Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

How can men be held more accountable for the children they father?

Posted by   + Show Post

In many threads regarding subjects such as mothers on pa, for example, inevitably some posters will ask a question such as this one:


Quote:

This may sound like Im a man hater but where is the outrage at the men who should be providing for their women and children?
So here it is.  Here is a thread dedicated solely to this question.
by on Apr. 25, 2012 at 9:54 AM
Replies (231-240):
candlegal
by Judy on Apr. 26, 2012 at 5:45 AM
1 mom liked this

now there is an idea  :)

Quoting futureshock:

Maybe women could get jobs?  Plenty of women support their children.

Quoting lga1965:

 Most states will put a man in jail for not providing child support. And then they have no income and can't send child support from jail,of course. And if the Government eliminates any help to feed children, will they feel any guilt? And would Republicans or Independents who are so anti-WIC or against  Food stamps feel bad if kids die? Its possible ,you know. Women might feed themselves first ....there are some crazy women out there. What would you suggest that the government do about starving children if they eliminate financial help that feeds children?

Quoting candlegal:

that is ok, baby daddy government will shell out the money.

Quoting wissotamum:

Because the child is there and requires support and he's partially responsible for the fact of it.

Quoting candlegal:

I believe it is a child at conception.  If a mother can abort w/o the father's permission or put it up for adoption without his permission, why should she be able to force him to have to be a parent because she made the decision to keep the child?

Quoting wissotamum:

Aaaaaaah, that's the fundamental question that divides people on abortion.  When is a child a child?  6 weeks, 12 weeks, term, after birth?  I don't have the answer to that one.

Abortion ends any future obligation to an embryo (fetus, baby, whatever term you're most comfortable with).  At no point, is a product of an abortion going to require money for soccer shoes, violin lessons, or orthodontics.  A child who is born might require all of these.

Quoting candlegal:

How is abortion fair to a child?

Quoting wissotamum:

How is that fair to a child?  How is it fair to be denied a parent?

Quoting AdellesMom:

I think that since a woman can abort or give her child up for adoption without permission from the father, then a man should be able to sign his rights away at birth. That way, he holds no financial obligation to the child. It's only fair.







 



PurdueMom
by Sherri on Apr. 26, 2012 at 6:01 AM
1 mom liked this

We can debate women's rights to choose, if you would like, but this post is regarding men's accountability as fathers.

What is ridiculous, to me, is that anyone would believe it is okay for a man to just walk away from his responsibility to his child.  What if this child is 11 years old and a man decides he no longer wants to be a father... can he just walk away from his responsibilities to that child?  What's the difference if the child is an infant versus adolescent?

There is no double standard here, because there is no equal ground here.  Until men start having babies, the choice to continue a pregnancy is the woman's.  If she decides to not carry to term, that is her right.  However, when she decides to have the baby, it's a whole new ballgame (so to speak). If she decides to keep her child, the father must financially help support that child - despite whether he wants to or not.  If she decides to give her child up, the father either signs away his rights and the child is put up for adoption - or he is given the child to raise.  If he decides to raise the child, then the mother must financally help support the child - despite whether she wants to or not.

If a man is not ready to be a father, he should take it upon himself to protect himself.  It's not a woman's responsibility. 


Quoting Salsacookies:

 so a woman has more rights to her body than the baby that she's supposed to protect and nurture? if the woman doesn't want to be a mother, she can get an abortion....no financial responsibility. if a man doesn't want to be a father, what option does he have(assuming he's already gotten a girl pregnant)?

It's a horrible double standard. I can take away the child that you want and make you financially responsible for the child that you don't want. Ridiculous.

Quoting PurdueMom:

So a father has more right to his hard earned money than a child has to financial support from his parents?

A woman's choice to what happens to her own body does not compare to the choice a man has on how to spend his money.

Quoting Salsacookies:

 If a woman can be 'selfish' and not give up her body for 9 months to carry a baby, why can't a man be "selfish" and not give up his hard earned money for 18 years? The man should be able to say where his money goes just as a women has say over her body.

 


Sherri

sterling21
by on Apr. 26, 2012 at 6:17 AM
I think it has more to do with the relationship between a man and a woman. If the couple were in a relationship than they are both responsible for what took place in that relationship, that's why judges rarely make a partner pay back money that was given in a relationship. But if its a one night stand than I think as a woman if your gambling with your body like that, its your responsiblity to care for the baby if you lose and get pregnant. Too many women make it a habit to go after sperm donors aka one nighters, they get pregnant to get paid, they use a child to make money. Gross!
Tara922c
by on Apr. 26, 2012 at 7:23 AM

First, I said nothing about mother's. Where did I say that Texas does not encourage deatbeat mothers? My ex hasn't paid child support in over six months. If I stop feeding my child tomorrow, guess who goes to jail? Me. I don't have a problem supporting my child because that is what real parents do. I don't think about it, I just do it. I have read up on the "formula". I have been through the whole child support process in Texas, have you? The court will make exceptions for extreme cases, but the formula used in most child support cases is:

CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES


 

BASED ON THE MONTHLY NET RESOURCES OF THE OBLIGOR


 

1 child           20% of Obligor's Net Resources

2 children        25% of Obligor's Net Resources

3 children            30% of Obligor's Net Resources

4 children            35% of Obligor's Net Resources

5 children            40% of Obligor's Net Resources

6+ children           Not less than the amount for 5 children

 

The formula is adjusted for non-custodial parents who are parents to children outside the custodial parent's house hold. The formula is also adjusted for non-custodial parents who make more than 6K a month. A non-custodial parent who makes 10K a month pays child support on a portion of his/her net resources, not the entire amount. The court will not order the non-custodial parent to pay more than the above amounts simply because the custodial parent does not work or does not make enough money. Divorces are different. A custodial parent may in fact receive a huge divorce settlement along with child support, and cases such as those are handled in family court. I am speaking of cases handled by the Texas Attorney General Child Support Division. My case went through the Texas Attorney General. I did have to show my income, but my income was not factored into the formula for child support. I receive 154 dollars a month in child support. The amount I receive was based off a person making minimum wage and supported two additonal children outside the child support order, or 16% of the non-custodial parent's net resources. I pay 700 a month in child care alone. Not every custodial parent is living the high life off of child support. And I am FULLY aware some men pay a shit ton of child support that not only supports the child, but helps supports the mother as well. The more you make, the higher your child support.

Quoting AMBG825:

You should read up on that formula.

 

Texas does not encourage deadbeat moms.

Quoting Tara922c:

What ignorance? Did I misunderstand you? Please enlighten me.


Quoting AMBG825:

Another shining example of the level of ignorance women have when it comes to the system


Quoting Tara922c:

Nope. In Texas is based off a percentage of the non custodial parent's income. child support has nothing to do with the custodial parent's income. It starts at 20% for one child and the amount is adjusted based on how many kids that are to be supported. I have been through the process. bills do not matter here in Texas when it comes to cs.



Quoting AMBG825:


 That's not even remotely close to be the truth. You, as an adult, are responsible for supporting yourself. If you have no children, you do not get CS to pay your rent, get your hair and nails done and buy new clothes. EVERY child support calculator in this country inputs bills based off of what the custodial parent pays not what the child's portion is.



 



for example. You are responsible for your own lodging. If a 1 BR apartment is 500 and a 2 BR apartment is 600 then the child's bill is only 100. that 100 is what should be inputed into the caculators. Instead, the 600 is.



Quoting EireLass:



Not in RI. They look at the whole financial package....Mom & Dad...then they convert it into percentages, leading up to 100%. The child needs 100%, so how much is Dad responsible for and how much is Mom responsible for. And you can go back every year to have it modified. One year I made more than he did, so the percentages changed, and his went down.



Quoting AMBG825:

Quoting GoddessNDaRuff:


How about actually enforce child support. Have reasonable cs amounts. If a man is only paying $25-100 for his child that is not reasonable. It's not even a dent in what it cost for a child, especially in the first year.  Even if he has to work three or four jobs he should be paying what the mother is. If his child support is less than the going rate for child care in the state or county the child lives in then it is too low. Even if the child is not in a daycare center.  And instead of making them pay less for each child they should have to pay equal for each child born to a different mother. the lesser percentages should only come in when he has mulitple children by one woman. JMO



You do realize that if you went by "reasonable" CS amounts, the average CS award would go DOWN and not up right? The current formulas used to calculate CS do not remove the mother's obligation to support herself. It's the cost of supporting the MOTHER as well as the child.






 



 


 


AMBG825
by on Apr. 26, 2012 at 7:50 AM
Again. Read up on the formula itself. If you are saying that your state does not hold you accountable for financial supper of your child then you are saying your state encourages deadbeat parents.


Again. If CS was based solely on the child's actual expenses most CS orders would go down. Not up. Because you, as the adult would still have rent, utilities, hair color and nail needs.


Quoting Tara922c:

First, I said nothing about mother's. Where did I say that Texas does not encourage deatbeat mothers? My ex hasn't paid child support in over six months. If I stop feeding my child tomorrow, guess who goes to jail? Me. I don't have a problem supporting my child because that is what real parents do. I don't think about it, I just do it. I have read up on the "formula". I have been through the whole child support process in Texas, have you? The court will make exceptions for extreme cases, but the formula used in most child support cases is:


CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES



 


BASED ON THE MONTHLY NET RESOURCES OF THE OBLIGOR



 


1 child           20% of Obligor's Net Resources


2 children        25% of Obligor's Net Resources


3 children            30% of Obligor's Net Resources


4 children            35% of Obligor's Net Resources


5 children            40% of Obligor's Net Resources


6+ children           Not less than the amount for 5 children


 


The formula is adjusted for non-custodial parents who are parents to children outside the custodial parent's house hold. The formula is also adjusted for non-custodial parents who make more than 6K a month. A non-custodial parent who makes 10K a month pays child support on a portion of his/her net resources, not the entire amount. The court will not order the non-custodial parent to pay more than the above amounts simply because the custodial parent does not work or does not make enough money. Divorces are different. A custodial parent may in fact receive a huge divorce settlement along with child support, and cases such as those are handled in family court. I am speaking of cases handled by the Texas Attorney General Child Support Division. My case went through the Texas Attorney General. I did have to show my income, but my income was not factored into the formula for child support. I receive 154 dollars a month in child support. The amount I receive was based off a person making minimum wage and supported two additonal children outside the child support order, or 16% of the non-custodial parent's net resources. I pay 700 a month in child care alone. Not every custodial parent is living the high life off of child support. And I am FULLY aware some men pay a shit ton of child support that not only supports the child, but helps supports the mother as well. The more you make, the higher your child support.


Quoting AMBG825:


You should read up on that formula.


 


Texas does not encourage deadbeat moms.


Quoting Tara922c:

What ignorance? Did I misunderstand you? Please enlighten me.



Quoting AMBG825:


Another shining example of the level of ignorance women have when it comes to the system



Quoting Tara922c:

Nope. In Texas is based off a percentage of the non custodial parent's income. child support has nothing to do with the custodial parent's income. It starts at 20% for one child and the amount is adjusted based on how many kids that are to be supported. I have been through the process. bills do not matter here in Texas when it comes to cs.




Quoting AMBG825:



 That's not even remotely close to be the truth. You, as an adult, are responsible for supporting yourself. If you have no children, you do not get CS to pay your rent, get your hair and nails done and buy new clothes. EVERY child support calculator in this country inputs bills based off of what the custodial parent pays not what the child's portion is.




 




for example. You are responsible for your own lodging. If a 1 BR apartment is 500 and a 2 BR apartment is 600 then the child's bill is only 100. that 100 is what should be inputed into the caculators. Instead, the 600 is.




Quoting EireLass:




Not in RI. They look at the whole financial package....Mom & Dad...then they convert it into percentages, leading up to 100%. The child needs 100%, so how much is Dad responsible for and how much is Mom responsible for. And you can go back every year to have it modified. One year I made more than he did, so the percentages changed, and his went down.




Quoting AMBG825:


Quoting GoddessNDaRuff:



How about actually enforce child support. Have reasonable cs amounts. If a man is only paying $25-100 for his child that is not reasonable. It's not even a dent in what it cost for a child, especially in the first year.  Even if he has to work three or four jobs he should be paying what the mother is. If his child support is less than the going rate for child care in the state or county the child lives in then it is too low. Even if the child is not in a daycare center.  And instead of making them pay less for each child they should have to pay equal for each child born to a different mother. the lesser percentages should only come in when he has mulitple children by one woman. JMO




You do realize that if you went by "reasonable" CS amounts, the average CS award would go DOWN and not up right? The current formulas used to calculate CS do not remove the mother's obligation to support herself. It's the cost of supporting the MOTHER as well as the child.








 




 



 



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Marypoppy
by on Apr. 26, 2012 at 8:19 AM

I agree.. Can't get blood from a stone. If they don't have the financial means without starving themselves to do it, putting em in jail isn't going to resolve anything (makes it even harder actually). I'm not sure what more could be done either.

There's plenty of responsible fathers and mothers working all day that still can't fully provide for their kids financially. They can only do what they can do.

Quoting futureshock:

Men are already supposed to be held financially responsible for the children they father, so I am not sure in what other ways women would like to see men held accountable.


Marypoppy
by on Apr. 26, 2012 at 8:22 AM

There's two people deciding to have sex.... yes they can BOTH decide to take precautions and they can BOTH decide not to have sex. Unless she's being forced into sex, she does take on some responsibility for making the decision to have intercourse unprotected.

Quoting PurdueMom:

...

If a man is not ready to be a father, he should take it upon himself to protect himself.  It's not a woman's responsibility. 



tina08mommy
by Member on Apr. 26, 2012 at 8:58 AM
No we weren't married. We were engaged but he didn't want to get Married till he was 24. I wanted to get married after we had our first son. No I wasn't surprised cause he was going out with his friends when he wasn't working or sleeping and he didn't seem to care about me or our sons. No he wasn't that good of a dad. He thought he was the best dad in he world.


Quoting futureshock:


Quoting tina08mommy:

My sons father decided he didn't want anything to do with our sons. I am going for child support from him. I was with him for 5 years.

Were you married?  If not why not? 

Were you surprised when he stopped wanting anything to do with his children?  Was he a good dad while you were together?  Sadly this happens even in divorces.


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
EireLass
by Ruby Member on Apr. 26, 2012 at 9:29 AM

They take the gross income of both. They only deduct health insurance costs. They do not take any other costs into consideration. Not living expenses, etc. Then they calculate who pays how much into the 'pot' (the child). Obviously if Dad makes more, he pays more. And then there is alimony on top of it, separate from child support, again, based on his gross. In my case it was WAY more than 20% of his gross.

Not sure why you're arguing what someone else has already lived for many years.

Quoting AMBG825:

 Once again you prove your ignorance. I didn't mention anything about how much anyone paid. I talked about the formula that EVERY state uses involves more than just "how much the baby daddy makes." You can prove this on your own if you'd like. Your states website will discuss what is involved in those formulas. You can get a breakdown of what the formula entails. It ISN'T a "straight 20% of his gross income." That's just plain ignorant.

Quoting EireLass:

Of course it's more than adding together. Actually, there isn't any adding together involved in the calculation. Seeing as you seem to think I didn't live my own life, why don't you tell me what happened, how much he paid and why.

Quoting AMBG825:

 And you obviously don't know what is involved in those calculations. It's a lot more than just add the 2 incomes together.  And you really can't see what the problem is. You just illustrated the whole reason men don't "step up." Ignorance.

Quoting EireLass:

How is that not true? I lived it! hahaha. This is exactly how it was calculated. His child support amount was based on the 2 children, his alimony was based on me.

Quoting AMBG825:

 That's not even remotely close to be the truth. You, as an adult, are responsible for supporting yourself. If you have no children, you do not get CS to pay your rent, get your hair and nails done and buy new clothes. EVERY child support calculator in this country inputs bills based off of what the custodial parent pays not what the child's portion is.  for example. You are responsible for your own lodging. If a 1 BR apartment is 500 and a 2 BR apartment is 600 then the child's bill is only 100. that 100 is what should be inputed into the caculators. Instead, the 600 is.

Quoting EireLass:

Not in RI. They look at the whole financial package....Mom & Dad...then they convert it into percentages, leading up to 100%. The child needs 100%, so how much is Dad responsible for and how much is Mom responsible for. And you can go back every year to have it modified. One year I made more than he did, so the percentages changed, and his went down.

Quoting AMBG825:
Quoting GoddessNDaRuff:

How about actually enforce child support. Have reasonable cs amounts. If a man is only paying $25-100 for his child that is not reasonable. It's not even a dent in what it cost for a child, especially in the first year.  Even if he has to work three or four jobs he should be paying what the mother is. If his child support is less than the going rate for child care in the state or county the child lives in then it is too low. Even if the child is not in a daycare center.  And instead of making them pay less for each child they should have to pay equal for each child born to a different mother. the lesser percentages should only come in when he has mulitple children by one woman. JMO

You do realize that if you went by "reasonable" CS amounts, the average CS award would go DOWN and not up right? The current formulas used to calculate CS do not remove the mother's obligation to support herself. It's the cost of supporting the MOTHER as well as the child.


Woodbabe
by Woodie on Apr. 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Women have spent the last 40 years proving that they don't need a man to take care of them, much less raise their children. Until we as society start to value the men and the importance of the two parent relationship, women will continue to see men merely as sperm donors, unneccessary in both their and their children's lives.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured