Fine Women Who Do Not Inform

Peter King said:

There is a moral obligation for sure, but women can have good reasons to not give into that moral obligation.

Click to expand...

You're free to share examples anytime.

But it should not mean the child should get punished for his mother's choices when she petitions for child support.

Click to expand...

So what kind of punishment should the woman suffer?

And men should never be allowed to opt out of paying child support even if they had not been told at the time of birth. If a woman is pregnant the lawgiver should assume that one or both of the 2 partners in that pregnancy did not take enough precautions to prevent a pregnancy. But if he makes a woman pregnant there is no way on hell a man should just be able to opt out. You cannot opt out after the fact.

Click to expand...

After the fact of what? Are you talking about after a pregnancy or after the child is born?

Henrin said:

You're free to share examples anytime.

Click to expand...

For example, someone the woman later finds out that he is a child abuser/sex offender/etc./etc.

For example he is a person who has abused her.

For example the pregnancy is the result of a rape.

Henrin said:

So what kind of punishment should the woman suffer?

Click to expand...

What on earth are you talking about? I stated the child should not be punished by not receiving child support even if the mother did not initially inform the likely father.

Henrin said:

After the fact of what? Are you talking about after a pregnancy or after the child is born?

Click to expand...

After the fact if the woman getting pregnant of course. And a woman should never be legally forced to inform the father, be it before or after birth. But if she wants child support/financial help she is hardly going to be able to get that without telling the likely father.

Peter King said:

There is a moral obligation for sure, but women can have good reasons to not give into that moral obligation. But it should not mean the child should get punished for his mother's choices when she petitions for child support.

And men should never be allowed to opt out of paying child support even if they had not been told at the time of birth. If a woman is pregnant the lawgiver should assume that one or both of the 2 partners in that pregnancy did not take enough precautions to prevent a pregnancy. But if he makes a woman pregnant there is no way on hell a man should just be able to opt out. You cannot opt out after the fact.

Click to expand...

A man can. You just dont like that option and favour unequal rights.

Bodhisattva said:

There is obviously a moral obligation for a woman to inform the man that he will be a father... if she does not do that she should not get child support ever. If she does he should be able to opt out and then she can decide what is best for her... selfishly having a child that she can not support or aborting the baby.

Click to expand...

How will you know whether she does or not ?

Bodhisattva said:

A man can. You just dont like that option and favour unequal rights.

Click to expand...

There is only one way a man can opt out of a pregnancy, not the the woman pregnant.

And I favor not duping the kid for the inability of it's parents to not get pregnant against their wishes.

Bodhisattva said:

There is obviously a moral obligation for a woman to inform the man that he will be a father... if she does not do that she should not get child support ever. If she does he should be able to opt out and then she can decide what is best for her... selfishly having a child that she can not support or aborting the baby.

Click to expand...

The fact is, is that the family courts are slanted and biased and have not changed with the times. Many men want 50/50 custody and custodial status. Being a single Dad myself for many years I know how slanted the system is or was at the time. Next to abandonment or some other serious issue fathers are rarely granted custodial parental status.

As for notification, It should be the norm that the birth mother stat who the father is before getting a birth certificate. A copy of that should go to the family court and notification sent out If no father is present at the birth. If the biological father is unknown the mother should attempt to find out and there should be a time window maybe 18/24 months or so, after that she waives any support unless just cause is shown.

This should also apply to social welfare benefits, there needs to be a financially responsible father whenever possible, all to often the moms know who the father is but won’t say because it reduces benefits. This is not uncommon at all, in fact, I have women in my extended family that play the system this way, one is carrying her forth child from the same man that lives in the home.

As I said, the family courts are slanted and behind the times, in todays world there are single Dads, stay at home Dads and men that want to be fathers but aren’t given the opportunity to do so because of the outdated family court parameters of one size fits all.

trblmkr said:

Well, shame on those women who have unprotected sex with honorable men like you who believe that magic will prevent pregnancy, just to find out later that the possible father may or may not want to to support said child in any way at all.
Are you really back to this crap again? How many women have told you to stay far, far away from them and your possible offspring? You got some deep rooted **** going on. Men need to learn personal responsibility and how to keep it their pants if they don't want to be a father.

Click to expand...

This post bears little relevance to the OP you responded to.

MrWonka said:

You don't seem to have the foggiest clue what human rights are. You should probably stop going on about them.

Click to expand...

Parental rights are one of the most basic of human rights out there.

Manc Skipper said:

So wear a condom or abstain.

Click to expand...

Your posts are dumb. Toddle along somewhere else.

Korimyr the Rat said:

Women should have every right, legally and morally, to decide for themselves whether or not to tell their former sexual partners that they are/were pregnant, and when. There is no rational basis for the argument that a man putting his penis in a woman should give him any say in what she does with her womb, or what she does with anything that comes out of her womb.

By the same token, when a woman decides to have sex, and decides to complete her pregnancy, and decides to keep her child... she should have no right to hold the man responsible for the consequences of her decisions.

Click to expand...

You used "rational" in a manner that makes me think you don't know what that word means. It's perfectly rational, and legal, for a man to have parental rights of his child. Anyone who thinks that is irrational doesn't deserve to be a father.

Peter King said:

Yes, I did read your OP and I could give a flying fig about men's rights when it comes to a woman's uterus and her right to medical privacy and her right to not tell someone he maybe becoming a father (if she keeps the baby). Not telling someone he is a father is morally very dubious, but there should be no legal rule that should force a woman to violate her privacy rights and her medical privacy rights.

Also, it is her body and if she wants to have an abortion and not tell the likely father, that's fine. It may be morally very dubious in some situations but legally she should fully have that right to decide if she wants to or not wants to inform the possible dad.

Click to expand...

Once that child is born everything you just said is irrelevant.