Child support law

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

The woman carries all the physical risk during the pregnancy, the man's only contribution to it (until the baby is born if he sticks around) is a squirt. The man does not lose work days, he doesn't risk death from the child birth, and he doesn't experience the pains of labor.

He risks death and agony if he has to drop out of school and work on an oil rig to pay child support. (Assuming he even qualifies to do so.) Which in practice would be incentivized by this.

Besides, making the man pay does nothing to reduce this agony, or this risk of death. It worsens his lot, without improving hers. If anything, it worsens everyone's lot, by giving society one less educated high-income earner.

Single motherhood has had a devastating effect on our society

How do you propose we prevent it, then?

[Galloism]

Nope. No requirement to assist parents, at least not legally.

It's a good thing to do, but they won't fine or imprison you if you won't.

But isn't it negligent to allow parents to die if you can help them? Anyway, even if voluntary, it's a major life event and should be seen as a valid point to adjust child support.

Sure, on both counts.

The latter just isn't the current reality.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

But isn't it negligent to allow parents to die if you can help them? Anyway, even if voluntary, it's a major life event and should be seen as a valid point to adjust child support.

Sure, on both counts.

It's just not the current reality.

Then it should be. At least concerning such an event.

[The Republic of Fore]

There's a group here in Idaho that I'm a member of that's trying to solve this. Basically it would change child custody law, so that both parents always get equal visitation. Meaning no child support. Unless It's in the child's best interest to only be with one.

[Datlofff]

The woman carries all the physical risk during the pregnancy, the man's only contribution to it (until the baby is born if he sticks around) is a squirt. The man does not lose work days, he doesn't risk death from the child birth, and he doesn't experience the pains of labor.

He risks death and agony if he has to drop out of school and work on an oil rig to pay child support. (Assuming he even qualifies to do so.) Which in practice would be incentivized by this.

Besides, making the man pay does nothing to reduce this agony, or this risk of death. It worsens his lot, without improving hers. If anything, it worsens everyone's lot, by giving society one less educated high-income earner.

Single motherhood has had a devastating effect on our society

How do you propose we prevent it, then?

I got you fam, its pretty simple. Push and encourage the Nuclear family in schools, and give economic incentives for married couples with kids.

[Ostroeuropa]

I support paper abortions for unwilling fathers. Men have no right to force a child or abortion on the pregnant woman, but women have no right to force a child on men.

I think a relevant question, though, is whether or not the child has a right to the resources of their father.

It doesn't. We don't punish women for refusing to name the father. The rationalizations society makes to explain away men's suffering are evidently not sincere when you actually consider them in depth.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I think a relevant question, though, is whether or not the child has a right to the resources of their father.

It doesn't. We don't punish women for refusing to name the father. The rationalizations society makes to explain away men's suffering are evidently not sincere when you actually consider them in depth.

I understand the need to protect the children, however, condemning fathers to poverty isn't the answer either.

[Scomagia]

I think a relevant question, though, is whether or not the child has a right to the resources of their father.

I doubt it.

Do we legally punish mothers who fail to/refuse to name fathers?

We don't, but should we? If they know who the father is and refuse to name them, I think that's a deprivation of the child's rights.

[Ostroeuropa]

Single motherhood has had a devastating effect on our society

How do you propose we prevent it, then?

Eliminate alimony. Curb gynocentrism and female chauvinism. Take on the notion that single mothers are "just as capable" as two parents (And implicitly that men are worthless or a detriment), itself peddled in a fit of misandry and gynocentrism during the 70s and 80s by a hate movement.

Make people more aware of the stats on single parenthood and oppose and break the organizations of those who hit the roof over it because they care more about enabling women's agency and shielding them from it than they do about consequences, to the extent they're now rambling about toxic masculinity which they claim is the same thing that's always been there through history, despite fatherlessness being the cause.

Mandatory shared custody in the event of a split up. Mandatory, no exceptions. If a partner is abusive, that's a crime, they can go to jail, there doesn't need to be a mechanism to cause lopsided custody.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

He risks death and agony if he has to drop out of school and work on an oil rig to pay child support. (Assuming he even qualifies to do so.) Which in practice would be incentivized by this.

Besides, making the man pay does nothing to reduce this agony, or this risk of death. It worsens his lot, without improving hers. If anything, it worsens everyone's lot, by giving society one less educated high-income earner.



How do you propose we prevent it, then?

I got you fam, its pretty simple. Push and encourage the Nuclear family in schools, and give economic incentives for married couples with kids.

Would this by any chance include forcing overseas consulates to allow couples with kids to switch countries? A lot of overseas employers aren't known to like it when couples bring their kids along.

[Ostroeuropa]

It doesn't. We don't punish women for refusing to name the father. The rationalizations society makes to explain away men's suffering are evidently not sincere when you actually consider them in depth.

I understand the need to protect the children, however, condemning fathers to poverty isn't the answer either.

We don't protect children, we protect women's interests and their ability to decide things because our society has fetishized female agency and decided anything that opposes it is evil, even where their decisions are demonstrably harmful to society or other people and their rights or even their agency. This is often rationalized away through various means, but fundamentally it comes down to the same dynamic.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I doubt it.

Do we legally punish mothers who fail to/refuse to name fathers?

We don't, but should we? If they know who the father is and refuse to name them, I think that's a deprivation of the child's rights.

It would mean you have to forgo the woman's rights and concentrate on those of the child in question. The question is, how will society react to this?

[Datlofff]

I got you fam, its pretty simple. Push and encourage the Nuclear family in schools, and give economic incentives for married couples with kids.

Would this by any chance include forcing overseas consulates to allow couples with kids to switch countries? A lot of overseas employers aren't known to like it when couples bring their kids along.

We can consider it. But I'm not talking about a global thing here. The USA is what I'm worried about, because thats where I currently and will probably continue to reside for the near future. Although I am all for full families being able to integrate into the USA.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

I doubt it.

Do we legally punish mothers who fail to/refuse to name fathers?

We don't, but should we? If they know who the father is and refuse to name them, I think that's a deprivation of the child's rights.

I think the idea is more that it'd incentivize pretending to know who the father is when you don't. We've seen enough of that on Maury as it is.

If we're going to go that route, we need compulsory paternity testing at birth for everyone.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Would this by any chance include forcing overseas consulates to allow couples with kids to switch countries? A lot of overseas employers aren't known to like it when couples bring their kids along.

We can consider it. But I'm not talking about a global thing here. The USA is what I'm worried about, because thats where I currently and will probably continue to reside for the near future. Although I am all for full families being able to integrate into the USA.

And if American couples can't leave the USA for work because the countries that want their skills don't want them bringing their kids along?

Come to think of it, I'm not sure if all overseas employers want them bringing their spouses along either.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

We don't, but should we? If they know who the father is and refuse to name them, I think that's a deprivation of the child's rights.

I think the idea is more that it'd incentivize pretending to know who the father is when you don't. We've seen enough of that on Maury as it is.

If we're going to go that route, we need compulsory paternity testing at birth for everyone.

Caution with Maury or Jerry Springer. Those shows don't exactly present real situations. They're reality TV, which is just as scripted.

[Datlofff]

I understand the need to protect the children, however, condemning fathers to poverty isn't the answer either.

We don't protect children, we protect women's interests and their ability to decide things because our society has fetishized female agency and decided anything that opposes it is evil, even where their decisions are demonstrably harmful to society or other people and their rights or even their agency. This is often rationalized away through various means, but fundamentally it comes down to the same dynamic.

This^

(just noticed your sig btw. I can recommend a great mod for Hearts of Iron 4 called "Kaiserreich." Basically long story short its "what if Germany won ww1" and in it the UK has become both nationalist and syndicalist, and you can play as them.)

[Datlofff]

We can consider it. But I'm not talking about a global thing here. The USA is what I'm worried about, because thats where I currently and will probably continue to reside for the near future. Although I am all for full families being able to integrate into the USA.

And if American couples can't leave the USA for work because the countries that want their skills don't want them bringing their kids along?

Come to think of it, I'm not sure if all overseas employers want them bringing their spouses along either.

I mean it'd be great if we could. But I'm not one for forcefully changing the immigration laws of ANOTHER country to fit the will of ours.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I understand the need to protect the children, however, condemning fathers to poverty isn't the answer either.

We don't protect children, we protect women's interests and their ability to decide things because our society has fetishized female agency and decided anything that opposes it is evil, even where their decisions are demonstrably harmful to society or other people and their rights or even their agency. This is often rationalized away through various means, but fundamentally it comes down to the same dynamic.

I don't doubt there is some of that, but I don't think that's the entirety of it. I think there is a vested interest in child welfare, I'm just not sure it is done properly or thinking about the child's best interest at hand.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

I think the idea is more that it'd incentivize pretending to know who the father is when you don't. We've seen enough of that on Maury as it is.

If we're going to go that route, we need compulsory paternity testing at birth for everyone.

Caution with Maury or Jerry Springer. Those shows don't exactly present real situations. They're reality TV, which is just as scripted.

Maury or Jerry Springer aside, suppose one of her lovers is better in bed than another. What's stopping her from naming the one who's worse in bed as the father, so she can use that guy's money to spend as much time as she can afford having sex with the one who's better in bed?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Caution with Maury or Jerry Springer. Those shows don't exactly present real situations. They're reality TV, which is just as scripted.

Maury or Jerry Springer aside, suppose one of her lovers is better in bed than another. What's stopping her from naming the one who's worse in bed as the father, so she can use that guy's money to spend as much time as she can afford having sex with the one who's better in bed?

Your scenario aside, women naming men the father of their child when that isn't the case is not uncommon, yes. But in that case, a paternity case would probably suffice. IMO, if there is doubt, the courts could mandate one of those to straighten things up.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Maury or Jerry Springer aside, suppose one of her lovers is better in bed than another. What's stopping her from naming the one who's worse in bed as the father, so she can use that guy's money to spend as much time as she can afford having sex with the one who's better in bed?

Your scenario aside, women naming men the father of their child when that isn't the case is not uncommon, yes. But in that case, a paternity case would probably suffice. IMO, if there is doubt, the courts could mandate one of those to straighten things up.

If there is "doubt"? By whom? Should she have to claim doubt? Should he have to claim doubt? Should a bystander have to claim doubt?

If paternity testing were required by default, it could more reliably prevent the scenario I have described than counting on "doubt" that may not be expressed even when it should.

[Wallenburg]

I support paper abortions for unwilling fathers. Men have no right to force a child or abortion on the pregnant woman, but women have no right to force a child on men.

I think a relevant question, though, is whether or not the child has a right to the resources of their father.

Does a fetus have a right to the resources of its mother? I don't think so.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Your scenario aside, women naming men the father of their child when that isn't the case is not uncommon, yes. But in that case, a paternity case would probably suffice. IMO, if there is doubt, the courts could mandate one of those to straighten things up.

If there is "doubt"? By whom? Should she have to claim doubt? Should he have to claim doubt? Should a bystander have to claim doubt?

If paternity testing were required by default, it could more reliably prevent the scenario I have described than counting on "doubt" that may not be expressed even when it should.

Ok, lets say a friend of yours is being told he is the father of this child. He has been sleeping with the girl and all but he is not entirely certain that this kid is his. It could be timing. It could be that the kid looks nothing like him. It could be a host of other things. In that case, he requests a paternity test.

The other scenario is that he's denying he's the father, in which case, the mother requests a paternity test to assuage doubts. If there is reasonable doubt, I think a paternity test should be performed.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

If there is "doubt"? By whom? Should she have to claim doubt? Should he have to claim doubt? Should a bystander have to claim doubt?

If paternity testing were required by default, it could more reliably prevent the scenario I have described than counting on "doubt" that may not be expressed even when it should.

Ok, lets say a friend of yours is being told he is the father of this child. He has been sleeping with the girl and all but he is not entirely certain that this kid is his. It could be timing. It could be that the kid looks nothing like him. It could be a host of other things. In that case, he requests a paternity test.

The other scenario is that he's denying he's the father, in which case, the mother requests a paternity test to assuage doubts. If there is reasonable doubt, I think a paternity test should be performed.

And if she's tricked him into believing he's the father, what then? Let her get away with it?