I am curious how would you propose encouraging a father to pay child support, if he goes to great lengths to avoid it and his children suffer as a result of his endeavors?If children had any rights, then they would have the rights to have meaningful relationships with both parents, and they would have the right to have child support money spent on themselves. They do not. The American child support system is structured to do the opposite. The mom can get the most money by preventing the kids from seeing their own dad, and the mom can spend all the money on herself. The child is entitled to nothing.
I know of cases where the father abandons his kids, moves away, starts over with a new honey, and amasses thousands of dollars in child support arrearages - and refuses to provide for the children HE fathered with his ex wife. Kids are on welfare while their sperm donor takes trips to the Bahamas and lives like a king. This is shameful!
What about the children's rights?
In most cases, the dad only abandons his kids because the court has already eliminated his parental role. It is the court that really causes the abandonment.
In the situation where the dad does owe some sort of tax debt based on a percentage of his income, then I would suggest that collection methods be limited to what IRS and other tax collectors can do. Those tax collectors have plenty of power already.
The family court jails dads without trial for not paying money that they do not have. The system is barbaric.
2 comments:
"I am curious how would you propose encouraging a father to pay child support, if he goes to great lengths to avoid it and his children suffer as a result of his endeavors? "
Encourage? That makes it sound like it's the norm. And defying the law is a sign of cowardice.
Both are amusing assumptions.
"I know of cases where the father abandons his kids, moves away, starts over with a new honey, and amasses thousands of dollars in child support arrearages - and refuses to provide for the children HE fathered with his ex wife."
It's a man's right to do so? And his right to not be mistreated without due process in a court of law.
I know some cases of mothers killing their infants, but even they aren't thrown in jail without one.
A man should have a right to leave his kids without giving away anything in return or give things directly to his kids, without the mother acting as an intermediary.
More than this requires his being granted the right to control his wife's reproductive abilities and his setting the terms of how child-custody will be arranged in the matter of divorce.
"Kids are on welfare while their sperm donor takes trips to the Bahamas and lives like a king. This is shameful!"
Shame? Over what? Maybe you mean this?
Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society.
And it's certainly not as evil as cuckoldry.
"What about the children's rights?"
Right to their sperm-donor's money? Tough luck that their ova-donor was such a bitch. Or a klutz. Or both.
Though it's mitigated somewhat by the fact that the man who fathered them is a courageous man.
I love this meme that dad's abandon their children to ride off into the bahamian sunset in a convertible with their new trophy wife, whilst their children starve.
It makes me laugh every time I see an incarnation of it.
Post a Comment