Roe v Wade for men

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

So he doesn't really give a flying fuck about where the money really goes, because every dime she spends on herself is "his" money that she's spending frivolously.

This was a good exercise. Now that we've established the extreme ends of the spectrum about attitudes of the primary custodian and the other parent..... maybe in the middle the real solution can be looked at.

(It's still more fun to pick at the stereotypes of the "deadbeat dad" and the "money grubbing mom" - even that's a stereotype as the primary custodian doesn't HAVE to be the mom. I suspect that it's even worse when the dad is primary in today's world.)

...
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

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

This was a good exercise. Now that we've established the extreme ends of the spectrum about attitudes of the primary custodian and the other parent..... maybe in the middle the real solution can be looked at.

You need to look at some other things.

It is a verifiable fact that many non-custodial fathers lose interest. There are a lot of reasons for this, and it's not a slur on fathers, but merely a statement of what happens in the real world.

And fathers who lose interest in seeing their children also lose interest in paying child support.

I've been pretty much out of family law for a few years (at one time, it was nearly all I did), and based on what lawrocket has written here, California is different from New Jersey and the state of the law has changed somewhat in general.

But people like lawrocket and me only see the more extreme cases, because the people who have managed to work things out on behalf of their kids don't need much in the way of legal services.

I think we already have a real solution. Implementing it is the hard part--because people continue to use their children as game pieces in an ongoing post-marital war.

Support awards are generally reasonable, but some people seem to think that the behavior of the spouse has something to do with what their children are entitled to. I know a guy who has gone to the state Supreme Court twice because he claims his wife lied...I can't remember what she lied about, but it didn't have anything to do with the kids. Still, he owes tens of thousands of unpaid support, and he is determined not to pay it. I know about this because he asked me to help him do some legal research. I told him to pay the goddam support.

As I said, Beck's dad paid his support--regularly and on-time (except once time, but he made it up a week later when the snit had passed) and I paid mine when she lived with him. Our relationship was perfectly friendly, and the moments of consternation were solely the result of his current wife and her nuttiness. So everything else I write about is what I've read or what I've seen in the context of working as a legal assistant.

And it's not pretty. Much of the world is populated by children in adult bodies.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

You need to look at some other things.... no - I understand the following stuff you wrote - I've also seen first hand the noncustodial mothers doing what you continue to apply is male dominated - It's why I didn't do the mom-dad thing in lieu of noting primary custodian - non-sexist

But people like lawrocket and me only see the more extreme cases, because the people who have managed to work things out on behalf of their kids don't need much in the way of legal services.

That second bit is why I was bantering with you. It's the part I was expecting you to 'look at' the first time. But we kept playing the court case stereotypes instead of the normal 'scenario'. I don't think that court case is about payment avoidance, I think it's about leveling the playing field in terms of defining the total responsibility picture.

...
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

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

I don't think that court case is about payment avoidance, I think it's about leveling the playing field in terms of defining the total responsibility picture.

I see it as being just the opposite, because that has been my professional experience. And if it's not about payment avoidance, it's about continuing the marital war.

Fortunately, we don't get to decide. As I said, the system is a pretty good system, and while it needs a few tweaks here and there, it seems to work better (for most children) every day.

rl

Edited to add: But we're way off the topic of tricking a man into parenthood. And that's something I think does need to be resolved better than it is now.

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[tbrown 26]

Lawsuit seeks right to decline financial responsibility for kids

Contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.

[boringjen 0]

Quote

If these DICKHEADS want to fuck whoever they please without paternal responsibility

Meanwhile, the law protects my right to fuck anyone I please without maternal responsibility.

Hell, think about it. I have sex with a guy (whether he's a total stranger, my gym teacher, my boyfriend/husband, whatever). I end up pregnant. I can tell him. I can not tell him. I can keep it and force him to "take responsibility" (even the men who are excited about pregnancies are still forced into the matter - it's just a happy coincidence that they're not upset about it). I can abort, over any and all objections he may have. I can claim to have no idea who the father is and give the baby up for adoption. I can keep the baby, while still never telling the father he has a child.

I can't even imagine knowing that much of my future is dictated by the whims of every woman I have sex with.

Jen
"I am ready to meet my Maker. Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter." - Winston Churchill

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Let's take your situation above and imagine the woman has another child, with another father. Her NDI is thus decreased, so does the father of the first child owe her more child support now?

That's an affirmative. It's what we call in California another "hardship." On the flip side, if the father has another kid, then the father will pay less.

It's the "Shawn Kemp" syndrome. By about his 9th kid, there wasn't anything available for child support for any more kids.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[livendive 8]

Quote

What an absolute load of crap ! Because a woman doesn't abort her pregnancy or give a child up for adoption, the impregnator is off the hook ??

That brings up an interesting question in my mind. Does a non-married mother have the legal right to put a child up for adoption without getting the father's consent? I don't know the answer to that, but I suspect the answer is "no" as long as the father's name is on the birth certificate. If the answer is yes though, that would open up a whole new can of worms.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Does a non-married mother have the legal right to put a child up for adoption without getting the father's consent?

Yep.

Quote

I don't know the answer to that, but I suspect the answer is "no" as long as the father's name is on the birth certificate.

Well, here in Cali the father's name is not to be listed on the birth certificate unless both father and mother sign a voluntary declaration of paternity. Hospitals are required by law to try to get one after a birth.

Unfortunately, if another man signed the voluntary declaration of paternity, it's uncertain whether the real father can set that aside.

Quote

If the answer is yes though, that would open up a whole new can of worms.

Why? Here's what happens. She puts the child up for adoption. Or guardianship. Etc. What needs to happen is that she must state who the father is and provide contact information. The "father" is provided with notice of the proceedings, which gives him an opportunity to object.

The court's reasoning? To grant an adoption a court must terminate parental rights. To do that, they must provide notice to the father. Of course, the alleged father is whomever the mother chooses to name, but she must do so under penalty of perjury.

If the father does nothing, and has received notice of the proceeding, then the court, hearing no objection from him, will move on with it. But if the father objects, he gets his day in court as to why his parental rights shouldn't be terminated.

It's the way it works. Pretty much the same as in child support. The alleged father gets a notice from the court that says that they are gonna order child support against him unless he shows up in court and explains why he shouldn't. A good reason is usually a genetic test that shows that the alleged father is not the father. Sure, it requires a couple of court appearances, but the problem is solved. Of course, if you get a default judgment against you because you failed to appear, then those are a bitch to set aside.

Okay, main point again is that for adoption, guardianship, etc., they gotta terminate parental rights. Any parent can fight that.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Why? Here's what happens. She puts the child up for adoption. Or guardianship. Etc. What needs to happen is that she must state who the father is and provide contact information. The "father" is provided with notice of the proceedings, which gives him an opportunity to object.

Finally, the perfect argument for the other side.

The father objects and gets custody of the child from the mother.

NOW, Can the father legally go after the mother for support?

(and then the woman HAS to pay what the court tells her - 'just because they told her to - even without explaining how that money goes to support the child.....)

...
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

[rasmack 0]

Quote

The father objects and gets custody of the child from the mother.

NOW, Can the father legally go after the mother for support?

I'd say yes. That is only fair. However, there might be a reason she would want to give up her child. She might not have any money...

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I'd say yes. That is only fair.

I didn't ask if it's fair. This overall topic has nothing to do with fair, it's all about various bits of unfairness that are enforced by law. (I'd agree it's comparable, but neither side is really fair in all aspects. Frankly, deadbeats forced issuance of laws that were tehn unfair to decent fathers and mothers that don't have primary custody)

...
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

[rasmack 0]

You asked if he could legally go after her. I said yes, and added that I thought it would be only fair.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

You asked if he could legally go after her. I said yes, and added that I thought it would be only fair.

and I totally agree. I wonder if that lawsuit scenario could be won (on average over several cases in several areas)

...
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