2007-11-03 07:42:24 · 12 answers · asked by ♥ ~Sigy the Arctic Kitty~♥ 7 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
Yes they are, legally as well. If you are there for the inception you should be there for the consequences. This applies to dead beat moms as well. Even if the dad wanted mom to abort or the mom wanted to but caved from pressure. Too many people are not taking responsibility for their actions. The results fall onto the kids and they did not have a choice.
2007-11-03 07:53:20 · answer #1 · answered by happygirl 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
The term "Deadbeat Dads" annoys me to begin with, because in USING that term you have already made a moral judgment and a set of assumptions which is self referential.
A deadbeat dad is a moral criminal of course - why, because he is a deadbeat. Case closed.
If you asked - are absentee fathers moral criminals, you would have a whole spectrum of replies.
If you asked are absentee fathers negligent in discharging their moral duties - the replies would be different once again.
If you asked how can absentee fathers best meet their moral obligations to their children, you might even attract some answers sympathetic to such men.
The human psyche is a fascinating playground, don't you think?
2007-11-03 11:57:42 · answer #2 · answered by Twilight 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily.
The question imports a pair of questionable ideas, to wit, 'deadbeat dad' and the monstrous 'moral criminal' Both notions are compounds of other questionable notions that can be criticized from many angles. The suppositional basis of this question is treacherous footing, especially for any man (USA, 2007, in this forum) who would dare to suggest an answer that deviates from the affirmative.
I would enjoy writing a lengthy analysis of this question. It is deliciously vague, with lively, squirming ambiguities, and should be used frequently, just to see who's paying attention to difference (in the usages of women's studies) and who's merely paying lip service to THAT notion.
But I won't. I'll just propose that project, pointing to the four 'basic' notions, and the two 'compound' notions, shamelessly appending a few questions that serve my aims with regard to this question:
'Deadbeat'--[your definition here]
'Dad'--[your definition here]
'Deadbeat Dad'--[your definition here]
'Moral'--[your definition here]
'Criminal'--[your definition here]
'Moral Criminal'--[your definition here]
What claims to objectivity or privilege are made by each defining opinion you offer for the terms above? Are the opinions indifferent to context, or sensitive to context? What is hidden, what is seen?
2007-11-03 10:00:44 · answer #3 · answered by skumpfsklub 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The system of justice is tilted towards the mother, and most men end up paying through the nose. I knew one father who dearly loved his children, but could not live off the money that was left after the divorce and left. I would not consider him a moral criminal. I consider his actions cruel to his children, but I also considered the greed of the mother also. I no longer considered her a friend, because of her part in the action that so greatly harmed her children.
2007-11-03 13:01:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Troll Shark said it all: does the gender of the deadbeat matter? And it would depend entirely on whose morals you're using.
2007-11-03 17:22:13 · answer #5 · answered by teeleecee 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think the question was deadbeat DAD's , not ex-husbands of spoiled ex-wives. Yes, they are legal and moral criminals. They have the responsibility to take care of their children just like the mother should. Speaking from the mother's point of view (who does not want alimony from the unemployed SOB), after I put him in jail for non-payment, it fixed the situation. He's worked ever since!!!!
2007-11-03 08:45:55 · answer #6 · answered by Dustelightful 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I don't know about all of them, but some, probably.
Do all guys feel fairly treated by the legal system, to have to pay for kids but have little or no role in their lives? To get treated like the villains by the law and the mothers of their children?
I realize that this is not true for all, but I know a couple of honest, hard-working guys who got raw deals. They do pay, as far as I know.
2007-11-03 09:14:23 · answer #7 · answered by Kara J 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think men and women who fail to make sure their children are well taken care of, to the best of their ability, are being unfair to their children, and ultimately, irresponsible and selfish. If you're poor, that's one thing, but to get back at your spouse, by affecting your children's well-being, is disgusting, regardless of gender.
It depends on society, how parents who refuse to care for their children are treated. Here in the US they're criminals, but since responsibility seems to be a missing gene for quite a few people, I don't know how they are treated in other countries.
Moral criminals? I don't know; that's up to their children to decide.
2007-11-03 08:27:45 · answer #8 · answered by edith clarke 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
NO, You women are the criminals, You try to soak the guy for every dime he has just because you are greedy. Paying for the care for a child is one thing, But when he has to pay you rent & utilitys (You would have to pay that even if you did not have a child) But paying you mare than you deserve is not being moral at all.
2007-11-03 08:05:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Yes, but Deadbeat moms are A-OK.
2007-11-03 08:03:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋