"Bo Raxo" wrote in message hlink.net...
"analog" wrote in message
...

Bo Raxo, Robert Lee wrote:

...unless, of course, you're the one who bears it, in which case
you can just drop it off at the fire station if you don't kill it
before the time limit runs out in your state.

What, 48 hours, maybe 72? Yeah, that's a huge difference...not! I
can see that giving women this option seems to really **** you off
as unfair. And it is, except for the one thing you seem to keep
forgetting: the welfare of the child. You know, the one that the
mother might kill, or abandon in a dumpster to die, if she can't
drop the kid off.


There is no proof that this law has saved any child. If the woman
can legally drop off a child because she might kill it then let the
father do the same. After all she does not have to prove she is
a threat to the child and he wouldn't have to either.

Women aren't the only ones willing to kill for their selfish
convince. Many guys have been so desperate to avoid unwanted
fatherhood that they have been driven to harm or kill the mother in
order to "abort" her fetus. You seem to be forgetting the welfare of
these poor women/children. You know, the ones that father might kill
if he can't drop off his unwanted parental obligations.

Gee..women have that legal right. They have the Child Abandon Law which allows
them to opt out of parenthood, no questions asked. Look it up. Give men
that same legal right.

So we should abolish child support, because some men will kill to get out
from under it?

Uh, there is a difference between avoiding harm (drop off the baby, no
questions ask) and rewarding it (abolish child support).



This is ****ing *absurd.* You're saying that women, essentially,
bear no responsibilities regarding children that they do not choose
and that *all* of men's responsibilities are mandated from outside
themselves.

What is ****ing absurd to me is that you and Bob and lots of other
people make these perfectly reasoned arguments, that the woman did
this, and the man didn't do that, and she should be on the hook for
this, and he shouldn't be saddled with that by her, her fault, blah
blah ****ing blah.

And nowhere do you guys factor in to this little scales of justice
model the goddamn kid. You know, the one who is not at fault for
anything. The one with the strongest interests.


We are not convinced that its in the best interest of the child.

No problem, then. Serve the child's best interests - to be adopted
and raised by an intact loving two parent family that can provide
for it. Why should the poor child have to suffer the single
parenthood of a deadbeat woman who's too irresponsible to even be
able to support it or provide it with a willing father?

Fine with me. In the real world, you can't find enough adoptive families,
especially for minority children.



Oh yes, it's terrible that some guy might have to lay out three or
four or five hundred dollars a month. It ain't fair in some cases,
he was tricked, she lied, fine. But the kid should not have clothes,
food, medical insurance, etc. because we're being fair to the bio
father?

Right, why should the kid suffer when it could easily be placed for
adoption into a loving and financially able family where *both*
parents have freely and deliberately chosen to love and raise it?

I would agree, if there were enough adoptive families. But when the woman
decides to give up the kid once he's past the infant stage, it's almost
impossible to do a placement. If the kid is black, you aren't going to have
enough blak adoptive parents. If the kid is handicapped, you're out of
luck.


Uh, I guess that it upsets your neat little model to have to
consider something other than the man's rights versus the woman's.
Yeah, just keep it to those two, and I'd agree, the guy is getting
screwed, she's in the wrong, fine.

But add in the kid, and you have someone who will get screwed a lot
worse by letting either parent out of support.


The Child Abandon Law does just that...it allows the mother to opt out.
EVEN if the father finds out where she dumped the child and retrieves
it the child's mother NEVER has to pay support. I contacted the
sponsors of the Calif. bill and that is what they told me. Once
she has abandoned the child she has a short time to go back and get it
but if she chooses not to she never has to pay a cent.

Adoption. Or, if you must, to help her with the costs of raising her
child, give the deadbeat woman a government loan that would be much
like a non-defaultable child support debt.

I like this idea. A lot.


The baby abandonment law is just one more item where we let
unfairness exist on the parental front because the harm to the child
is potentially much greater. How can you discuss the interests of
the bio parents and totally forget the interests of the friggin'
cause of all this - the baby?!?

Adoption - better for the child and potentially saves lives - not
only of children, but of the mothers that carry them, too.

Fine with me, but the devil is in the details. Do you make adoption
mandatory for a woman who can't support her child? How about a man who gets
a divorce, should he be exempt from child support? And if his ex-wife can't
make a living and care for three kids at the same time, take 'em away?

Letting the father off the hook is hardly an "answer",

Funny..since the Child Abandon Law lets the mother off the hook and you seem
to think that is the "answer."


and adoption won't
work if the mother doesn't want to give up custody. Sadly, plenty of women
who can't afford to raise a child won't give up custody. Plenty of women
who don't even want a child will keep custody, just because they would be
ashamed or embarassed to not live up to their expected role of mother.

Nope, adoption is a nice idea, but in practice, mothers won't give up
custody just so their ex-husband doesn't have to pay child support.


But they will legally abandon the child before they will give custody to
the father. By abandoning the child they never have to pay CS. If
they just gave custody to the father they would have to pay. It seems
to me that it gives them more of an incentive to abandon.