Men Abortion and Choice - Page 26

08-20-2007, 10:19 PM

Sorry dude.
My family once helped a guy put all of his income, even as it came in and property(except $10 a week) in his kid's name when he found out that his wife was cheating on him.
Still proud of that.

DanaC · 08-20-2007, 10:25 PM

Bizarre that she gets alimony off you if youhave the kids.

I know the system is fucked. Both here and over there. Mostly things stay out of the CSA unless the mother is claiming benefits of some kind, or if one or the other party ask fo rthem to be involved (I think is how it works). Usually things are decided through the courts instead. But even though they are usually fairer they still aren't entirely fair.

For example, I have a friend, D, who continues to pay alimony to his ex-wife as his contribution to the costs of raising his son and also as a recognition of the time she took out from her career to be a full time mum. He has done so since they first started divorce proceedings nearly 10 years ago, throughout the four years of strung out divorce and on through the five years since that was finalised. Kid's now just turned 17.

On the surface of it that sounds quite fair. Except that she earns significantly more than he does, because she's a fairly senior teacher (she may even be a headteacher, I'm not sure) whilst his social work payscale froze for several years because he went into union work. So, whilst he is earning less, driving a shit little car and going into debt in order to buy a season ticket for their team for him and his son, she's living a much easier life, having, as far as I can tell, been barely inconvenienced in her career by the two or three years she spent at home.

At the same time, I had a colleague a couple of years back whose abusive ex managed to secure visitation rights to the children and she had to wave them off in the car twice a week with a man she couldn't really trust with their safety. Why did the court not take her fears seriously? Because she was a housewife and he was a businessman, imo.

The truth is it's very difficult to get anything like a fair and amicable settlement unless both parties are trying to come to such a thing. The problem with an adversarial system is that it presupposes a winner and a loser.

yesman065 · 08-20-2007, 10:26 PM

thanks rk, but it is more than ok - I know that I am doing the right, just and morally correct thing in this situation - I have faith that all will work out in the end. It usually does.

Yeah Dana - its a shame that a system had to be designed so that a friggin father is compelled to take care of his own kids. I cannot fathom that level of irrisponsibility - even though I see it everytime I go to the domestic relations office.

08-20-2007, 10:27 PM

The kids were adults.

08-20-2007, 11:03 PM

There is an important quote in here about excusing his actions as "temper" or "maleness" and "taming/civilizing him to find the prince within being our (females) job".
Hmmmmmm?

DanaC · 08-21-2007, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Yeah Dana - its a shame that a system had to be designed so that a friggin father is compelled to take care of his own kids. I cannot fathom that level of irrisponsibility - even though I see it everytime I go to the domestic relations office.

In fairness to men, they don't have a monopoly on irresponsibility. I think it's just that actually carrying the child kind of concentrates the female's mind a little to the new responsibility. We (females) have the help of a bunch of very powerful hormones which guide the maternal instincts, unless you happen to be one of those poor lasses who don't bond with their baby.

xoxoxoBruce · 08-21-2007, 03:51 PM

Hormones and a corrupt legal system.

DanaC · 08-21-2007, 03:57 PM

What has a corrupt legal system got to do with a woman wanting to take care of her baby?

08-21-2007, 04:49 PM

As already stated, if a man wants to "abort" his responsibilities to an unwanted situation he should be allowed to... no no problem.
It's all the mother's choice now, she is in COMPLETE control and that is the way it is supposed to be, right?
The man is just the sperm donor.

Cicero · 08-21-2007, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim

never had a woman complain about it being TOO hard before.

And you still haven't. I said harder than it has to be.

I just got that 10 minutes later...

xoxoxoBruce · 08-22-2007, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC

What has a corrupt legal system got to do with a woman wanting to take care of her baby?

The corrupt legal system decides who must support her efforts, whether they want to or not.

DanaC · 08-22-2007, 04:55 AM

yes indeed. But the point that Yesman had raised was the fact that he has encountered a lot of men who don't want to step up and he seemed disgusted that enough men don't want to support their children that it requires a whole department to deal with it. My point was merely that it would be unfair to judge men harshly compared to women on this, given that women get a bunch of hormonal help when the pregnancy starts.

xoxoxoBruce · 08-22-2007, 05:14 AM

Fair point.

lumberjim · 08-22-2007, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cicero

And you still haven't. I said harder than it has to be.

I just got that 10 minutes later...

har...
when it comes to me or elspode, assume it comes from the direction of the gutter first....

yesman065 · 08-22-2007, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC

yes indeed. But the point that Yesman had raised was the fact that he has encountered a lot of men who don't want to step up and he seemed disgusted that enough men don't want to support their children that it requires a whole department to deal with it. My point was merely that it would be unfair to judge men harshly compared to women on this, given that women get a bunch of hormonal help when the pregnancy starts.

Or moreso - the department that is supposed to be handling and manging the support cases gets completely overwhelmed dealing with these losers to the point that NOTHING seems to get done. There are 4 caseworkers available at 8:00 am and there are at least 30 -40 people waiting in the lobby to see them, with more literally pouring in as the day goes on. These caseworkers seem to be trying their best, but the workload they face is staggering and the mental grind they must entail over days, weeks and months is staggering.

Virtually all of the people there are women, most with young children, and they are all there for the same reason - to get money from someone else - be it the system or an accused "deadbeat dad."

When in court I have seen the guys with their ghetto attire complete with $100+ sneakers blinging with decorative rings, necklaces and cellphones. They sit there disrespectfully slouched in front of the court with literally the same excuses time after time. "Yeah I'll pay this much more a month or that much next time or I ain't got no more money."

They have money for the clothes and the jewelry and the cellphones, yet nothing left for their children? Yeah I get why things are so screwed up with this system - This scum is reproducing much faster and in larger numbers than respectful people who honor their commitments.

Whats the answer???

08-21-2007, 03:51 PM	#382
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Hormones and a corrupt legal system. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

08-22-2007, 05:14 AM	#388
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Fair point. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

08-20-2007, 10:19 PM	#376
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	Sorry dude. My family once helped a guy put all of his income, even as it came in and property(except $10 a week) in his kid's name when he found out that his wife was cheating on him. Still proud of that.

08-20-2007, 10:25 PM	#377
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	Bizarre that she gets alimony off you if youhave the kids. I know the system is fucked. Both here and over there. Mostly things stay out of the CSA unless the mother is claiming benefits of some kind, or if one or the other party ask fo rthem to be involved (I think is how it works). Usually things are decided through the courts instead. But even though they are usually fairer they still aren't entirely fair. For example, I have a friend, D, who continues to pay alimony to his ex-wife as his contribution to the costs of raising his son and also as a recognition of the time she took out from her career to be a full time mum. He has done so since they first started divorce proceedings nearly 10 years ago, throughout the four years of strung out divorce and on through the five years since that was finalised. Kid's now just turned 17. On the surface of it that sounds quite fair. Except that she earns significantly more than he does, because she's a fairly senior teacher (she may even be a headteacher, I'm not sure) whilst his social work payscale froze for several years because he went into union work. So, whilst he is earning less, driving a shit little car and going into debt in order to buy a season ticket for their team for him and his son, she's living a much easier life, having, as far as I can tell, been barely inconvenienced in her career by the two or three years she spent at home. At the same time, I had a colleague a couple of years back whose abusive ex managed to secure visitation rights to the children and she had to wave them off in the car twice a week with a man she couldn't really trust with their safety. Why did the court not take her fears seriously? Because she was a housewife and he was a businessman, imo. The truth is it's very difficult to get anything like a fair and amicable settlement unless both parties are trying to come to such a thing. The problem with an adversarial system is that it presupposes a winner and a loser.

08-20-2007, 10:26 PM	#378
yesman065 Banned - Self Imposed Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,847	thanks rk, but it is more than ok - I know that I am doing the right, just and morally correct thing in this situation - I have faith that all will work out in the end. It usually does. Yeah Dana - its a shame that a system had to be designed so that a friggin father is compelled to take care of his own kids. I cannot fathom that level of irrisponsibility - even though I see it everytime I go to the domestic relations office.

08-20-2007, 10:27 PM	#379
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	The kids were adults.

08-20-2007, 11:03 PM	#380
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	There is an important quote in here about excusing his actions as "temper" or "maleness" and "taming/civilizing him to find the prince within being our (females) job". Hmmmmmm?

08-21-2007, 03:57 PM	#383
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	What has a corrupt legal system got to do with a woman wanting to take care of her baby?

08-21-2007, 04:49 PM	#384
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	As already stated, if a man wants to "abort" his responsibilities to an unwanted situation he should be allowed to... no no problem. It's all the mother's choice now, she is in COMPLETE control and that is the way it is supposed to be, right? The man is just the sperm donor.

08-22-2007, 04:55 AM	#387
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	yes indeed. But the point that Yesman had raised was the fact that he has encountered a lot of men who don't want to step up and he seemed disgusted that enough men don't want to support their children that it requires a whole department to deal with it. My point was merely that it would be unfair to judge men harshly compared to women on this, given that women get a bunch of hormonal help when the pregnancy starts.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)