who do you think is going to fit your half of the bill for a child you didn't want if the mother can't afford to raise the child by herself but still wants to keep her child. The state will have to pay your portion if it ever became law that a man didn't have to pay child support for a child that he did not want. It's not fair to the tax payers to have to pay to raise your kid.
2007-08-02 15:24:31 · 12 answers · asked by hanna 1 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Pregnancy
I agree with you 100% It's like i told my ex. I didn't make this baby by myself im not supporting her by myself. I work hard for the money i have and to make sure i would have money to support her after she is born. And even without his help i could support her, but I don't think its fair that some guys think they should be able to help make the babies and then run off and leave the mother to fend for herself. So even though I don't need his help in supporting her i think it's only fair that he helps out.
2007-08-02 16:12:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think that dads should have to pay. Sometimes I think that they have to pay too much though. Another thing that bothers me is that if that dad is a good parent but the mother won't let the child see there father then I don't think that they should have to pay child support. That way a lot more children would get to see there fathers and a lot more fathers would want to pay child support.
2007-08-02 16:23:27 · answer #2 · answered by ~LYNZ~ 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
common-sense might desire to respond to your question. newborn help rules say that a newborn IS ENTITLED to be supported by utilising the two dad and mom. Any woman is in charge for the youngster, if she did no longer insure that she did no longer get pregnant. If a guy participates, and does no longer choose for a being pregnant to happen, then he additionally did no longer avert the being pregnant. i will flow away out any debates approximately abortions, different than to assert that many women folk do have faith that an abortion is morally incorrect, and not something they're going to ever do, whether they did no longer intend to get pregnant. the final analysis to my thinking is that, as quickly as a newborn is conceived/ born.. there is now no longer an argument of what the two the father or mom "choose for". i in my view do no longer settle for the argument that a mom "tricked" a father right into a being pregnant.. on the instant, a guy who actually does no longer choose for a newborn, has the choice to the two use his very own secure practices, or get a vasectomy. If he does neither one.. then he has placed himself in hazard, in basic terms as lots using fact the girl who won't have used start administration. Taking your mastercard analogy.. in case you're dumb adequate to offer the cardboard to a guy or woman, and that they run it up..you nonetheless are partly in charge. in case you do no longer choose for a guy or woman to run up a bill on it, save it locked up. no longer attempting to be against you here. If I have been a decide, and listening to a guy whine that he did no longer choose for a newborn, as a result, shouldn't pay, i could triple his newborn help order.
2016-10-09 02:39:24 · answer #3 · answered by kerby 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that is a fact.its also a fact that many of these "mothers" (i use the term loosely,cause just giving birth doesn't make you a real mom) just sit on their butts and draw welfare,child support,ssi and every other hand out they can get!men really need to be smarter and not lay with anything that comes along.i know guys who for a fact are ashamed to admit they were even with some women let alone claim a child she tricked him into making her pregnant with.if these women will not work or support these kids themselves why should everyone else?
2007-08-02 15:34:53 · answer #4 · answered by dixie58 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see your point but here is my point I know I have a child that i do pay for but it does not cost $1200 a month to feed and cloth my child it should be 50/50 not for her/his benefit to do as he /she wants to do with the money because i doubt it all goes to the child as it should hence the word child support and to me that's sad
2007-08-02 15:33:31 · answer #5 · answered by Nater_ 3 · 6⤊ 0⤋
"It's not fair to the tax payers to have to pay to raise your kid." which is EXACTLY why women shouldn't be raising children they themselves can't afford to take care of! There are no guarantees in life... the "paycheck in pants" today could be a corpse tomorrow... The best advice any woman could take would be to get a solid education BEFORE you start having kids... Why should a man be expected to fund YOUR desire to play mommy if he himself doesn't want to play daddy?
2007-08-02 15:36:27 · answer #6 · answered by halfthebottle 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
babygirl i feel ya! i hope my name dont nfool ya but i am a girl i have my moms name but anyway, i have four kids, two baby daddys, and my three kids dad served me a summons for a stop child support order because he feels that he is paying to much per week. oh, did i mention he is court ordered to pay me 98 dollars a week.
2007-08-02 15:38:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
wow... it almost sounds like a direct message to my ex!!! Get him to admit that in court and go for sole custody as I did with the exception that he still is ordered to pay support! I think deadbeats (women included) should be FORCED to be fixed!!!
2007-08-02 15:35:58 · answer #8 · answered by Kishauna_P 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Agreed. I'd also like to add to the end of the first part, "To the men..." I'd say then keep it in your pants!!
2007-08-02 16:09:58 · answer #9 · answered by Kittieashy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well first of all if they didnt want 2 pay child support then they shouldnt i had sex stupid guy
2007-08-02 15:35:23 · answer #10 · answered by kay 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋