2006-08-11 07:55:57 · 23 answers · asked by golden heart 1 in Family & Relationships ➔ Family
Unless he is abusive or a danger to the child you should never prevent a father from seeing his children. He might not be much of a man, but he's still their father. Report him to the authorities, don't harm your child as revenge.
2006-08-11 08:01:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes! I don't give a damn what people say or think. As a dead-beat, you have to change your ways and support the child YOU created and women have to stop using their children as revenge.
Yes, some dead-beats deserve a beating, but when that child gets older and want the truth, you HAVE to tell them that things didn't work out (because it took BOTH to make a child, no matter how mothers and fathers want to spin the problem and all the blame game B.S.) and that daddy didn't live up to the responsibilities.
But all in all, some type of relationship has to be maintained between father and child. The child will eventually make a decision as they get older, if the y want to continue the relationship with the father. Mothers shouldn't add to the problem by keeping the child away. Children are adaptable more so than their own parents. So it should be fine.
If your a dead beat dad, no matter how you look at it, at the same time, you have to EARN the visitation not by money, but by responsibility. Your absence can effect the child and it takes a lot more work, when they get older, to patch things up. Same goes for mothers.
There's more than money at stake when you don't.
2006-08-11 08:15:28 · answer #2 · answered by monkeymustard 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A person may not have the money to physically provide for his children the way society thinks he should, but if that man loves his children and wants to spend time with them, he should be allowed to. Love conveys a whole lot more to a child than all the money in the world ever could. We women should be more careful who we have children by to begin with if money is the only qualification we are going to use as to whether or not a man should be allowed in his childs life. My daughters father is broke as a joke, but the man loves his daughter more than life itself. I would never dream of not allowing them together just because he doesn't have as much money as I would like for him to. My daughter adores the ground her father walks on without having a clue as to his financial status in life.
2006-08-11 08:06:39 · answer #3 · answered by sassy_red_3972 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Before I had a child with a deadbeat I thought that there was no reason on earth to keep a child from seeing a parent. However, through experience I've learned that it hurts the child to have a parent (father) be constantly in and out of a child's life. This really depends on the situation and on one's definition of what a deadbeat father actually is.
2006-08-11 08:05:43 · answer #4 · answered by Red 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
didn't know beets had kids. the word you're looking for is spelled "beat"
ideally all fathers should be involved in their childrens' lives' however, if a father doesn't show an interest in the child except to complain about child support.. well, that's another story.
2006-08-11 08:20:55 · answer #5 · answered by blkrose65 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Where a father pays or not, he's still the daddy. Your battle with the dead beat should have nothing to do with your childrens relationship with their father. Use the court system to the fullest to collect your child support, but don't deny your children their father.
2006-08-11 08:04:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes. A father should not have to pay to see his kids. He should do the honorable thing and pay child support to help his wife, but if you deny him visitation just because he won't pay, then you are punishing the kids. All you have to do is file agaqinst him and the couts will order him to pay. But if the kids love their father , why would you keep him from visiting. For once i would like to see the parents think of the kids in these situations. If you would care to question me as to why i feel this way, just e-mail me. I am not a dead beat father. I have sole custody of my child.
2006-08-11 08:04:54 · answer #7 · answered by zeuster2 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What exactly is a deadbeat father. Are considered a deadbeat because he doesn't have a job? He might be trying. Nothing should get in they way of a father his child (unless he is violent or abusive). Also denying him his child might make him violent and angry. This is when the real problem starts.
2006-08-11 08:11:42 · answer #8 · answered by Black Like A Tar 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes, because the children should not grow up not knowing there father just because he is a loser. Let the children form there own opinions about him. But i do think it should be a supervised visit and he shouldnt be allowed to take them anywhere. He lost that right when he decided not to be supportive of them.
2006-08-11 08:02:51 · answer #9 · answered by sea_sher 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If it's possible for him to be a positive force in the child's life, then he should be allowed to see the child. But if he isn't financially supporting the child or spending time with the child then no he shouldn't. Life is hard enough these days without having to deal with a promise-breaking, dead beat parent.
2006-08-11 08:03:48 · answer #10 · answered by lovelee1 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋