Casual Sex vs. Child Support... was "Name Changing"

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

Quote

Skymama said:
Please take this conversation to SC.

So let it be written. So let it be done.

Quote

Pumpkin said:

Quote

I read his reply as meaning - the 'absent' father gets a free pass on child support if the kid doesn't get his name.

I'm sorry, but regardless of how that child was conceived (dad could have used precautions, mom shouldn't have drank so much - whatever), it deserves the support of both parents and both parents have an obligation to that child...

Zig said:
You read it correctly. If we're talking casual sex here, why should it be legislated the man be penalized in $$ for the next 18ish years? It takes two to tango. Why is it only the woman that has the say in whether the child gets put up for adoption? If she doesn't want to, again, why should the man then be forced to dole out $$? Why do such men have to dole out $$ to the mother of the child with no burden of proof from her that the $$ is going to the child and not into her "beer fund"? They obviously don't want to have anything to do with each other, they just wanted some sex and it didn't end up totally as planned, neither is chased.

Quote

... it deserves the support of both parents and both parents have an obligation to that child ...

Zig said:
OBTW, I agree with that most strongly. Of course, its the child that suffers in these cases, but what do you do? The more we try to do (laws), the more complicated it gets.

My personal opinions on this differ greatly with what I think the laws should (or more correctly stated shouldn't be) on this topic.

Here's the problem in these arguments, as I see it, we cannot legislate morality... in other words... we cannot pass laws to make people act responsibly, but we do pass laws to punish people who don't. Like all the "dead-beat dads" laws you hear about. Maybe the mothers in such situations should have their wages garnished too? Why to they get a pass because they're the one that had to carry the child in their womb for 9 months?

Here we go...

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Actions have consequences. If you aren't willing to face the consequences, don't do the action.

Sometimes it really isn't anybodys fault, the condom breaks for example, but that doesn't change the outcome.

Traditionally, the kid stays with the mom, but fathers have rights too.

If the "child support" isn't supporting the child, then he should seek custody and get support from the mom.

I agree that adoption choices shouldn't be left up to just the mom. But the thought of forcing a mom to give up her kid (or even face the choice of giving up the kid vs giving up support from the father) is abhorrent to me.

In short, if you aren't willing to face her having your kid (and paying for it for the next 18 years) then don't stick your dick in her. Get a blowjob instead.

I was thinking this while reading the original thread, but there was no way in hell I was going to post this there

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[ryoder 1,590]

Vasectomy;
The best investment I ever made for my future.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[silent_pumpkin 0]

My sentiments exactly, everything I wanted to say in the other forum.

[skydiver604 0]

Agree 100%,,,there's too many deadbeat dads and parents out there who are more than willing to get laid but bail when it's time to step up and fullfill their parental obligations and responsibilities because it's "inconvenient" or "unplanned". If you're man enough to do the deed then you should be man enough to take responsibility for your actions.

Ryoder,,,,completely agree with you, i had to go to 4 different doctors before I found one that would do the vasectomy procedure when I was 22 years old,, best thing I've ever done.

"The greater danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it." - Michelangelo

[lawrocket 3]

Penalize a kid versus having a father support the kid?

Yeah. that makes sense. "Hey, the mom was nothing more than a cum dumpster to me. So a kid resulted from it. I don't want the kid. So I'm not paying a cent."

I take it that this is the viewpoint of many. Casual sewx can result in a non casual kid. If it's your kid, deal with it and take care of it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

Yeah, but what doesn't the woman have to pay too?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Yeah, but what doesn't the woman have to pay too?

You think she doesn't?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[TrophyHusband 0]

Quote

Yeah, but what doesn't the woman have to pay too?

the woman does have to pay. raising a child is expensive. you can bet that whoever a child is living with is spending a significant amount of money to raise the child. having a child increases the cost of living in many, many aspects from the type of house/apartment you live in, utility bills, childcare, they type of job you can have, etc.

i understand your sentiments reguarding the rights of the father in reguards to adoption decisions. it may be frustrating and seem unfair that as men we don't have much in the way of reproductive rights, but that's the way it is. its best to just come to peace with it.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Yeah, but what doesn't the woman have to pay too?

Sure she does. If she is an unfit mother, and using the "child support" money for beer then the father should sue for custody, take care of the child and get support from the mother.

It isn't common, but it happens a lot more today than it used to.

And don't forget that child support doesn't come close to covering the full cost of raising a kid.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[rehmwa 2]

Abortion - The woman has the option (without the consent of her partner) to abort (but still have sex). Been down this discussion, but it got derailed by hotheads last time.

Where does the man have the equivalent option to abort his responsibility (without the consent of his partner) but still have sex?


Scenarios and options -

1 - Man wants the kid, woman wants the kid - no problem - they deal with it, both pay
2 - Man doesn't, woman doesn't - abort - no problem again

3 - Man wants the kid, woman doesn't - abort (woman gets her way, man doesn't)
4a - Man doesn't want a kid, woman does - today, man pays anyway and the kid is born (woman gets her way, man doesn't)
4b - Man doesn't want the kid, woman does - have the kid, aborts the financial responsibility as his only option (woman gets her way, man also)
4c - Man doesn't want the kid, woman does - have the kid, but then kill it after it's born when it's out of the woman's body (man gets his way, woman doesn't)

There is no equivalent option for the man to #3 - but 4b is closer than 4a. 4c is closest, but abhorrent under almost anyone's morals.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Adoption fits in the "Option to Abort Responsibilty" categroy too.

I'm not going to start on whether abortion is right or wrong, so to try (with little real hope) to avoid the hotheads:

There really isn't any equivalent to option #3. The idea (as I said in my original post) of forcing a woman to give up a kid for adoption (or be forced to choose between giving up the kid or going it alone) would be more fair to the man, but totally unacceptable to most of society (and me personally).

I think it's just one of the areas where men and women are not now and never will be truly equal.

Again, if you aren't willing to raise a kid with the woman, don't stick your dick in her.

I'm not going to raise any moral or religious issues here, but from a purely practical standpoint, the consequences for thoughtless, casual sex are often life changing. Kids and diseases.
If you don't realize that, then you probably aren't mature enough to have sex in the first place (mentally and emotionally that is).

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

There really isn't any equivalent to option #3. The idea (as I said in my original post) of forcing a woman to give up a kid for adoption (or be forced to choose between giving up the kid or going it alone) would be more fair to the man, but totally unacceptable to most of society (and me personally).

I don't follow the logic when you talk adoption. If neither partner wants the child, than adoption satisfies both parties' desires - as does abortion.

the issue is when they disagree

- If both parties want equal ownership of decision - the only way to give both parties equal choice of responsibility is to wait until after the birth - then either party can raise the child (with the other party volunteering only what they choose to contribute - including nothing). If neither wants a child, then adoption where both parties elect to nothing.

So the interesting situation is what is 'equivalent' to the female choice of abortion - for the male. I can't think of one. she gets another option in abortion - he doesn't.

"Just don't have sex" is the knee jerk statement - but that can be applied to the woman as well - since that's not acknowledged, I just claim it's a sexist position to the discussion at hand - true, but not applied equally to the debate.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wmw999 2,589]

Biology says that it will never be the same for them regardless. Until a man can go through pregnancy, with the (sometimes) loss of income, and the potential for death, it's not the same.

Doesn't mean it's OK for the woman to hold the man hostage using the baby. But it's never, ever, going to be the same until the woman can say "fine, you want the baby, you have it"

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rehmwa 2]

Hi Wendy -

In terms of genetic differences vs social responses to that difference, I think it's moot - social cliched responses are overwhelming in this type of discussion ("it's her body", "it's not really a potential human until after the birth so you can't draw parallels", "he should keep it in his pants even if she isn't held to that standard", "the man has a responsibility more than the weak woman", etc ad nauseum),

but yet our laws are whimsical and arbitrary - so one can debate under the premise of 'how to maximize the equality of treatment' and come up with scenarios to discuss.

your note is simply "viva la difference - therefore there is no point trying" - kinda a moot point when discussion hypothetical options........

doncha think

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

But it's never, ever, going to be the same until the woman can say "fine, you want the baby, you have it"

I assume you meant "fine, you want the viable life mass that politically isn't defined as a person until some other arbitrary checkpoint? Then you gestate it, grow it in your male uterus, give birth to it..."

I would contend then that the common ground is the choice of whether or not to financially, commit-wise, emotionally, etc - wise choose to raise the child post birth and having similar option to accept or avoid that part.

(this does mean I'm conceding, and have always conceded, that gestation and labor are unique (no kidding, it's the foundation of the 'other' debate) - but the following responsibilities are inherently tied into the option to abort or not as, at least, a consequence of that option.)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Bolas 5]

Why a woman would want to bring a child into her life that she knew the father didn't want is beyond me. She can force him to support the child financially, but that doesn't help with the child's emotional needs.

Edited to add: While the same could be said about a reverse scenario, it is ultimately her choice to make.

I fully recognize, that while I have the right to express my opinion should I be in that scenario, the final decision is hers.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[wmw999 2,589]

I'm going to say that the hypothetical options really are moot here, because the conditions of the parties during the choice periods are different.

- Before sex, both are equal -- horny and (since we're talking about unplanned pregnancy) irresponsible
- During sex, about the same, except they're probably also sweaty now
- After sex, one is pregnant, and one is not.

One has already suffered a consequence of the intercourse. Even if she has an abortion, or a miscarriage, there has been a physical consequence that the man has not yet suffered. The man cannot suffer this consequence. It's a shorter-lived one than paying child support for 18 years, but it's nevertheless real.

The choices are immutably tied to the timeframe. Discussing them without it is as relevant as discussing whether an infant is going to Harvard or Yale (well, if one's parent is rich enough that might be a discussion, but if one is rich enough, unwanted paternity isn't that much of a problem either). It's a very different discussion from that of a parent talking to a child with acceptances from both in his hand.

So I guess what I'm saying is that your premise of choices has to be viewed with the different conditions from before, during, and after sex.

Before sex, the partners are equal (except that a woman might suffer chemical problems from birth control hormones).

During sex, the partners are equal (except that a man might suffer reduced sensation from a condom)

But after sex, the partners are no longer equal. And, in fact, for the next nine months, there is probably only responsibility on the mother. Judges don't normally award child support during pregnancy. The mother has a choice not available to the father, but she also has a condition not available to the father. She has medical expenses, and physical issues. Responsible fathers might take this into account, but there generally isn't a legal requirement to.

It's only after birth that the parents are now back on equal footing; their physical conditions are the same. And there's a baby who, no matter what the parents want, needs to be fed, clothed, etc. The inequality here is that the mother gets the presumption of custody and choice when there is dissent -- that's not necessarily right.

Hopefully if they're that unwilling and irresponsible, they'll choose adoption by then.

But the reason I reject your choices as a single simple set is because of the changing situations when they can be exercised.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Quote

There really isn't any equivalent to option #3. The idea (as I said in my original post) of forcing a woman to give up a kid for adoption (or be forced to choose between giving up the kid or going it alone) would be more fair to the man, but totally unacceptable to most of society (and me personally).

I don't follow the logic when you talk adoption. If neither partner wants the child, than adoption satisfies both parties' desires - as does abortion.

the issue is when they disagree

- If both parties want equal ownership of decision - the only way to give both parties equal choice of responsibility is to wait until after the birth - then either party can raise the child (with the other party volunteering only what they choose to contribute - including nothing). If neither wants a child, then adoption where both parties elect to nothing.

So the interesting situation is what is 'equivalent' to the female choice of abortion - for the male. I can't think of one. she gets another option in abortion - he doesn't.

I was using adoption to try to remove the controversy surrounding abortion. That was all.

And I agree that the problem occurrs when she wants to keep it and he doesn't.

But I don't agree with allowing the man to "abort" his responsibilites just because he doesn't want them.

While more fair to the man, it isn't fair to either the woman or the kid.
It also isn't fair that the woman can choose to not keep the kid if the man wants to. That's just the reality of the situation.

It's your kid, it's your responsibility. Fair or not (kinda not), equal or not (again, kinda not). Again, it's the reality of the situation.

Unless you are willing to force the woman to give up the kid (either way) or go it alone. Which, IMO, is unacceptable.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[rehmwa 2]

tangent - you support choice

I actually support choice in situations where the male is a creep or totally out of the picture (not completely PC, but I figure it's only my business if I'm the father)

but that's not what I'm fishing for....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

I like this direction - can you define equivalent rights, then in each of the scenarios?

Tough qualitative discussion imbedded in it though - is 9 months equivalent or more/less impactful than a lifetime of forced support (for either partner)?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

I'm talking hypotheticals and you keep throwing out the PC position tied to "that's the way it is, deal with it".

We are talking past each other.

I appreciate the adoption point as the only way to equal the options. You solved the logical problem, but also then revoked Roe vs Wade - I don't want to be in your shoes when everyone finds out you did it.

But the premise I'd like to discuss is predicated on the abortion choice the woman has that the man doesn't and what scenarios level the field while still keeping abortion for the woman as a legitimate choice. In essence - what is the 'closest' equivalent to abortion that the man has. (Wendy's response just says, there is no equivalent - ok, given - but what's the 'closest' we can get?)

I posit he aborts the responsibility to raise the child as the closest equivalent. The mother can do it unilaterally be terminating the pregnancy (removing the option of the mass becoming a child thus avoiding all that it entails for the next 30 years) - though the father can't. So, the father does it by removing himself completely from the part he would have to experience (everything but the gestation and labor) - also an option the mother can have if the father wants to raise the child, or through adoption.

Do I find it moral for the male to do that? - absolutely not. But it's a parallel for discussion. What else is there?

This pisses off militant pro-choice because the advertising is predicated on the position that it's not yet a child, so they take/make it as escalatory. I don't mean it to be, but I can't come up with anything closer that's more PC.....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Before sex, the partners are equal (except that a woman might suffer chemical problems from birth control hormones).

During sex, the partners are equal (except that a man might suffer reduced sensation from a condom)

Have you noticed how many people here don't agree with that? and put it all on the male???


Reject the options all you want provided you give your own - If the woman can abort, what do you suggest is the 'closest' equivalent right that the male can take?

I'm not thrilled with the 3 I offered either - you're smarter than me - brain storm something different.

Edit: one problem with this debate is the concept of what abortion does - does it simply terminate the medical condition, or does it also terminate everything that happens after that point (giving birth, raising a child, being responsible for it etc.....) But I hate that because then the militant abortion/anti-abortions people get into the conversation and it derails to the same old drift we always see......

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Tough qualitative discussion imbedded in it though - is 9 months equivalent or more/less impactful than a lifetime of forced support (for either partner)?

the 9 months can be fatal, destroys your dating options, definitely hurts your career, and prevents you from working effectively for at least a few months. Costs additional money in services, as well as lost wages. ADD: much of the damage to dateability is perm if you keep the child.

the price of child support has no effect on your health or your work, does cost you income, may impair your dating prospects to the degree that you disclose the child or that it reduces your marginal income.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Tough qualitative discussion imbedded in it though - is 9 months equivalent or more/less impactful than a lifetime of forced support (for either partner)?

the 9 months can be fatal, destroys your dating options, definitely hurts your career, and prevents you from working effectively for at least a few months. Costs additional money in services, as well as lost wages. ADD: much of the damage to dateability is perm if you keep the child.

the price of child support has no effect on your health or your work, does cost you income, may impair your dating prospects to the degree that you disclose the child or that it reduces your marginal income.

uh huh - so you are offering what option for parity of choice???

If I may infer then, you are proposing the following:

Two people hook up - she gets pregnant.

She has the viable life mass for 9 months and gets to abort any time she chooses. For any reason, on demand. He has no choice.

At birth, the viable life mass is given to the male, who must have the mass on him at all times for 9 months, he is solely responsible for changing and feeding the life mass - no exceptions, no baby sitting. During that nine months, he may also abort the life mass (take it to a doctor and have it crushed and disposed of). For any reason, on demand. She has no choice.

At the end of the 18 month cycle - both parent, having chosen independently to keep the child - have to be responsible for the upbringing of the, now, child. Else both have to agree at that point to allow adoption.



you have an interesting proposal

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants