Yes
No
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
Notice how everyone who said "Yes" is female. So, that goes to show that yes it is fair... to women. As a man, my question has always been, how does this not violate my 5th amendment rights? Money is my property. A child is my property. The government and the females who would like to have it can kiss my ass, and the only reason I paid it was to stay out of jail. If someone doesn't like that opinion, well then they're probably benefiting from the system.
Read my comment. I don't know what your personal situation was, but there are LOTS of reasons a guy should pay for the upbringing of his kids, and remain part of it, unless he's a total fuck up and they're better off never seeing him.
Whoever gets to raise the child should pay for them. Theyre instilling all their beliefs. And then the person who doesn't even see the kid has to pay? Makes no sense.
Opinion
12Opinion
The idea of child support is fair. You have a child, you take care of it. However, the way child support is handled is not fair for the following reasons:
1. The way child support is paid. Instead of being on an account that can be monitored by the courts, the money gets paid to the mother with no restrictions. This means a woman can use the money to get her nails done instead of on the child. There needs to be more strict guidelines on mothers to prevent them from misusing these funds. When a man divorces/breaks up with a woman, she should take care of herself with her own funds. The man should support the child, not the mother.
2. Often, the 2 most common ways to enforce child support is jail or suspending a license. These measures are counterproductive to the idea of collecting money for child support because a man cannot make money for a child if he is not at work or loses his way to get to work. Garnishments for a man who refuses to pay child support is sufficient. If the man does not get paid direct deposit, then the judge can send a garnishment order to his employer and legally they would have to take it from his check before he sees the check, just like taxes.
3. Similar to reason two. If a father is willing to pay but does not make enough to live on, the courts need to reconsider the amount being paid. At the end of the day, the mother is supposedly awarded custody for being the better parent. If that is true, then she should also be able to find a way to support her and the child should the father have something come up where payment cannot be made. The courts need to quit punishing fathers for having bad luck but otherwise being a good parent.
4. If a woman is receiving child support, then she probably has custody of the child. Child support should be tied into visitation requirements. This means the mother loses some or all of child support if she takes actions to deliberately prevent the child from seeing their father or otherwise sabotaging the father/child relationship. Many times mothers get child support, deny the father their chance to see their child AND lie about the father to sour the child against him.
In order to deny visitation, the mother should be forced to prove that the father is abusive to the child and that the child would be harmed in some way by being around the father. Also, abuse of the spouse should not play into this. A parent's relationship with their spouse is different than one with the child and it is the CHILD we are concerned about here. I do not condone spousal violence, but it is a separate matter than the welfare of the child.
Generally speaking yes. But its clearly miss used in a lot of cases often not even for the child but for the mother to buy whatever she wants. Its called child support money not extra free income. Today's child support laws are clearly negative and are often not even fair to begin with. Even a man who isn't even related to the child could end up paying big time which then you wonder why so many good men chose to leave women alone, ignore them and leave them in their misery they created on their own. What the government wanted to create in order to help women backfired greatly and damages the unity and trust between men and women. The government says to a woman tell me the father of the child and she can just point to one and he's ordered to pay even if she never met him. You see the problem. The biggest problem is women who fuck around with several men and get pregnant. They have no idea who the father is so what do you do. Make them all pay if they don't want to have a DNA test? Child support laws are flawed like many laws woke people do. The father and mother should both take care of the kid together and the government should punish them for their irresponsable behavior. Get both accountable and this crap will stop. On top of that many single fathers are often turned away from single parent income help or are completely on their own. Does the mother who would have to pay up go to prison if she doesn't like a man would?
It's only fair, if it's actually used for the child and not for the mom going out and partying or getting her hails done and the like.
I personally advocate for 50/50 shared parenting because it's what's best for the child in most cases. Unfortunately it's not the first option in most cases because family courts make 60 cents on every dollar of child support collected.
Oh and statistically women are the gender who are less likely to pay support when ordered not men. Because there are no consequences for women, where as men will lose their license, their home, their pay, and even go to prison for unpaid support. It's the one and only situation that side steps the debtor's prison doctrine of the US constitution and its literally only applied to men. Not to women.. Additionally women are by far, the largest perpetrators of parental alienation. Even when ordered if mommy is pissed off at daddy, mommy will refuse to let daddy see his kids. It's disgusting.
It can. But it’s never fair.
I don’t get child support or alimony. He makes double more than me.
after we splitted up. I moved back to my mom for a yr. Then got a small apt. for me and kids.
he rented a nice apt. with the kids…
he bought a million dollar house and I live in a small house… so what? We are both healthy and what the best for kids…
life is not fair… I do my best to make sure kids are well educated and to not let this corrupted society damage my kids… look beyond/ and work ahead of what’s controlling us…
that’s true freedom!!!
It depends on the situation. For example: Couple is married 8 years or so, guy makes good money so wife was able to be a stay at home mom and raise two kids, now 6 and 4 years old. Husband falls in love with another woman, announces one day he's moving out and wants a divorce.
Mom now has to find work, childcare for the youngest, and after school care for the oldest. All that because hubby wants someone else. If that's not a valid reason for child support, I don't know WHAT would be!
The concept of it? Yes it is, the actual system? No because it’s incredibly unbalanced.
I understand the origin of the idea because men were abandoning their families by saying they’re going to get cigarettes/ milk but then disappear on the wife and the children. That’s entirely fucked up but the rate of men doing that now isn’t the same as the past. Now people abuse the system and i don’t understand why it’s not been revised and fixed due to the constant examples of abuse.
Nope. Equal time with a child is fair. When a kid is with you, they are your responsibility. You raise them to the best of your ability with the resources you have at hand. Being extorted to have someone else own your child is unjust.
The idea is fair.
The way it's put into practice is... debatable :)
It might be better to put the authority over child-funds to someone who's neither the Mom nor the Dad.
If two people have sex that creates a baby, yes it’s fair to expect BOTH parents to contribute to raising the child. How is this a difficult concept?
The mother leaves the father for a more handsome guy so shouldn’t that guy now be responsible
Are you serious?
The essence of it yes how its actually practiced no
Most of the time, "yes."
For those with custody that use the money for other purposes, "no."
Read the comments on here from men, and you can see why most men should never be fathers.
Excuse me? Men of GAG represent most men?
Not even most men on GAG but 7 men on GAG represent all men now?
Child support AKA the adult but immature version of getting pocket money.
It often is not. Depends on the circumstances.
If the dad is a deadbeat dad yes.
Hell no it is not fair.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions