Child support is a right of the child, not 'him' or 'her' (dad or mom). If a child is born it deserves to be supported by the people who created it. The state also has the interest in support from the parents as the first line of responsibility, otherwise we all have to pay for it while the people directly responsible for it go free.
You can't sign off a third party's rights. You can't tell the child or the state that you won't pay, the child and the state and the taxpayers have an interest in you paying and it's far outside your rights to deny that.
If the mother doesn't want to bring the child to term, but does so because the father wants it, then the woman should have no responsibility for the child thereafter. She's just the surrogate womb, nothing more.
Your way forces the woman to have an abortion, with or without the father's consent. How does that make sense?
If that is indeed the law, it is forcing abortions and fathers are not going to have a say about it. Too bad daddy if mommy doesn't feel like spending 9 months carrying a baby for you. Nor should she be forced to or feel guilty for not doing it.
The people who created the child are legally responsible for it. The child has the right to support from its parents. The only way to get around that is if another party willingly takes on the parent's obligation.
Hypothetically Speaking
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Child support is a right of the child, not 'him' or 'her' (dad or mom). If a child is born it deserves to be supported by the people who created it. The state also has the interest in support from the parents as the first line of responsibility, otherwise we all have to pay for it while the people directly responsible for it go free.
You can't sign off a third party's rights. You can't tell the child or the state that you won't pay, the child and the state and the taxpayers have an interest in you paying and it's far outside your rights to deny that.
--
thegypsysailor
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
If the mother doesn't want to bring the child to term, but does so because the father wants it, then the woman should have no responsibility for the child thereafter. She's just the surrogate womb, nothing more.
Your way forces the woman to have an abortion, with or without the father's consent. How does that make sense?
--
wigz
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No, it simply doesn't discriminate based on gender. Neither gender can sign off a third party's rights.
--
thegypsysailor
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
If that is indeed the law, it is forcing abortions and fathers are not going to have a say about it. Too bad daddy if mommy doesn't feel like spending 9 months carrying a baby for you. Nor should she be forced to or feel guilty for not doing it.
--
wigz
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
No, it means each parent is held to the same standard once a child is born.
--
thegypsysailor
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
So now a surrogate womb is a parent? OK, just how does that work again?
--
wigz
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
charli.m
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
See More Comments =>
The people who created the child are legally responsible for it. The child has the right to support from its parents. The only way to get around that is if another party willingly takes on the parent's obligation.
Is the man who played a part in conceiving a child he doesn't want to parent just a sperm donor?