Conservative numbers estimate that 1.6 million men are paying child support for children that aren't their biological children many even after DNA tests prove they are not the biological fathers and even after they are no longer together with the mothers of the children... http://www.rense.com/general51/chsup.htm """""Roughly 12% of men who refuse to pay child support do so because they are not the father. Yet when a man doesn't pay support for a child that he has proven is not his progeny, under current law and practice, Colorado labels him a "Deadbeat Dad," takes his drivers and other professional licenses away (making it almost impossible for him to work), and then throws him in jail for contempt of court. That often occurs without a hearing and certainly without a jury trial. A man can get out of prison for murder based on DNA evidence but can't get out of child support payments or jail based on the same conclusive evidence""""""
This is why legal marriage isn't the best option until marriage laws are reformed - a lot of these laws are holdovers from more puritanical eras of society and haven't updated with the changing times. There's a myth that if a couple lives together for X number of years that they're automatically married by common law, but this is actually not true in any state in the US. I'm not hugely in favor of welfare but I think it's wrong for the state to force men who are proven not to be the father of the child to pay for it only taking the child's interest in mind - that's what the welfare system is for, and I'd much rather everyone pay more in taxes to support these children then individual men who prove themselves by DNA not to be the child's father.
There is almost certainly a real legal issue to be addressed here but the creative statistics used in that article are absolutely ridiculous and, along with the blatant underlying bias, significantly damages it's argument.
I like how your solution to the problems of child support and alimony is "don't date women". Plus while feminist hypocrisy might be the reason that few feminists speak out against the problem, the laws aren't a by-product of equal rights - they're a by product of archaic time period where women rarely worked and were entirely dependent on the man for financial support - the laws haven't updated with the changing times.
In order to be intellectually relevant and honest, provide a link to a post that states "don't date women". All intellectual bankruptcy aside, what the laws area by product of is entirely irrelevant. Date a single mother eh? Well, look forward to nearly two decades of child support. Put one in the cylinder, spin it, pull the trigger and play the odds.
That's an apples to oranges scenario - not comparable to the issue of being required to pay child support for another man's kid due to one's wife having an affair even after DNA proves he's not yours. In the case of voluntarily marrying or dating a single mother I'm on the fence - but I'd say in the event that man has voluntarily assumed the role of a father and is making decisions for the kid, such as where the kid goes to school, and receiving custody rights - then it'd be fair to pay child support in any instance under which it'd be fair for a father to do so in any other situation.
If you think that's how child support works that makes me wonder if you've ever even dated, sorry but it does. You really need to look up the laws on child support, bro
I have a doctorate in the field of law so that I need not study it any further. Again, want to avoid child support? Keep your zipper closed.
Then you should not that people can be required to pay child support even if they aren't married - such as if a man signs his name on a child's birth certificate or brings a child into his home, even if it's proven after the fact by DNA that the woman had an affair and was pregnant with another man. My plan's actually just to sleep with married women, that way if she gets pregnant her husband gets stuck paying the child support and I'm free to play video games, drink beer, and f- other married women.
men have also been forced to pay child support when they left a deposit at a sperm bank again, keep your zipper locked and you will not have the problem
Posts like these do a good job illustrating hypocrisy on the emasculated left - simultaneously demanding feminism ("men and women should be treated equal") and chivalry ("men should still be responsible for everything") at the same time. Hence them not caring about reforming laws which are a holdover from a more puritanical era when welfare didn't exist and women rarely if ever had a source of income other than the man, so long as said laws benefit the woman even when the circumstances behind the enacting of the laws no longer apply.
That's the equivalent of a man getting his ex to come round and clean his house and have sex wih him. imagine if your wife had to go round to all her ex's and look after them every week?
It is generally the result of the legal issue called res judicata. Because courts do not want to be bogged down with hearing the same cases over and over and over again, the rule is once the court has decided, i has decided it for good, subject, to appeals and such.
what are you raving about? in fact I have lobbied for passage of the equal rights amendment that would have mandated equality under the law for both genders - this way there is equal accountability for all sides
That doesn't work. They know there is a father to pay them for assistance given to the mother, and they will find him.
I think how it works is that if a man has played a role as the father, and the real father is unknown , then the "adopted " father is considered the father. By the child and by the state. The first thing welfare people ask mothers before any subsistence is offered is, the name address and employment by the biological father. If that is unknown and the child was raised by a stepfather then they go after him.
What are you arguing about then? No one here is saying men shouldn't have to pay child support for the kids they create - rather that laws require men to pay for children which were not actually theirs even when DNA testing confirms it in many cases.
this was a possible real issue I was facing with my now, ex-wife. We never had kids together and we split up. Legally, we never got divorced but both had moved on in relationships, etc. The longer it drug on, the more my mother was getting nervous. If my ex has a child with her new b/f, while we are still married. she can come after me for child support because we were still technically married at the time. I quickly made a few concessions, and got the divorce done in about 30 days online. I told her as soon as she signed, I'd give her 500$ in the form of a cashier's check, and as soon as the divorce finalized, I'd give her 250$ more. All of a sudden, she quit dragging her feet and I got out of it without her getting knocked up by someone else.
Many single, never married men pay child support. Has nothing to do with marriage necessarily. - - - Updated - - - So changing your tune now. Your first suggestion was not getting married. This second suggestion is more accurate.
Thank you. But the suggestion settles the issue - don't get married and keep your zipper closed. End of the problem.
