A man's right to choose.

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

You may be kicking in some money but you're advocating a situation in which you would have to increase that by multiples, without legal recourse.

In my situation the government, and hence the people, were out the amount that legal aid cost. Nothing more.

Plus the amount for everyone that works the courts and all the fees associated with that for all the multiples of people. The amount going to her lawyer also has an impact.

The people who won't be paying will be the same people who aren't paying now and are feeding our legal system.

I really doubt you would see an impact on our costs.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Trip

Plus the amount for everyone that works the courts and all the fees associated with that for all the multiples of people. The amount going to her lawyer also has an impact.

The people who won't be paying will be the same people who aren't paying now and are feeding our legal system.

I really doubt you would see an impact on our costs.

All dealt with in batch. Negligible cost per individual case, to the order to pay.

Not quite. If what you suggest comes to pass then men who father children, out of wedlock, would be able to wash their hands of it entirely. Right now, in many US jurisdictions, men who don't pay support orders can have their income be subject to garnishee, have their drivers licenses suspended, or perhaps even be jailed for contempt. The money can be obtained from the actual cause, rather than coming from all other taxpayers.

Funny thing is that when my father ultimately left the Province, hoping to get away from the Ontario support order, he moved to the only Province in Canada that actively pursued deadbeat parents. They put the screws to him faster than Ontario would have. The whole thing was handled by phone and within 2 weeks his pay was being docked, at source.

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

All dealt with in batch. Negligible cost per individual case, to the order to pay.

Not quite. If what you suggest comes to pass then men who father children, out of wedlock, would be able to wash their hands of it entirely. Right now, in many US jurisdictions, men who don't pay support orders can have their income be subject to garnishee, have their drivers licenses suspended, or perhaps even be jailed for contempt. The money can be obtained from the actual cause, rather than coming from all other taxpayers.

Funny thing is that when my father ultimately left the Province, hoping to get away from the Ontario support order, he moved to the only Province in Canada that actively pursued deadbeat parents. They put the screws to him faster than Ontario would have. The whole thing was handled by phone and within 2 weeks his pay was being docked, at source.

You would have less mothers that choose to keep the baby, there would be a rise in abortions, so you wouldn't have as many people in the system fighting for money.

Right now, a lot of these dead beat fathers don't have jobs that can be garnished and so going into the prison system ends up costing us even more money.

The costs would even out.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Trip

You would have less mothers that choose to keep the baby, there would be a rise in abortions, so you wouldn't have as many people in the system fighting for money.

Right now, a lot of these dead beat fathers don't have jobs that can be garnished and so going into the prison system ends up costing us even more money.

The costs would even out.

And a lot of them are just hiding their under the table income, until someone throws their asses in the can.

Again, it's simply wrong to put someone in the position where they feel that they have to undergo an invasive procedure. And again, how would you feel if you were told that you were going to be forced to have a vasectomy?

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

And a lot of them are just hiding their under the table income, until someone throws their asses in the can.

Again, it's simply wrong to put someone in the position where they feel that they have to undergo an invasive procedure. And again, how would you feel if you were told that you were going to be forced to have a vasectomy?

Some still don't give it up.

It's not right to force someone to pay for a child they clearly do not want to be apart of it's life. I wouldn't compare it to a vasectomy. That one is far more invasive. Men do not really have a like for like example of abortion, there are a few procedures for birth control for men that are still being tested that might be there one day though. And again, no one is forced to have an abortion, that is the mother's choice, adoption is still a perfectly accepted practice. Plenty of people want newborns.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Trip

Some still don't give it up.

It's not right to force someone to pay for a child they clearly do not want to be apart of it's life. I wouldn't compare it to a vasectomy. That one is far more invasive. Men do not really have a like for like example of abortion, there are a few procedures for birth control for men that are still being tested that might be there one day though. And again, no one is forced to have an abortion, that is the mother's choice, adoption is still a perfectly accepted practice. Plenty of people want newborns.

Some mistakes have lifetime consequences, and should.

I don't know about it being "more invasive." It's the closest analogue that I could come up with as it involves reproductive organs. A couple of small incisions and a couple of knots tied, vs. no incision but having your insides scraped. The latter sounds worse than the former, to me.

I'm not going to change my mind. You aren't going to change yours. I'd like to hear what the women have to say.

[goof2]

Compared to being compelled by force of law to pay for a kid I don't want for the next 18 years? Fuck yeah, where the vasectomies at!

In all seriousness I likely couldn't deny support even if the option was available (I can't know for sure without being in the situation). The value I see in this option is many of the dudes who would jump at that chance aren't going to pay support anyway.

At least the woman has to face the fact that she will need to manage without that support instead of counting on support that isn't coming. It forces a very in-her-face assessment of the situation. If that results in a decision to abort or give up the baby the net of it is likely 2 people better off instead of 3 shitty lives.

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

I'm not going to change my mind. You aren't going to change yours. I'd like to hear what the women have to say.

Don't think there are any left.

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

I'm not going to change my mind. You aren't going to change yours. I'd like to hear what the women have to say.

I don't think the way I like has a chance in hell of ever happening anyway.