DB wrote:

"Galileo" wrote in
The point? That he is obligated to help support his kids, that's the
point. The mother should not have to carry the entire financial
burden. If she could cover their basic needs on her own, maybe this
idiot could have started a college fund for his kids.

Lots of 2 parent famlies don't have college funds for their kids, are you
going to impose Government santions against them too for not having enough
money to look after their kids?

Did you miss the beginning of the statement? Did you miss the "IF"?
What I am suggesting is that if the mother can afford basics for the
kids, the dad could contribute to their education in a fund that is
STRICTLY earmarked for the kids. Isn't that what you all wanted? To
make sure that the money went to the kids, not the mother?

He fathered the rugrats, he needs to get off his ass and contribute
something to their support. Period.