Posted on 10/14/2008 4:39:29 AM PDT by RogerFGay
yes ma’am. but dead beat dads are still scum. you are of course entitled to your opinion too.
Nah, you have the $10b wrong; the incentive money is all the money the feds spend on the child support program.
Any other money you’re thinking of is reimbursements for ‘IV-D’ (welfare) which is money that’s going out (by the state) to “poor moms” under the federal program and paid back by the feds. Who said funded mandates were better than unfunded mandates?
This is IMO the true travesty of the whole mess. The first cause is the 60s-era welfare system itself, which under the guise of ‘helping the poor kids’ in fact penalizes people for sticking together and rewards people for shacking up or splitting up.
This bit of social engineering creates the situation where moms are alone and on welfare and dads are neither necessary nor wanted. After all if Dad stays in the house Mom doesn’t qualify for the various and sundry programs.
20 years of this and people are tired of paying for professional welfare moms, so another layer of crud is layered on top of the first. This layer manages to make Dad not only unwanted but also a permanent debtor and criminal. Oh yea and as you noticed it wreaks havoc on middle-class people as well.
Now people wonder why young people don’t get married. Heh.
That comment doesn't help anything. I was asking simple questions to try and find some common ground that can be worked from. I'll go first. Dead beat dads are scum. I agree. Now, what is the definition of a dead beat dad? My definition would probably be more biblical than legal. I don't think the man in the article is a dead beat dad since he is not the sperm donor nor ever took responsibility for the child. However, looking at the big picture if he had kept his **** to himself he most likely would not be in this predicament.
Apparently wtc911 does not believe that RogerFGay has any moral authority to speak about the subject of child support based upon personal issues. I am guessing that he does not disagree with the premise of the article, but the poster himself. If that is correct, then let him present his evidence, and if RogerFGay is found to be a hypocrite then the FreeRepublic Self Appointed Posting Police will hound him into oblivion as they always seem to do.
If wtc911 is willing to do the research necessary and posts it we will all jump on the pillory block and light our torches gleefully. If, however, he is conducting a personal attack to cover for a hidden agenda, such as RogerFGay is insinuating, then he needs to either 'fess up his real purpose or be banished as a troll (viking kitties, lighting, the whole bit).
Sorry, I forgot to ping you in the above response.
______________________________________________________
If he is not the father then he should not be ordered to pay support. The decision should be reversed.
However, any father who does not do his best to support his children, regardless of the relationship with the mother, is scum.
I've known a few and told them so.
One guy cut a deal with his ex wherein he gave up any visitation rights in exchange for not having to pay support (the law in NYS doesn't allow this any longer). His kids grew up five miles away and never saw him. He used to say that they would come to him once they were grown. They did, checked him out, decided he was an asshole and cut him off.
At the same time another friend with two kids saw them move to Minnesota when their mother remarried. Not only did he keep making the payments but he flew there once a month, regardless of the weather, to see them. Did he get screwed? Yeah, stuff happens. But he dealt with it like a man because his daughters were more important to him than anything else. In the last two years both his girls got married. He gave them both away.
Whom do you respect?
When you come back... could you try dealing in specifics for the lurkers out here? Your inuendos are really annoying...
I recall the definition of “deadbeat dad” quite vividly. During the 1990s it was the subject of thousands of articles and news reports. It’s a guy who abandons his wife and children, can afford to support them, but simply refuses to do so. From this definition, I went to the statistics and estimated that “deadbeat dads” compose about one half of one percent of the total population of non-custodial parents.
It appears from the way the article is written that this was not a call for the judge to make. The law needs changing because it favors the accusation of fatherhood over the actual paternity. Most of these laws were written before positive DNA testing was available. Many of them could be overhauled to allow for this, just as many innocent men have been released from rape and murder convictions in the last 15 years based on DNA evidence.
As for your other query, is it possible that both of them made the right decision for the sake for the kids?
I think they were having a private conversation on a public thread. And believe the answer is in one of RogerFGay’s previous articles for Mens Daily Something-or-the-other in which he implied, but did not expressly give open support for Condelezza Rice as a Pres/VP candidate.
_______________________________________
The guy who wrote his kids off did it for the money. I knew him well enough to know it from his own mouth. And no, his kids welfare was not part of his consideration.
Ah... hmmm... ok... I guess. Thanks for letting me know.
If it’s the sister’s divorce she’s worried about... isn’t that Taser-boy?
I made it a point to tell you flat out that I wasn't talking about McCain.
*Nobody* can have it both ways. You cannot lecture on the need for men to vote for better candidates on men's issues and family issues and *at the same time* be a cheerleader for a candidate who personally uses family court as a weapon against *any* man. You are losing credibility every time you insist you can have it both ways.
Roger knows what I’m talking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.