Is casual, consensual sex a mistake?
In a male -- female union, which of the two partners is making a mistake?
Ultimately, I think the child pays regardless of which of the two parents made a mistake.
But, unless it was a case of rape, shouldn't BOTH parents share responsibility?
How often does the court award custody to the sperm donor?
Why is that?
How often do the courts award child support to the mother, and put the financial burden on the male sperm donor?
Why is that?
How often have we heard about the mother using the child support money for things other than supporting the child?
Why is that?
In cases of unmarried partners, and the decision is made by the mother to keep the child rather than considering adoption, why is the sperm doner expected to pay for the bulk of that decision? Is the child's welfare always
considered? Wouldn't a two parent family be of benefit for the child?
My point is, we are wittness to an increase of single parent families with the mother as the only parent. And we're wittness to an increase in children who are out of control.
Many times, the mother won't allow the sperm doner any latitude in the upbringing of a child. The sperm doner might have visitation rights, but that's a hard row to hoe for any influence to rub off on the child, effectively.
It seems to me, the child becomes a pawn in a game of tug-of-war, and the child is the rope.
Now we have children raising children. Pregnant by the age of 13 or 14 and raising a child by the ripe old age of 14 or 15. Not even legal to drive a car, but they are in charge of a childs life --- besides their own.
Foxxxx says he's $90,000 in debt right now. If he can't make big payments, that amount will only grow. Whatever Swift pays per mile, let's just say 32 cents for the sake of conversation, what Foxxx will be receiving after the courts re-adjust the payments he's expected to be paying as a truck driver, that 32 cents will look more like twenty or twenty five cents. Every time he receives an increase, the courts will demand more and more, effectively keeping him locked in that twenty or twenty five cent range. As the cost of living increases, he'll be ordered to keep the mother of his child at status quo, while he continues to slip farther and farther in the hole, -- until the child reaches 18 or 21 years of age.
If the mother can figure out how to make ends meet without holding a job, she's allowed to do that. Being a stay at home mom doesn't guarantee that she'll be a good or better mom though.
Considering there ARE other options, like adoption, why is the mom allowed to make the choice to keep a child she's not equipped to properly care for and the sperm doner foot the bills for 18 to 21 years?
What really sticks in my craw is a mother with three or more children with sperm donated by as many doners as there are children, and collects child support from all of the many sperm doners. Cha- Ching!
Dad-Blasted men, anyway!
If it weren't for providing a little pleasure (hopefully) and supplying the funds thereafter, men would be totally worthless.
They're ALWAY at fault, even when the sex was consentual. The female had nothing to do with the decision process because the word "no" isn't in her vocabulary. But they know how to say "I'd like to cash this check, please".
"And this one,
And this one,
And this one...................."
After all, girls just wanna have fun.
And guys are all the same.