1) Can I ask why a single parent should have to experience great inconvenience just because someone doesn't like the idea of "compromising their principles"? Sometimes people have to compromise their individual wants in order to play their role in a collective.
2) The value of food is subjective, and things like tax and child support are paid in money because money has an objective value and resources do not. You can't just be vague and say "well, that's about $50 worth of potatoes", it has to be objective. What if what you produce has no subjective value to the single parent?
3) What about the single parent's lifestyle? That's just as important, isn't it? Many people don't have the time or skill to cook with raw ingredients every single day, and why should they be forced to if they don't want?
If it infringes on religious practice it should be excepted.
I also don't see why a person, who has lived a lifestyle that CAN provide, in ways other than cash, can't be allowed to provide in those ways. I don't see it reasonable to expect or force such a person to abandon their lifestyle for some random job just to make a minimal support payment. Their partner accepted this lifestyle prior to having the child so it should remain acceptable. That shouldn't magically change. If the food provided was OK before, it should still be OK now, if it isn't then why did you have a kid with this person?
IIN to think Child Support Is Unfair!
← View full post
1) Can I ask why a single parent should have to experience great inconvenience just because someone doesn't like the idea of "compromising their principles"? Sometimes people have to compromise their individual wants in order to play their role in a collective.
2) The value of food is subjective, and things like tax and child support are paid in money because money has an objective value and resources do not. You can't just be vague and say "well, that's about $50 worth of potatoes", it has to be objective. What if what you produce has no subjective value to the single parent?
3) What about the single parent's lifestyle? That's just as important, isn't it? Many people don't have the time or skill to cook with raw ingredients every single day, and why should they be forced to if they don't want?
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Why should a non-custodial parent be inconvenienced just the same?
If the child lived with the other parent, they'd be eating whatever food that was provided so what's the difference?
If they want to eat, they'd find the time. Eating is not a want, it's a need.
--
dom180
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If we accept that both parties will be inconvenienced either way, why make any special exceptions?
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If it infringes on religious practice it should be excepted.
I also don't see why a person, who has lived a lifestyle that CAN provide, in ways other than cash, can't be allowed to provide in those ways. I don't see it reasonable to expect or force such a person to abandon their lifestyle for some random job just to make a minimal support payment. Their partner accepted this lifestyle prior to having the child so it should remain acceptable. That shouldn't magically change. If the food provided was OK before, it should still be OK now, if it isn't then why did you have a kid with this person?