[jeffc]

Reads like a thinly disguised editorial/opinion...

[OldGoatCPO]

Reading the entire article was a chore as it initially tried to raise sympathy for the poor poor man. However, if you read it to the very end, his family is already a drain on the system and the $90,000 annually is dependent on the father-in-law. Pretax his annual earnings would be less then $35K per year for a large family. So the assumption is the father-in-law would give $55k per year because as the article states the wife does not work. The judge threw the BS flag. Hell yes he will be a burden on the state, he already is pumping out babies he cannot financially care for.

[KC_Conspirator]

It is POORLY disguised editorial opinion. I can sense that many facts have been omitted from this opening sob story.