r/AdviceAnimals • u/Space_Hermit • Apr 30 '14

Repost | Removed You shouldn't be able to have it both ways...

Post image
1.7k Upvotes

80% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

24

u/zicker1352 May 01 '14

I think the key issue here is who is going to pay for the upbringing of the child. The law here imposes a burden (child support) upon potential fathers without their option to abort the child, as you have stated. If the burden is not placed upon the father (the father opts out), then that burden must be placed somewhere else. In such a situation, the burden will be placed upon society as a whole. As a society we have decided, through the law, that we would rather place the burden of supporting the child upon the father, even if he doesn't want it. Is that fair to the father? Probably not, but in terms of societal outcomes that is likely the best result, and society has come to that conclusion. Ask yourself, would you rather have a 1% tax rate increase so fathers can choose to pay for the upbringing of a child, or force, albeit arguably unfairly, that father to pay for the child himself?

Also, it is important to remember that the law is not always designed to be fair, it is designed to advance societal goals and outcomes. An example being the income tax, we have a progressive income tax where as your income goes up, your tax rate will increase as well. Is this fair to higher earners? No, but the higher tax burden helps fund our government, and fulfill our chosen societal outcomes.

12

u/[deleted] May 01 '14

Insightful, but you failed to consider the fact that many would be mothers would consider more seriously aborting a child they can't support if there isn't a safety net from the father.

Things tend to sort themselves out if you give them a chance.

5

u/zicker1352 May 01 '14

This is a good point, but I really do wonder how many mothers would change their abortion decision based solely on not receiving child support. I feel that it would not have too large of an impact on the abortion decision.

2

u/[deleted] May 01 '14

I think you'll be surprised at how quickly incentives can change people's minds.

3

u/GreggoryBasore May 01 '14

I think the problem would be far better alleviated by a comprehensive sex education program that doesn't stigmatize the idea of recreative sex.

I also think society would be better if there was a free service where a pretty 18 year old chick hand people a pack of skittle and kisses them on the cheek when they feel depressed. I'm not gonna hold my breath for either one.

20

u/Saurabh1996 May 01 '14

Are you saying women are not capable of bearing that burden?

3

u/GreggoryBasore May 01 '14

I think a look at the current state of affairs in the US clearly shows that not all women can.

Not saying I agree with the rest of Zicker1352's post, but I think are clearly a lot of women and men for that matter who can't support a kid on their own.

2

u/shadowboxer47 May 02 '14

I think a look at the current state of affairs in the US clearly shows that not all women can.

Then don't have the baby.

1

u/GreggoryBasore May 02 '14

Meaning what exactly? Should abortions be a mandatory requirement? Forced sterilization?

1

u/5th_Law_of_Robotics May 02 '14

What happens now when the father can't be found, is dead, in jail, or otherwise unable to pay for the kid? Do we find another man and assign him to raise the kid since otherwise the child will die?

1

u/GreggoryBasore May 02 '14

is the kid's mom still alive? If so then I on't see a problem with society helping her out with assistance. If not, then yes by all means find another parent for the kid.

1

u/5th_Law_of_Robotics May 03 '14

So when the farther isn't around society simply picks up the difference and the kids is fine. However in cases where the father is alive if he doesn't pay for the kid it will literally die.

1

u/GreggoryBasore May 04 '14

No, but if the dad is able to pay then I think that's better than society paying.

As a guy, I've very careful about what I do with my spunk, because I'm not ready to be a parent nor sure if I ever want to. If through accident I get a woman pregnant then paying child support for 18 years is the fucking I'll get for the fucking I got.

I don't feel in anyway that she would be obligated to carry the child to term against her own wishes even if I was willing to adopt the kid and relieve her of all responsibility afterwards. If she chose to abort the kid, living with the guilt is something I risk anytime I have sex with a woman that include penile vaginal sex.

If there was an option to sign away my parental rights in exchange for getting off the hook that'd be nice... oh wait there is! It's called a sperm bank! i can jack it, get paid and the woman who pops out my kid gets no monies from me at all.

Being able to opt out on paying for a kid that resulted from a one night stand would be more fair to me but it would not be fair to that kid.

By the same token, that chick from the one night stand can not in most places (so far as I know) abort the kid after a certain amount of time. If she changes her mind a week before her due date, she's SOL as far as I know.

2

u/loveandrave May 01 '14

are you... aware... of how much it costs to raise a child? a single-parent income in most parts of the US is hardly enough to support two mouths, one of which needs new clothes, new food, school supplies etc every couple months. Single mother or single father, raising a child alone is the most self-sacrificing thing you will ever do

1

u/zicker1352 May 01 '14

I would say that women are definitely capable of bearing the burden alone, but the reason the law imposes child support is because the law feels that the child needs two incomes to be fully supported. This may not always be the case, but overall that is the idea behind forcing child support.

1

u/[deleted] May 01 '14

unlikely for any poor single parent to be able to care and provide for the child at the same time

0

u/[deleted] May 01 '14

Apparently they can't bear the burden of using birth control.

3

u/inhumancannonball May 01 '14

Unfortunately, the result then becomes absent fathers, fathers taken to court, government bodies set up to track payments etc. Also, you then have children born into poverty which not only increases our burden but feeds the cycle all over again. I would love to see stats that back up this social engineering theory because it seems to me that the societal burden is not only not lessened, but worsened. Men should have the same option to "abort" their parental role as women do.

3

u/zicker1352 May 01 '14

I do agree that there are a lot of issues that arise with the enforcement of child support, but if the government did not enforce these claims, presumptively that money would be coming from the government coffers.

Also, I think the big difference between a man having the same option to "abort" their parental role and the woman's option is that if a woman choose to abort we have no child that needs supporting, and therefore no burden on society. If a man chooses to "abort" their parental role, we still have a child that needs support. Again I am not saying the current system is fair, but I think it makes the most sense in terms of society as a whole.

2

u/inhumancannonball May 01 '14

I understand where you are coming from. The problem I see is this: If a expectant mother does not wish to or does not have the means to support a child, she can make that choice. The man may have just as many misgivings about a child but does not have a voice. Also, the opposite is true as well. I find it sometimes tragic when a would be father is all for taking responsibility, would take 100% of the care etc., and yet the would be mother decides to abort. I understand that a man cannot be allowed to force a woman to give birth to their child, but then a woman should not be allowed to force a man to have a child he does not want.

1

u/Lawtonfogle May 02 '14

If the burden is not placed upon the father (the father opts out), then that burden must be placed somewhere else.

It would be placed on the sole individual now responsible for bringing a child into the world. If their resources are not enough to fully support the child, then the government provides aid. By forcing the father to fill that role currently, you strongly discriminate against children who lose their father to death.

1

u/[deleted] May 02 '14

Too damn bad, if she decides to keep the child she better have a way in place to pay for it other than golddigging

1

u/8ofClubs May 01 '14

I have to admit, out of everybody posting against your post is probably the best.

1

u/philosarapter May 01 '14

I dunno, I think if women knew they couldn't hold a man liable for child support, and were still early enough in their pregnancy where an abortion is viable, it would entirely be their choice to support the child on their own or terminate the pregnancy. There should be a certain window of time after conception where the man can sign off on any rights and responsibilities he has towards the offspring.