I always wondered . . .

I have always wondered why having a child is considered to be such a
"burden." If having a child is such a burden, why does anyone
voluntarily have children? And yet our system of child support attempts
to spread the financial burden (in rhetoric, in reality it completely
shifts it) of having a child and reserves the benefit of being a parent
for the custodial parent.

Of course someone will whine about how "the kids take so much time" and
that "motherhood is so hard" and yada-yada. If this is the case, why
aren't all these CP's giving up custody? Because raising children can
be rewarding and fulfilling.

It is so hard to do something that most people consider to be one of
the most fulfilling things to do, give me money. Boo, hoo, hoo.

The answer to your question is not entirely straightforward. There ARE
times when raising children is a burden. (And by the way, this doesn't end
when your children become adults, as I am finding out currently in regard to
irresponsible choices being made by one of mine). But it also is a
rewarding experience and is in a sense a way of achieving immortality.

However, many women are locked into thinking of themselves as victims,
and particularly as victims of men. More than 30 years of feminism seem to
have made little difference in that habitual mindset, raising the question
of whether it is biologically programmed into the female brain. Of course,
part of keeping up the woman=victim mindset is that it produces major
rewards for women. For instance, a major buttress of the "child support"
system is the idea that men are responsible for the creation of single
parent families, and thus must be made to compensate their victims.
However, the truth in the U.S. today is that the vast majority of fatherless
families are the result of decisions unilaterally made by women.

In my view, one of the best ways to smoke out the underlying realities
of domestic relations law is to talk about changing current custody
arrangements, and finding a way to end the glass ceiling on paternal
custody. This is fought tooth and nail by groups that claim to represent
mothers. They argue that fathers only want changes because they want to
reduce their CS burdens. Thus, these groups implicitly concede that (1)
custody ISN'T a burden that they would willingly surrender, and (2) that
"child support" has turned the children into a profit center for their
mothers, since if the money were actually being spent on the children,
fathers who got custody would have additional expenses that would wipe out
any gains they made from not having to pay CS to their exes.


wrote in message
oups.com...
I have always wondered why having a child is considered to be such a
"burden." If having a child is such a burden, why does anyone
voluntarily have children? And yet our system of child support attempts
to spread the financial burden (in rhetoric, in reality it completely
shifts it) of having a child and reserves the benefit of being a parent
for the custodial parent.

Of course someone will whine about how "the kids take so much time" and
that "motherhood is so hard" and yada-yada. If this is the case, why
aren't all these CP's giving up custody? Because raising children can
be rewarding and fulfilling.

It is so hard to do something that most people consider to be one of
the most fulfilling things to do, give me money. Boo, hoo, hoo.

"Kenneth S." wrote in

However, many women are locked into thinking of themselves as victims,
and particularly as victims of men. More than 30 years of feminism seem
to have made little difference in that habitual mindset, raising the
question of whether it is biologically programmed into the female brain.

Seems the status of "Single mom" is worn like a badge of honor with these
types.
It's thrown in your face everytime you turn around and we're supposed to
feel sorry for them.