Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Scenario 1- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with her parents, the girl decides there's too much she wants to accomplish in life, and the kid would make things that much harder. She has the abortion. Due to the fact that it's her body, the father has no say. If he wants her to keep the kid, oh well, cry me a river. She goes on with life, unhampered by the responsibilities of raising a child.

Scenario 2- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with his parents, the guy decides there's too much he wants to accomplish in life, and having a kid will make things that much harder. The young lady decides to have the kid anyway. They break up not much later, she takes him to court for child support, the end.

Am I the only person who thinks this is wrong? Putting aside what you think about abortion, should the female retain the right to receive financial help with raising the kid if the father decides he doesn't want the kid?

Please refrain from claiming "This thread is pointless" simply because you don't understand the question. This is not an abortion thread. It's not my intention to offend anyone, just to figure out how many intelligent people think as I do.

I agree, it's not fair for the father to have to pay although he didn't want the child. That's a double standard that needs to be addressed and changed.

LOL simple solution bring that teenage couple to attornies draw up a legal and binding agreement spend some money up front based on mutual agreements and BAM no problems!

The woman should pay him "No-child support" for the fact she killed of something he wanted (in the case that the dad wanted the child...) that way she can ask for child support when she goes against his wishes....

Bizzzaro logic rules!

If a girl gives her life to the raising of her children, and then decided to get educated,.............is that some problem??????...............A Man should take charge for what is his.

Originally posted by Crease
Scenario 1- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with her parents, the girl decides there's too much she wants to accomplish in life, and the kid would make things that much harder. She has the abortion. Due to the fact that it's her body, the father has no say. If he wants her to keep the kid, oh well, cry me a river. She goes on with life, unhampered by the responsibilities of raising a child.

Scenario 2- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with his parents, the guy decides there's too much he wants to accomplish in life, and having a kid will make things that much harder. The young lady decides to have the kid anyway. They break up not much later, she takes him to court for child support, the end.


These scenerios I find them to be rather hard to answer. I will only comment on the fact that these are teenagers and is shame they're wasting their lives thinking of sex and kids. If only they had that passion for education it would be miracle.

As for the parents getting involved....pity...they should have taken action before and not after the fact.

Scenario one- tell the teen to get a dog. Cheaper, easier to take care of. He's not ready yet. He made a dumb decision having sex that young anyways.

Scenario two- tough crap. Man should not sleep with a woman and then just go "Oh, I got too much to do. Nevermind". He made his choice already. Now he can pay for it.

Originally posted by debbiejo
If a girl gives her life to the raising of her children, and then decided to get educated,.............is that some problem??????...............A Man should take charge for what is his.

I see nothing wrong with that...I just don't see how it pertains to the thread at all.

Originally posted by Wesker
Scenario one- tell the teen to get a dog. Cheaper, easier to take care of. He's not ready yet. He made a dumb decision having sex that young anyways.

Scenario two- tough crap. Man should not sleep with a woman and then just go "Oh, I got too much to do. Nevermind". He made his choice already. Now he can pay for it.

If the girl, as you say, "has too much to do", it's cool I guess. They both made the "dumb decision" to have sex. My only point is that she's not penalized financially if she aborts the kid.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
These scenerios I find them to be rather hard to answer. I will only comment on the fact that these are teenagers and is shame they're wasting their lives thinking of sex and kids. If only they had that passion for education it would be miracle.

As for the parents getting involved....pity...they should have taken action before and not after the fact.

I absolutely agree.

Out of curiosity, would the scenarios be easier to answer if they were both older? Mid to late 20's maybe?

Originally posted by Crease
If the girl, as you say, "has too much to do", it's cool I guess. They both made the "dumb decision" to have sex. My only point is that she's not penalized financially if she aborts the kid.

The man will never have to actually carry a child. Whether or not he wants it is really a small choice in life compared to her decision to endure the nine month trial, along with everything that entails, and then she will have to fulfil a role as mother to that child which is far more demanding and personal than father roles (At least, in the earliest stages.) The father can want the child or not, but either way it's her body that carries the baby. However, in the very least he should provide her with financial support if he decides to be a deadbeat.

Originally posted by Wesker
The man will never have to actually carry a child. Whether or not he wants it is really a small choice in life compared to her decision to endure the nine month trial, along with everything that entails, and then she will have to fulfil a role as mother to that child which is far more demanding and personal than father roles (At least, in the earliest stages.) The father can want the child or not, but either way it's her body that carries the baby. However, in the very least he should provide her with financial support if he decides to be a deadbeat.

It is an obvious truth that the man will never have to carry a child. I also agree that from inception to the child's early years of life the mother's role is, under what most would consider normal circumstances, more demanding.

However, I still believe she should wave her right to child support if she decides to have it against the father's will, simply because she has no such restraints. I do however thank you for intelligently stating your points...Next opinion, please.

Originally posted by Crease


However, I still believe she should wave her right to child support if she decides to have it against the father's will, simply because she has no such restraints. I do however thank you for intelligently stating your points...Next opinion, please.

I agree with this completely.

However, I have seen the flip side too. My brother's gf got pregnant and she wanted an abortion and he didn't want her too. He was ready to pay child support or even raise the child alone and still she had the abortion. So should she have been made to carry the child then give it to him? Maybe. Its not always fair that the girl has all the options and not the guy. Just my 2 cents.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I agree, it's not fair for the father to have to pay although he didn't want the child. That's a double standard that needs to be addressed and changed.

Farthers for justice.

Originally posted by omaga
Farthers for justice.

Yeah, I agree with them.

Originally posted by Crease
Scenario 1- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with her parents, the girl decides there's too much she wants to accomplish in life, and the kid would make things that much harder. She has the abortion. Due to the fact that it's her body, the father has no say. If he wants her to keep the kid, oh well, cry me a river. She goes on with life, unhampered by the responsibilities of raising a child.

He can always leave her if he's not happy with their relationship. That's it.

Scenario 2- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with his parents, the guy decides there's too much he wants to accomplish in life, and having a kid will make things that much harder. The young lady decides to have the kid anyway. They break up not much later, she takes him to court for child support, the end.

It shouldn't have to come to this point. Women and men can take proper steps to ensure they don't have children. Why would they have sex without contraceptives and then become frusturated that they are having a child.

Am I the only person who thinks this is wrong? Putting aside what you think about abortion, should the female retain the right to receive financial help with raising the kid if the father decides he doesn't want the kid?

No she shouldn't retain financial rights if the male took the proper steps of contrecption and he understood they both were.

Both man and woman should come to a point where they decide to have the child before having it. It shouldn't come as a surprise. If it does come as a surprise, with both parties allowing the pregnancy to happen, than both have to be held accountable for the life of that child. That includes child support.

Having a child needs to be taken seriously. This includes planning it.

Originally posted by NoahMann
I agree with this completely.

However, I have seen the flip side too. My brother's gf got pregnant and she wanted an abortion and he didn't want her too. He was ready to pay child support or even raise the child alone and still she had the abortion. So should she have been made to carry the child then give it to him? Maybe. Its not always fair that the girl has all the options and not the guy. Just my 2 cents.

I don't think she should've been forced to carry the child. For women who aren't movie stars (most), their bodies are never the same after carrying a child. Had she carried it to term and gave him the kid though, he should have to waive the right to chilkd support.

Isn't there a court case happening right now that deals with the man claiming that he should not be held responsible for the child if she chooses to go ahead with the birth?

My feeling on abortion has always been that the man has few rights in the childbirth scenario. I understand that only the woman is capable of carrying the child and giving birth to it. However, the man should be allowed at least a measure of parental rights in this situation. Conversly, if the man wants nothing to do with the child and abortion is an option that the mother flatly refuses, then her righteous attitude should extend to the possiblity that she will have to raise this child on her own.

I'm glad somebody made a Child Support thread, cuz I eventually woulda and they saved me the trouble.

Child Support is a bullshit law. If a man wants the baby and the woman doesn't and wants an abortion, he has no say in it, and if he DOESN'T want the baby and the b!tch does, he still has no say and has to pay against his will--half of his hard-earned money is going to an unwanted presence in his life. That's crap. It's a trap either way.

I know for a fact that eventually there will be a law where a man don't hafta pay if he don't wanna. And Lord willin', that'll be the day.

There are women out there who will decide they want the baby just because they will get child support, which is bs.

That said, if a man is strolling around penetrating females carelessly, he isn't exactly trying to prevent this from happening is he?

I think that if both parties use contraception or something and decide they DON'T want a child, but it happens anyway, then the female should suggest that- if she wants to keep it- the man doesn't have to be tied down. She didn't want it and because she's making a choice on a whim, he has to suffer for something they agreed not to have.

It works both ways.

-AC

Originally posted by debbiejo
A Man should take charge for what is his.

He may want to take charge of what is his, but he can't do that if his girlfriend aborts his child.



I think this is a double standard. If the woman choses to keep the baby, she should raise it herself. If she goes after her partner for child support, obviously she doesn't have enough money to finacially support the baby, so why have it?

Originally posted by Makedde
obviously she doesn't have enough money to finacially support the baby, so why have it?

"People should always take responsibility for their actions. No matter what." - Your opinion or getting pregnant, for many weeks.

-AC

I meant that only if the woman acts like a whore and doesn't use protection. She should take responsiblity, but if she is careful, she will be okay.

I don't like you, btw. You piss me off.

Why, because I'm exposing your flip-flopping hypocricy at every turn?

Yeah, I bet that is a bit of a b*tch.

-AC

You don't seem to think I should have an opinion, you disrespectful git.

Have one, but don't piss and moan when you have about 9 different ones that all contradict each other, then get called up on it.

Responsibility, remember?

-AC

I don't have 9 different opinions, my opinions have always been the same, but they are just not the opinions you think I should have.

Hahaha, good one.

-AC

Well, you seem to think I should have whatever opinion you say I should have.

I think you should pick one and stick to it. Not have many that contradict one another.

I won't continue this here, already proven my point.

-AC

I have my opinions and I stick to them. You won't accept that.

I've proven that you don't, as you have.

-AC

I thought you said you wouldn't continue this here?

Child support sucks. I'm having to pay it to my ex-wife until my youngest turns 18. Its not a burden for me, just a pain in the ass.

Can I ask, what do you all think about men who are paying child support to a child who doesn't exist? There have been a few cases of that here, men paying for a child they have never seen only to find that child never existed. This happened to one man, he tried to force his ex partner to pay back the child support, but she won the court case, and the man lost. How on earth is that fair? Another man unknowingly paid child support for three children that were not even his-they were his best friends. His wife had carried on an affair with his best friend then told her husband she was pregnant by him, when she was really pregnant by his mate. She got about $40,000 out of him. He took a second job to pay child support, he spoiled the kids rotten, then he found they were not his. Initially, he won his case, but the wife appealed, and won. The man lost $40,000 that he spent on children that were not his.

Should all fathers who are ordered to pay child support have a paternity test to determine if they are the father, or should they risk being made fools of?

Paying child support for a child that doesn't exist?

That's teh most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. Why would one do such a thing?


Look, if a man and a woman have sex and she becomes pregnant, then that is one issue. However, if the man wants an abortion and the woman does not, then in the current US political sphere, he should have the right to let the mother know his intentions. If he supports abortion and she refuses based on her morals(what else could it be based on?) then it is legitimate to take it to court and have the father absolved of social and financial responsability.

when it comes right down to it, the basic question is that of the mothers righteous attitude. And when the mother is willing to stand in fron tof a court of law and admit that, then she should have the good sense to stand by that notion when it comes down to crunch time. If she refuses abortion based on her desire to gain something finacially, then where are her morals now? If she refuses based on her moral belief that abortion is wrong and the child is her responsability, then shut the **** up and do it. If she believes that the baby is a gift from god that knows everything happens for the best, then shut the **** up and deal with it....everything will be okay. If she spread her legs and let some guy **** her without a condom, then shut the **** up and deal with it.

And, in the long run, it boils down to two factors. The mother and the father. If the father says yes and the mother says no, well...she has to carry the baby. If the mother says yes and the father says no, well...the mother has to carry the baby.

One has to wonder why homosexuals are so often called "promiscuous". Breeders would be too, if they didn't have to worry about shit like having babies. I guess baby Jesus dropped the ball on that one.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Paying child support for a child that doesn't exist?

That's teh most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. Why would one do such a thing?



The man never saw his child, and believe his ex partner when she said she had a baby. He was naive, sure, but that woman had no right to do what she did.

Originally posted by Makedde
The man never saw his child, and believe his ex partner when she said she had a baby. He was naive, sure, but that woman had no right to do what she did.

Okay, I can't argue that.

Originally posted by Crease
Scenario 1- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with her parents, the girl decides there's too much she wants to accomplish in life, and the kid would make things that much harder. She has the abortion. Due to the fact that it's her body, the father has no say. If he wants her to keep the kid, oh well, cry me a river. She goes on with life, unhampered by the responsibilities of raising a child.

Sucks for the father, but he isn't the one that has to deal with the pregnancy so he really shouldn't have any say in it.



Depends, I do thinks she should make it clear to him that she is pregnant and that she wants to keep the child, if he then refuses to take any steps then yes he has to pay for the child. If he however makes it clear that he does not want the child (in a period when abortion is still an option) and he can somehow prove that he used birth control or that she did (pill, condoms whatever) then no he shouldn't pay. So if he would go to court and tell a judge this or make a contract with a lawyer and have her sign it, then no I do not think he should pay anything.

If the time for an abortion is already over and the mother knew she was pregnant at least a week before that time was over and refused to tell him about it then he shouldn't be forced to pay either. If she didn't know and the time for abortion was already over then sucks for him, nothing he can do to stop it and he's just going to have to pay.

Originally posted by Makedde
He may want to take charge of what is his, but he can't do that if his girlfriend aborts his child.



I think this is a double standard. If the woman choses to keep the baby, she should raise it herself. If she goes after her partner for child support, obviously she doesn't have enough money to finacially support the baby, so why have it?

Where have been all my life?

Where have I been, or where have you been?

one can always give the child up for adoption........on the other hand, if a woman gets pregnant and gives birth to a child the man have to take responsibility for his action he cant go on neglecting his own blood. He needs to help supporting his own child, if he is truly a man that is

Originally posted by Makedde
Where have I been, or where have you been?

Where have you been all my life?

Originally posted by Crease
Where have you been all my life? She is truly one who wouldn't mind being taken advantage of.

Originally posted by debbiejo
She is truly one who wouldn't mind being taken advantage of.

Lol only by you Debbiejo, Crease isn't her type.

Originally posted by soleran30
Lol only by you Debbiejo, Crease isn't her type.

Now I'm really wondering you've been all my life

Originally posted by Crease
Where have you been all my life?

Getting belted on the head by AC at every turn.

Okay...went looking for threads and came across this one, and boy did it hit home !

I am a remarried guy that has two kids from my previous marriage, and one from my current. Now I had no problem paying child support, ( and with it being automatically withdrawn from my employment checks ) I knew that I was taking care of my kids.

The problem that occured with me is that I changed jobs, and although I maintained my payments to the Ex, by giving her either cash or check, the State didn't see that I was paying and the debt started to pile up. I was not aware of this until I moved out of State to Tennessee, where I found a very low paying job and could barely make enough to put food on the table.

Once they began to take out Child Support from my checks again, they were taking 75% of my weekly pay, which only gave me 25% to put food on the table, and a roof over my head. Of course I tried to contact the Ex and tell her what was going on, but she simply stated that it wasn't fair, or right and that was it. Nothing done about it.
I was taking care of my kids, but I could hardly take care of myself, and my new family. We had to move out of our apartment, move in with a relative, I had to quit my job cause I couldn't afford to drive there everyday, and on top of it all, I resorted to asking the government for help and they issued me food stamps. This went on for over a year...

I moved the family from Tennessee back to the State I originated from, and got a much better paying job, and once again they are taking the child support, but I am in a much better financial state and it doesn't hurt as much to have those payments taken.

Like I said, I have no problem paying the child support, but just recently I was informed that my tax return would be taken for child support. All of it..not just a percentage, but all of it. That is $4700 that should have been mine, that is now hers ! Oh yeah, and to top it all off...I found out that I am $30,000 in debt to the child support, and there is no way that I will ever be able to buy a car, a house, or get any kind of credit card in the future !


I believe in child support, and again have no problem paying what I should, just as long as it is used on the kids, and not vacations, or new stereo systems !!!!

I just wish there was a way that the non-custodial parent would not be taken advantage of like I have been and now has to deal with the situation without rectification.

Originally posted by Crease
Scenario 1- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with her parents, the girl decides there's too much she wants to accomplish in life, and the kid would make things that much harder. She has the abortion. Due to the fact that it's her body, the father has no say. If he wants her to keep the kid, oh well, cry me a river. She goes on with life, unhampered by the responsibilities of raising a child.

Scenario 2- Teenage couple are expecting a kid. Together with his parents, the guy decides there's too much he wants to accomplish in life, and having a kid will make things that much harder. The young lady decides to have the kid anyway. They break up not much later, she takes him to court for child support, the end.

Am I the only person who thinks this is wrong? Putting aside what you think about abortion, should the female retain the right to receive financial help with raising the kid if the father decides he doesn't want the kid?

Please refrain from claiming "This thread is pointless" simply because you don't understand the question. This is not an abortion thread. It's not my intention to offend anyone, just to figure out how many intelligent people think as I do.

They should both pay child support if that's the case.

Originally posted by Makedde
Where have I been, or where have you been?

Don't know, and right here. Hasn't been to KMC since April 2nd - it's funny how some users come, try to make this impression that they've posted here for years by posting 1,000 posts per day, and then simply vanish.

scenerio 1 is fine........

there is no parallel to scenerio 2 though. The first scenerio only involves two lives, the parents. The second involves 3 lives......the parents and the child. A child should be punished, trapped in a life of poverty because a difference in the parents' decision making? No. Once the child is born, both parties have equal responsibility in providing for it.........not out of responsibility to the mother who made the decision to keep the child but out of responsibility to the child who didn't get to make a decision at all.

not only that.......scenerio 2 is completely natural. The only purpose for sex is for reproduction. Anybody engaging in sex realizes this and knows the possibiltiy to probability of creating a child. Naturally the child will be born in most cases. Once the sex act is complete......the father has no further rights to make choices as he has already made the choice to engage in an act designed for no other purpose than procreation....something he knew well beforehand. If later the mother decides to do something un-natural like having an abortion.....she has the right simply because it is her body. She can do anything she wishes to it. If she wishes to slice of an ear, she can........if she wishes to stick a coat hanger up her cervix into her uterus, she can.

We know how it is. The question is is it fair. I know that life's not fair, but it just seems wrong somehow that a woman can cop out of it after sex no matter what, but a guy is trapped - no matter what.

I could be wrong on this, but - before the advent of genetic testing, child support could only be taken from a father if he'd signed the birth certificate.

Now personally I do think the man should owe up and take responsibility for his actions, but then again I think the woman should too.

-edit-

by the way, Evil Dead, Did anyone ever tell you that that sig is just creepy?

I agree Life Isn't Fair.

Both scenerios are not fair and neither have clean cut answer.

I think it is funny that in both scenerios the guy comes out as the victim. The girl is in this as much as he is, he has JUST as much resposibility as she does. She did not force him to have sex, just as she was not forced. They put themseleves in this situation by having sex to young and unprepared to handle the what may happen.

I think that the guy should DEFINATLY have a say in an abortion. It is his baby as well. There is no law that says he has any right, and I think that is wrong.

I think that YES he should pay child support, wether he wanted the baby or not. He had sex, he was responsible enough to take the chance, he is responsible enough to take care of what he helpped create.


Just because a woman carries the child and is ultimately responsible for it in the eyes of society, does not mean that the father has any less reponsibility morally.


I would like to ask another question to you....

Scenerio One:
You see a young man, late teens, he has a baby. He is the sole caretaker for the baby. He is not married, he lives w/ his parents, the baby's mother did not want it.

How do you view this guy? RESPONSIBLE, for taking care of his baby when the mother would not. And you pity him since his life has been altered and he has a been handed a responsiblity that the girl should have had. He is praised. And he is made into character in TV shows and movies. I can name several.

Now...
Second Senerio:
You see a teenage girl w/ a baby. She too is unwed, lives w/ her parents, and the babies father has left.

How do you view her? As a ****. Why did she get pregnant? Because she slept around. Why did the guy leave her? For a good reason your sure. That is how she is painted in public, even if it is far from the truth.

Society is very turned, and even if you know better, it is easy to jump on the bandwagon and believe the easiest answer.

You help make the baby, you should help take care of it........I wonder if opinions would differ if the man carried the baby for 9 months and the women took off to play other fields.

perhaps one day technology will render this discussion moot and make that possible.

wouldn't that be hilarious a pregnant guy....

Of course birth would have to be C-section.

hysterical

Its already been done. Govahnah Ahnold had Junior!

the courts seem to be loaded on the side of women and have been for some time. when if ever will there be equal rights! i feel that she has a choice to have or have not a child. i also feel that he should have the only choice that he can have. if she decides to have the child for what ever reason she wants then he should have the choice to sign all of his rights away and not be finical responsible if he so desires. i feel that ... actually i know of several young girls that in there youth felt that they would trap the man by doing this and it never worked out. so young single mom and pissed off single paycheck. so who do we blame? those of us that are a little wiser and also vote for the people that make the decisions of our laws and educational programs. had most of these you women had healthy parents that understood child raising a little better and provided a healthy home which produced a healthy young women she would have made different choices because she would have cared about herself and her future. the same goes with the young man. so we as society do nothing to promote healthy families and guidance there for we end up with shootings at high schools and teen pregnancy just to name a few of our nightly news headlines. when we take a proactive stance for the future of our country and the world of people understanding people and education for all because it is in the greatest interest to the ultimate survival of our planet. then we will start to see a change. these types of information and education should be free to everyone in every country and advertised regularly on billboards, TV, buses, welfare you name it. but does any of this matter? no. why? greed! you don't want this to happen to the people you know and love then first educate yourself and then educate them. thanks for reading what i had to say and sorry for the poor spelling. James