Why is it Ok? (min-rant)

Avatar for hydromommy
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Why is it Ok? (min-rant)
88
Mon, 06-18-2007 - 9:12pm

You always here that a man should never be able to force a woman to gestate a pregnancy, even if the father wants to take on 100% responsibility of raising the child once it's born. So answer me this....why is it OK to saddle a man with a child he doesn't want...but not a woman?


My boyfriend has 2 kids by an ex girlfriend ( they had one, broke up....got back together basically for the sake of the kid... wound up with another kid). He pays child support, but she REFUSES to let him see the kids....no matter what. For a while ( before I was in the picture) people were telling him that he should give up his rights to the kids, which honestly he doesn't want to because despite thier mother he LOVES his kids and we hope one day when they're older they can have a relationship with him...but even if he wanted to he can't....even if he gave up paternal rights he'd still have to pay child support (paternity was absolutely established). So why is this Ok? If a woman can be given a legal *out* by aborting...why can't a man be given a legal *out* unless there is another man in the picture willing to adopt/ take financial responsibility for the child?

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-03-2007
Mon, 06-18-2007 - 9:49pm

This is a troubling thing. I have never yet heard a solution that pleased me. I think that of all the methods tried through history, the arrangement we have allows for the least frequent victimization of people.

I wonder if we could arrange a system wherein a judge could free a man from paternal obligation based on a pattern of conduct of the mother? Or, pardon my total ignorance on the topic, is this already possible? You mentioned that your boyfriend considered giving up all parental rights, would this free him from financial obligation?

Currently, I try to console myself with the understanding that as much as we try to equalize the playing field, there are biological differences in men and women which we cannot remove. Given that men never have the risk and joy of childbirth, maybe they lose their control when they donate sperm?

Avatar for hydromommy
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 12:46am
<<

I wonder if we could arrange a system wherein a judge could free a man from paternal obligation based on a pattern of conduct of the mother? Or, pardon my total ignorance on the topic, is this already possible? You mentioned that your boyfriend considered giving up all parental rights, would this free him from financial obligation? >>


No, that's the thing, he could sign away his rights but he would still be financially responsible unless the mothers BF agreed to adopt them ( and the mother's BF is a irresponsible drug addict who beats the

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-24-2006
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 1:55am

"take childbirth out of the equasion for a second.....say a couple adopts a baby .....they split up and the father decides he no longer wants to be responsible for the kid......I'm not 100% sure the 8rules* would be the same...but seeing as how adoption judges are always stressing that adopting a child afords the adoptive couple " all the rights & responsibilities of natural parents" I'm guessing it would."

Right, but in this scenario the father HAD to not only consent to bringing a child into the home, but had to sign legal documents saying so. And yes, an adoptive father is just as liable as a natural father for child support in the event of a divorce.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2004
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 3:17am
Well I wish most men were like that maybe I would think men are not all Assholes cuz I have a father who care more bout himself and step kids more than me and brother who are blood children and from his first marriage, to be honest I have a very good boyfriend who I deeply love and I am pretty sure he would be there for me most people don't what They have til they lose it I am pro choice but at time I could say that not all women are right on things such taking honorable man for granted.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-07-2007
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 7:54am

If he pays support and still has his parental rights then he can fight to get visitation if that hasn't already been done. She can't legally refuse him the right to see his kids.

I think if he did want to give up his parental rights then he should no longer have to pay child support regardless of whether she remarries or the child/ren are adopted.

It's wrong that a woman can force a child on a man who doesn't want one.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-29-2004
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 8:56am

"He pays child support, but she REFUSES to let him see the kids....no matter what."

I think that the court could easily step in on this if he wanted to see his kids and there were no legal reason to bar him from doing so.

"but even if he wanted to he can't....even if he gave up paternal rights he'd still have to pay child support (paternity was absolutely established)."

Why would he have to pay? In our state I'm pretty sure that that's the ONLY way to get out of paying. If you sign over parental raights you are no longer the parent (like an adoption), people don't have to pay for their kids that have been adopted.

"If a woman can be given a legal *out* by aborting...why can't a man be given a legal *out* unless there is another man in the picture willing to adopt/ take financial responsibility for the child?"

Again, I'm not sure if this is true. Every woman I know who has had their exes give up paternal rights did so knowing that they would no longer get any kind of support. Some were remarried, others were not.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-29-2004
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 9:03am

"say a couple adopts a baby .....they split up and the father decides he no longer wants to be responsible for the kid......I'm not 100% sure the 8rules* would be the same...but seeing as how adoption judges are always stressing that adopting a child afords the adoptive couple " all the rights & responsibilities of natural parents" I'm guessing it would. "

In this case the person who does not have custody pays the other, just like in any other situation. If the man were to get custody the woman pays child support. It's not always men, it's about who has the child most of the time. I actually kinda knew (a friend of a friend) a couple who had 50/50 custody, but since the woman made more money she had to pay a small amount of support to "even the playingfield". In my state at least, if one parent signed over parental rights and the other accepted it, then no child support would change hands.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-08-2007
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 9:03am

It is a double standard and is unfair, but I don't see a way to fairly end it. We can't just give men the option of not supporting a child, or thousands of single moms would be left by themselves to raise children, and many kids wouldn't have a dad.

Men can sign their rights over with the women's consent, but other than that they don't have any protection from unwanted children and I can't think of any ways to give it to them.

Ella Grayce

Lilypie1st Birthday Ticker
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-08-2007
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 9:06am

"No, that's the thing, he could sign away his rights but he would still be financially responsible unless the mothers BF agreed to adopt them ( and the mother's BF is a irresponsible drug addict who beats the her and can't hold a job...so you can imagine how willing he'd be to adopt the kids *eyeroll*"

Really? Is that a nationwide thing or is that just in your state? My understanding was always that a man could be freed from everything if the woman let him, regardless of their being another man in the picture.

Ella Grayce

Lilypie1st Birthday Ticker
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Tue, 06-19-2007 - 9:07am

it's all equitable.

each gender has control over his own body, bodily fluids and their by-products until they leave his/her body. for the man, this occurs when his sperm is ejaculated inot the woman's body. BAM! no more options. for the woman, it's once the fetus exits her body. actually, it's MORE restrictive for the woman since elective abortions are often restricted by a certain stage in gestation.
once born, BOTH biological parents are held responsible financially for the child unless BOTH agree to place the child for adoption. the woman will also be held financially responsible for the child if she'd like to terminate her parental rights and the father retains his.
once born, the child is a separate entity whose rights cannot be altered by its parents insofar as its care (financially)is concerned - unless people would like the government to pay for even more irresponsible parents- and i, for one, would like to use MORE, not LESS, of my money on MY OWN children.

Pages