID my support plus some. Still, every person in the FC system treated me like a felon. Every guy was looked at as a deadbeat. I've met numerous fathers in my same situation so I'm not some rare exception. As I sat in court waiting to be called I'd have the opportunity to see countless 'baby mommies' showing-up to 'get paid'. Newly manicured, nice clothes, fresh hairdo and a lawyer by their side.

Bottom line, despite what you want to believe there is NO equity in the system. Mothers are free to use the system as their personal enforcers with little if any personal accountability. Also, child support is untaxed income to the recipient. However, I cannot take my child support payments as a deduction. I couldn't even take the dependent deductions since she was the custodial parent. Talk about a screw-job.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

They can choose not to sleep with a women and if they do, they can choose to wrap it up, it just takes some personal responsibility.

What? are you serious? only Men chose to sleep? women just lay there and take it?

Thats not what i said. I was refering to men playing the victim card when it came to taking responsibility. They can avoid being a "victim" by not engaging in sexual activity and using protection, thus the likelihood of them getting caught out is lowered. No one is forcing men to sleep around.

No wonder this society is wreaking in double standard, because people don't even realize that they are doing it.

Or maybe your just misinterpreting posts and getting worked up about it?

Yes women can choose to wrap it as well, female condoms are available to use. However, contraceptives are not 100% and sometimes it does happen, among alcohol, drugs and other instances.

Im not discouraging female responsibility here.. Both parties are responsible.

Yes, people do need responsibility, that's includes women to open up for men. What nerve people thinking it is a one sided action.

You must honestly think im totally on a woman's side here, its hilarious. Do you know how much i hate seeing women with 2+ kids living off the state and still shagging about? Or hearing of guys knocking up girl after girl and laughing about it because they're "Just being men" Its ridiculious, people should be made to take responsibility for their offspring and if a guy is unfortunate to knock up a girl then guess what? ITS HIS RESPONSIBILITY whether she choose's to keep it or not. Men need to be careful!

Its like saying " Women should pay men for giving them sperm"

Well, you know, women are still expected to worship men for the simple fact that they are men and the general consensus among them is that they can do no wrong because they make the world go round

What's not fair is a child who has to live with the fact that he or she is a b****rd without a father. A man who doesn't think he has to be responsible for what his body helped make. It'd be criminal procreation for not accepting responsibility for offspring. Like crashing into a car and running away from the scene of the accident. Even if it was an accident there are still consequences. That's why there are courts for these issues, because in history society has decided they are necessary to survive extra mouths to feed.

It's a fair label. Just don't get caught wearing it. With power comes responsibility. Behold, a man, with the power to make more men in his pants. There are always vasectomies for the men who really really don't want the responsibility of supporting their own children.

The argument for abortions to avoid having to pay money doesn't go far. See, that's not his decision to make, unless a woman comes around asking for financial assistance for an abortion. In which case, now there's argument room for should he pay for an abortion if she asks for one? There's more argument room for a woman getting her tubes tied. It's a hard lesson, to not have relations with women who want to exploit the money out of them.

reply to post by jtma508


Off topic, but I'd like to know what kind of job your ex had that paid $85k/year for 30 hrs/month. I want that job!

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by generik

Free will kind of gets taken out of it when you have to carry the resulting child or attain an abortion, both initiate a responsibility on the woman's part, so your "free will for women" nonsense is void.

how about the "free will" not to have sex? as it takes two to make one it should take two to kill one. but no the choice only rests with ONE because they are too WIMPY or SELFISH to actually face their mistake, and so murder an innocent instead.

I dont condone women having babies so that they can be kept by the state, i think its bad for society all around.

even an orphanage is better than DEAD, i know my friends that were in orphanages would agree with that. was not "bad for the state" either.

Men do have a say btw, they can choose not to sleep with a women and if they do, they can choose to wrap it up, it just takes some personal responsibility.

funny women have the SAME choices, and share the same responsibility. so lets not lay all the blame on the guys, the gals share an EQUAL fault.

You're seriously suggesting that the courts should chase men around so that they can either accept/deny fatherhood - Waste of money & time.

what is a life compared to a short time and a little cash? i know i would not see it as a waste of time and money if i found out that i might have a son or daughter that i could SAVE from death.

You might be surprised to hear that not all women who get pregnant are super sluttish hood rats who cant keep their legs shut :O!

they may not be "super sluttish hood rats", but they did willingly "spread their legs", (your linguistics). but guys are just as EQUALLY at fault. it does take two after all, it doesn't mean that EITHER party does everyone they see. that does not mean the guy should have any less responsibility or choice of what happens.

No one wants to move 6 times a year. Maybe the child would prefer to live with 1 parent and see the other on weekends? Uprooting a child for 1 year at a time could be disastrous for them socially, as ive said, it just doesnt fit in with real life.

if parents were willing to be nice about things there would be no real "moving", they would just live at a different house half of the time. perhaps there should be a clause that BOTH parents have to live say within two blocks from each other for the sake of the children. or would that be unfair and hurt the rights of the parents? the "weekends at the other parent's place" was one of the BIGGEST Things many of my friends with divorced parents hated. as for the parents the same holds true, the "main parent" only gets to deal with them during the week and deal with all the "bad, boring stuff", none of the fun stuff, and the other parent feels they aren't a "real parent" as the can't really share the "bad stuff", which can create stress between the parents which of course will also effect the kids. nothing about separated parents really "fits in with real life", no matter what it is a nasty patchwork solution. at least 50% custody is fairer for ALL involved.

Yes but your "solutions" arent really viable.

they are MORE viable that the way things are done now. especially since it would remove a lot of the hurt that these situations can cause EVERYONE who is involved for the rest of their lives.

You sound like an angry teenage boy with no perception of how the world works :S

no more like an angry MAN who has seen how the world DOESN'T work, and all the hurt it causes both the parents and children, or even parents who have had their offspring murdered just because ONE PERSON was so selfish they couldn't be bothered giving so little of themselves so that the child would live.

Originally posted by kaylaluv
reply to post by jtma508

 

Off topic, but I'd like to know what kind of job your ex had that paid $85k/year for 30 hrs/month.

I want that job!

She was making $16k/yr working 30hrs/mo. That translates to $44.45/hr. If she worked fulltime (160hrs per month) that would equate to $85,333 annually. Few of us are lucky enough to ONLY work 40hr weeks, however. I'm not sure what she did but she worked for an investment adviser. She was a cartographer by trade.

reply to post by generik


Sort your post out and i'll reply to it.

reply to post by luciddream


No one is claiming that only a man chooses to sleep with a woman. This would in effect be rape.

Thats not what is happening whats happening is two people getting extremely intimate and having sex togeather be that for a minute, months or years. And therefore he has responsibility as does she.,

Its a 50/50 thing for goodness sakes.

The way these men carry on is as if they were " raped" by the women. Well they werent. They chose who they lay with.

And yes the woman did too. I suspect neither would " ideally" want that circumstance. But many are too immature to make sensible choices in life.

And it seems as if in many cases the state then pays.. for these dead beat men or women..

Even if the woman is a millionairess and the dude has a mininal wage job - he still deserves to pay. Its his dues.

Were not kids, this isnt primary school where people cannot work out HOW babies happen.

Fortunately, I have had boyfs who made sure to take care of themselves during sexual activities. Its the sensible thing to do, and I almost certain now that every one of my exes is married and has kids they are FOR SURE taking care of.

This is the meaning of sensible.

reply to post by generik


How do you know that a pregnancy is a result from YOU having sex with a woman? I mean, if she "spread her legs" for you, who knows how many others had access!

So, before you insist on your paternal rights to decide whether or not THIS pregnancy is carried or aborted, you have to prove it's yours! How are you going to do that?

In utero paternity testing is expensive and may not be covered by medical insurance. There is also the risk of damage to the fetus or the amniotic sac. In rare cases, the fluid will continue to leak from the sac and the baby will need to be delivered or you have a miscarriage. Most often, the court system will need to be involved for a doctor to consent to prenatal paternity testing.

Can Paternity Test be Done In Utero Before the Baby is Born

reply to post by MadhatterTheGreat

shouldn't the man have the equal right to say he doesn't want anything to do with the child?

He can, he can terminate his parental rights, though this doesn't always absolve him of paying for the child. Of course, you also had equal responsibility to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, and didn't, so that would be on the dad too. You take the dance, you have to pay the violinist. The lesson to take away is one well known....ounce of prevention = pound of cure.

To another:

Do you know how much i hate seeing women with 2+ kids living off the state and still shagging about?

Of course they are, because for each kid, they get that much more state assistance. We really need some kind of anti-mooching legislation, that penalizes, rather than rewards people who go on state aid, then have more children while still receiving it.

It isn't a case of "either the dad pays or the tax payers pay".

My daughter has always lived with her mother and her mother's husband. They have always made more money than I made, and made it incredibly hard for me to experience any sort of visitation with my daughter. When she was six, I finally had enough and allowed her to be adopted, severing my parental rights. I have not had any contact since then.

Should I have had to pay child support on a child that did not require money from me to be supported?

That is the question, isn't it?

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


Not to mention, should you have to pay child support for a child when you had no or very little visitation?

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


Of course you should. No matter how well off the mother is its your duty to give something towards the growth of YOUR own child. It is a case of tax payers shelling out for other " irresponsible people" its exactly that. I mean on the whole its not a massive amount of single parents. There are more married couples than singles... which is a good thing.

But you have given your child up to adoption to these other man. Thats also your choice.

Originally posted by FreedomEntered
reply to post by luciddream

 

Its a 50/50 thing for goodness sakes.

See, that's the thing. In Family Court it isn't even remotely a '50/50 thing'. I would have no problem if that was the case but it's not.

Whine whine whine... Cowards

reply to post by Gazrok


The problem here is society thinks its the Male and only the male who caused the pregnancy. If this was rape i would understand, but it is not.

So, current society thinks, male alone is responsible for producing the baby, but the women decides what happens to it?(also tying the man down for 18 yrs), thus making it a unfair system.

Why is it okay for women to have fun and abort to continue her youth, while men do not have that choice? Why are women responsibilities is voided? and falls 100% on men?

Why would a women would want to carry a child from a man who is not willing? in logical point of view, she should be paying the man for his "service" or continuing her genes.

Makes it look like Men are all evil rapists, running around impregnating innocent, defenseless women.

Its like 2 people get in on a head on head collision(both at fault) but judge will only hear one person's story. You cannot say the driver should have taken the bus or paid more attention. Both are at fault.

Originally posted by Agent008
What about fathers who want nothing more than to be part of the child's life but the mother wants nothing to do with the father and refuses access rights. This happened to a good friend of mine he is a great father but the mother fought tooth and nail to restrict his rights to see his child on a regular basis. When the courts ordered the mother to let the father see his son at least twice a week she moved to another state, giving only one days notice to the father, he didn't even get to say bye. Now he still pays child support (garnishing his wage) and lives a sad lonely life... very sad to see.

Dude I can relate. I had a friend in the military who after coming back from his first tour in Iraq in 03 found out that his wife had gone on a huge coke binge with all his combat and tax free pay. Needless to say they split. He had to fight tooth and nail to win the rights to care for his child from her despite him being a drug free United States soldier and her being a coke head. The system favors the women.

What makes you think women get away with not paying child support?....

My mum was a deadbeat and they caught up with her . And after this she ran away again. Then she came back and herself decided to pay child support on " arrangement" with my father. This worked out, my life was MUCH better as a result.

I know MANY dads to this day are perhaps paying £10 at most child support a week.

She decided to pay £15 a week but this was like 20yrs back. So it was alot. And I did feel a difference, I notice my dad wasnt so unhappy and struggling to make ends meet . Hence not taking his stress out on me.

But the money did go to me - then she side stepped my father altogeather and paid maintence directly to ME. My Father never asked for it back. It was in my bank and pocket. And she kept to that ever since.

She is no longer a deadbeat mother, she did her time and now I support myself!