Option to pay child support.....

Question

Fathers have very few rights as is, custody of children often go directly to mother unless father fights for children. It's always assumed that kids NEED a mother, however a father can always be found later or not at all.

So fathers NEED more rights to there kids.....both legally and socially.

If men were given the legal right to not pay child support, an opt out clause. She gets pregnant he say's "nope dont want to be a father" he has nothing to do with the child.

Wouldn't this harm the few fathers rights men have? Yet again decreasing the value of fathers.

What what would be the benefit to give men, the legal right to skip out on the kid?

Answer 1

This is moot.  The real world does not work like that.  The real world works on how to pay the bills, not on how to "opt out" out of paying the bills, unless you're a Republican, of course.  Does any man in his right mind actually believe any government struggling right now with how to financially support unsupported children is going to let ANYONE "opt out"of supporting children?  That's just another "men's rights activists" delusional victimhood fantasy. The reason most children are awarded to their mothers is because their fathers in court before a contest state for the record that they do NOT want their children, or because the father does not bother to show up for court / is in jail / is not found, and because in a contest children old enough are asked in chambers which parent they want to live with and the vast majority of children (I stood by the abused children in chambers as a family/child advocate), abused or not, say they want to live with their mothers.  Maybe that average of only an hour and forty minutes a day that fathers in the U.S. spend caring for their children has something to do with that.

I get your point about how men wanting to opt out even more of their responsibilities to children could generate "disrespect" and disregard for them.  But, I think even the mold growing in my basement around the drain could figure that one out.

Answer 2

I believe that if there was an opt out clause, or "paper abortion" as one female member on this forum called, and a man chose NOT to exercise that option, I imagine that he would have more credibility because it would show that his intention was to be there for the child from the beginning.

Answer 3

The obvious benefit is a right to have s*x without consequences.  

Wouldn't it be nice if women had the same right?

I agree that the parental opt-out devalues the role of father.

I agree that men have fewer reproductive rights than women, and I understand when men feel that imbalance is unfair.  But asking to be absolved of responsibility for a child he helped create (even if it was unplanned), is indicative of overall societal decay where everyone blames everyone ELSE for their troubles and no one accepts responsibility for their own actions.

It's like begging for the STATE to come in and rescue them from the consequences of a poor decision or a random "accident."

But that's communism, you say?   Yes, it would seem so.  

Answer 4

Rose, you often state this argument.  You keep saying things like 'skip out on the kid' - but you wouldn't say them if you were defending abortion.  The value would be unchanged by this other than the fact that men would have equal rights as women in this regard.  This would -not- change the rights that men have after the birth unless he -chose- to opt out.  The man could still find an egg donor and surrogate mother if he wanted to have his own child.

All men are asking for is a right to choose.  The same right granted to women 40 years ago.

Answer 5

I'd ask you what gives a mother a right to skip out on her child through adoption?

If two people are involved in creating a child it wouldn't be fair to say that only ONE of them has the right not to be responsible.

I don't think it would harm men at all- I think it would actually make men more valuable as women would start taking into consideration what kind of man they are getting involved in, therefore making "good guys" more attractive.

Answer 6

Actualy,  the mother can't give the child up for adoption without the father's permission. But it's not fair to let the father opt out, then expect the tax payers to pay for it.

Answer 7

I think it would decrease the value of fathers. It would also push a lot of women to abortion. Women that would have the child might go on to  welfare, which becomes a burden on taxpayers. I would rather see abortion become illegal than men get financial abortion. People should just be more responsible. They should know that every action has consequences and to live with those consequences.  

Answer 8

I agree with zipperhead.  

"...however a father can always be found later or not at all."

Many police would object to that & tell you that is the main reason we have so much crime today.  Fathers are needed.  How can fathers be so casually tossed aside?

Would this harm the few rights fathers have?  Of course it would.  Anything we do is deemed harmful.  Rarely do I see positive publicity per fathers.  As you stated above " It's always assumed that kids NEED a mother..."  

Society, the media and many women consider fathers just a wallet.  Nothing more, nothing less.  So many of us men have had to legally fight JUST TO TALK TO AND SEE OUR CHILDREN.  Yet feminists conveniently forget this?

Sorry about my rant but it's the truth from a fathers viewpoint (those who want to be in their children's lives.)

Answer 9

I think the point is that women get an "opt out" right and men do not. It is not fair period. But if men were a little more discerning about who they have s*x with they would not run into these problems.

Answer 10

The saddest story I have ever heard was from an older women regarding her first child.  She went to the man and said what would you say if I was pregnant; he said abortion.  He was just starting out in his life and didn't think that he could be a father.  Truth was she was pregnant; so she left him and went to have her child; she didn't tell him about the child.  She struggled to do this on her own and then settled with raising the child with her male friend who said he was the father.  Years later the father found out about the child and he started to watch her, then the child was told and this damaged the relationship she had with the surrogate father and her other siblings.  The father actually regrets saying he wished she would have an abortion.  He missed so much time with his child and there were now so many things to fix.  I think if fathers have the right to opt out on living children they will grow to resent the freedom.  They may choose to make haste decisions and miss out on a lot.  

Granted women can opt out and I do think if the man is involved with the women he should have a choice about that.  However I would be acceptable to a man within the same legal time frame for abortion was to go to a registry fill out a form to release claim of any child that may occur with this women. However; there would have to be the understanding of once you completed the form you could never say that you were the father of the child; ever not even when they are adults.  See women make the difficult decision to have an abortion not to opt out of parenthood but because she can not legally or mentally afford to raise the child.  She never gets a second chance and neither should he... Thats equal right?

Answer 11

Good question. you are right fathers do NOT have many rights. and this question really hits close to home with me. there is not really a right answer here. I can see your point here. it's a tough one it really is.

If the father does opt out like my daughter's daddy did. does it harm the few rights?

Ok I am going to say YES & NO. yes it could harm the fathers that fight for their kids. but at the same time if a father wants nothing to do with his child. I don't know. I want to be fair to her daddy I don't want to force him to be her daddy. but at the same time i want my daughter to have a father in her life to know him she is being raised to love him.

I don't know this question is hard for me to answer let me just say it's a shame fathers don't have as many rights as mothers it sucks that fathers who want to be fathers con NOT be in their life because a few mothers won't let them in. they are the ones who maybe harmed with this. but then again it may help to see how hard they are fighting to see their kids. I am sorry like i said this question hits close to home with me,. there is no easy answers and that is a shame. sorry i didn't answer this better. God Bless

ADD ON: If he came up and asked to see her I would let him see her in a minute. he is more then welcome to see her anytime. I just want to be fair to both him and my daughter LORD I wish i knew what the right answer could be. and he is NOT at my mercy never was and never will be.

Answer 12

I fail to see how granting a father similar rights to that of the mother could be seen as decreasing the value of fathers because as it is, fathers are considered expendable, except for financial matters. In regard to children, birth, abortion, custody, child support and involvement with his children, the father's "rights" almost always depends solely on the mother's wishes. Granting ANY options would be an improvement, except for the women who use children as a means to an end (money and/or vengeance).

If granting fathers the same right to opt out of parenthood (which is very comparable to the ability to abort a fetus or legally abandon an infant), then abortion on demand legal abandonment would have decreased the value of women. Has it? If feel that it has but apparently our democratic socialist state feels otherwise.

Answer 13

I HAVE crawled through broken glass to enforce my visitation rights.. and the financial aspects are increadibly oppressive.  I took my x to court 4 times to ensure I got to see my kids.  She's remarried and making combined, about 80K+.  I am making about 36 combined and the amount of child support is a heavy burden, especially since I know it's not as though they are inpoverished, nor would they be without it.  I would never "opt out" however, because I realize that somewhere down the line, there is going to be a payday for me when the kids are old enough to realize what was really happening.  Bitter women are the problem, not the ability to opt out.  OK, rant over.  It would hurt the system if men were able to opt out, it would help the system if there were "retroactive accounting" of child support issues.  The rights we have are very few, and it sucks.  I'm just trusting God to sort all of it out and when the kids are old enough, they'll be able to figure out what's what.

Answer 14

It's always men who don't have children who always have the most laughable opinions on how they would "deal" with child support.

They apparently feel that you can raise a child for a couple of years and then just "lose interest" and walk away.

I would crawl over broken glass to keep my child from harm or distress; I assume most fathers feel the same way and want the best for their children.

Don't they?

Answer 15

No this would provide some balance, is she wants to give birth against the fathers wishes, he should be given to option to sign away the child.

The mother can also choose to put the child up for adoption or give it to the grandparents or an other family member.

It would raise our lowly status to be given any sort of a choice.

Answer 16

I don't think a man on this earth who is against abortion should be for an opt out law.

I suppose some of them really do only care about themselves. I think this kind of thing would make people pay because they have morals. I guess the whole country is going in that swing.

I am against abortion (unless its rape or serious medical reasons) and opt out.  Making a law like that would be against so many of the women who morally COULDN'T live with the decision of having an abortion. Many fems believe in the right but say they wouldn't have one themselves.

Sooner or later men will get this right and that is one of the many reason that I am not a feminist. I don't believe they are looking at the whole picture when it comes to women and men in this issue. Feminist want to push their weight around on this and its going to effect EVERY woman, not just the feminists.

Oh oops and NO it would not lower the value of fathers more. It would probably increase it. Many single mothers know the value of a father. Many children do as well. See how many woman will understand after a law like that came into play.

Answer 17

I wouldn't say it harmed.  It's about being fair..

It's "her body her choice", men have no say and are completely irrelevant when it come to abortion.  BUT when the woman decided to keep the child, the man(or his wallet) automatically become relevant and responsible..

That's wrong and unjust..

The point is that, it's "her body her choice" so it should be her responsibility as well; and since women can use abortion to opt out of parenthood, it really is only fair that men should also have the right to opt out and have the option of whether or not to pay child support