shall I keep this baby? (210)
jac379: My child never went without food, but I did for several years.
If my daughter's father had made a financial contribution, it would have gone in my mouth because my daughter already had enough, I made sure of that.
He knew that.
He chose not to contribute for fear that I might gain from him.
I have heard men saying this time and time again, "How do I know my money is going to my child and not the mother?" and it makes me so furious.
Any money that enables the family unit to survive is for the benefit of the child.
If my daughter's father had made a financial contribution, it would have gone in my mouth because my daughter already had enough, I made sure of that.
He knew that.
He chose not to contribute for fear that I might gain from him.
I have heard men saying this time and time again, "How do I know my money is going to my child and not the mother?" and it makes me so furious.
Any money that enables the family unit to survive is for the benefit of the child.
On this I agree whole heatedly. I give up 2500 a month to see that my children have a roof over their head, food to eat, clothes on their back, and transportation to get where they need to go. I do it knowing full well that my x will be using the same money for the same purposes. I brought them into this world and will take care of them even if she and I can't get along. They are just as much my responsibility as they are hers.
Guess that's why I have a hard time finding someone. I'm not rich but I have enough to live and survive and can do most things I want to.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: My child never went without food, but I did for several years.
If my daughter's father had made a financial contribution, it would have gone in my mouth because my daughter already had enough, I made sure of that.
He knew that.
He chose not to contribute for fear that I might gain from him.
I have heard men saying this time and time again, "How do I know my money is going to my child and not the mother?" and it makes me so furious.
Any money that enables the family unit to survive is for the benefit of the child.
If my daughter's father had made a financial contribution, it would have gone in my mouth because my daughter already had enough, I made sure of that.
He knew that.
He chose not to contribute for fear that I might gain from him.
I have heard men saying this time and time again, "How do I know my money is going to my child and not the mother?" and it makes me so furious.
Any money that enables the family unit to survive is for the benefit of the child.
More so in China, there may be no social welfare or insignificant, and the child may starve actually. Or at least be disadvantaged comparing to those who are supported by both parents. Actually, you don't need to be in China, most of children anywhere would be disadvantaged with only support of the mother.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conorco: I'm thinking about what you and Joy have said and will reply in due course said but in the meantime what would be the position where a gal tells a guy she is on the pill and is also using one of them thingies up her yolk and begs for a good roddin and being the gentleman he is he duly obliges .Now the truth is she's lying and subsequently becomes pregnant. Is he obliged to pay child support?
If a woman believes lies that the man is infertile, will withdraw, blah, blah, blah she has no choice, but to accept the consequences of her misguided trust.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Actractorguy: On this I agree whole heatedly. I give up 2500 a month to see that my children have a roof over their head, food to eat, clothes on their back, and transportation to get where they need to go. I do it knowing full well that my x will be using the same money for the same purposes. I brought them into this world and will take care of them even if she and I can't get along. They are just as much my responsibility as they are hers.
Guess that's why I have a hard time finding someone. I'm not rich but I have enough to live and survive and can do most things I want to.
Guess that's why I have a hard time finding someone. I'm not rich but I have enough to live and survive and can do most things I want to.
It may be hard, but you are doing the right thing.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: My child never went without food, but I did for several years.
If my daughter's father had made a financial contribution, it would have gone in my mouth because my daughter already had enough, I made sure of that.
He knew that.
He chose not to contribute for fear that I might gain from him.
I have heard men saying this time and time again, "How do I know my money is going to my child and not the mother?" and it makes me so furious.
Any money that enables the family unit to survive is for the benefit of the child.
If my daughter's father had made a financial contribution, it would have gone in my mouth because my daughter already had enough, I made sure of that.
He knew that.
He chose not to contribute for fear that I might gain from him.
I have heard men saying this time and time again, "How do I know my money is going to my child and not the mother?" and it makes me so furious.
Any money that enables the family unit to survive is for the benefit of the child.
I divorced my daughter's father when she was 11 months old...I had a high school education and very limited work experience...at the time of the divorce, the court awarded me $100.00 a month in support, to be paid to me by my daughter's father...this amount was never increased during the 17 years I spent raising my daughter and often, I was not paid to me by her father.....we made it, but it was very difficult for many years.....I know exactly what you are talking about Jac when you say your child ate but often you did not...
------ This thread is Archived ------
Actractorguy: On this I agree whole heatedly. I give up 2500 a month to see that my children have a roof over their head, food to eat, clothes on their back, and transportation to get where they need to go. I do it knowing full well that my x will be using the same money for the same purposes. I brought them into this world and will take care of them even if she and I can't get along. They are just as much my responsibility as they are hers.
Guess that's why I have a hard time finding someone. I'm not rich but I have enough to live and survive and can do most things I want to.
Guess that's why I have a hard time finding someone. I'm not rich but I have enough to live and survive and can do most things I want to.
------ This thread is Archived ------
joyaepace: More so in China, there may be no social welfare or insignificant, and the child may starve actually. Or at least be disadvantaged comparing to those who are supported by both parents. Actually, you don't need to be in China, most of children anywhere would be disadvantaged with only support of the mother.
I mostly agree with you and I'm nit-picking again, so please forgive me.
A child may have less material things and fewer opportunities, but never is a child so disadvantaged than a child that is not loved.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Give the baby for adoption do NOT KILL IT.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Actractorguy: On this I agree whole heatedly. I give up 2500 a month to see that my children have a roof over their head, food to eat, clothes on their back, and transportation to get where they need to go. I do it knowing full well that my x will be using the same money for the same purposes. I brought them into this world and will take care of them even if she and I can't get along. They are just as much my responsibility as they are hers.
Guess that's why I have a hard time finding someone. I'm not rich but I have enough to live and survive and can do most things I want to.
Guess that's why I have a hard time finding someone. I'm not rich but I have enough to live and survive and can do most things I want to.
Good for you.
------ This thread is Archived ------
joyaepace: I think you are not seeing that it is not about a man and woman as much as it is about the third person, the child, who they made. The child needs support of its parents, not true? Why would you want that your child is starving, while you are enjoying life?
Me, I would support the child but this discussion is not about what i'd do its about whether or not society should oblige a man to suffer the consequences of a woman's failure to look after herself and if society decides (as it has in lots of countries) that he should then that should be paid for out of tax revenue and not the poor innocent man who was just doing what comes naturally. No ?
------ This thread is Archived ------
joyaepace: I think you are not seeing that it is not about a man and woman as much as it is about the third person, the child, who they made. The child needs support of its parents, not true? Why would you want that your child is starving, while you are enjoying life?
Me, I would support the child but this discussion is not about what i'd do its about whether or not society should oblige a man to suffer the consequences of a woman's failure to look after herself and if society decides (as it has in lots of countries) that he should then that should be paid for out of tax revenue and not the poor innocent man who was just doing what comes naturally. No ?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conorco: Nooo, I was responding to your comment "the consequences should be shared equally" and Jac's comment "Therefore, shared responsibility should be taken for the consequences of that action"
I think there's little point in pursuing this topic, we've reached the crux of the matter and as usual, when there is a difference of opinion between males and females the man will rely on fairness and reason whereas the female is driven solely by expediency, in this case they are irreconcilable.
I think there's little point in pursuing this topic, we've reached the crux of the matter and as usual, when there is a difference of opinion between males and females the man will rely on fairness and reason whereas the female is driven solely by expediency, in this case they are irreconcilable.
Driven by egocentrism rather than fairness.
Unfortunately the differences in opinions are often irreconcilable! I stand by my opinion that the fathers have to share care about their children, wanted or unwanted. It can't be left only on mothers, whatever the circumstances were when the child was conceived.------ This thread is Archived ------
Conorco: Me, I would support the child but this discussion is not about what i'd do its about whether or not society should oblige a man to suffer the consequences of a woman's failure to look after herself and if society decides (as it has in lots of countries) that he should then that should be paid for out of tax revenue and not the poor innocent man who was just doing what comes naturally. No ?
I can't speak for Ireland, but here in the US, and especially now that we have DNA testing, the courts will dictate that the biological father assume "his" share in the financial responsibility of raising a child...this, however, does not relieve the mother of the 24/7 responsibility of caring for the child..
Personally, I think the courts should address this issue as well and adjust the support money to reflect all the added expense a "single" parent bears while raising her child....
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conorco: Me, I would support the child but this discussion is not about what i'd do its about whether or not society should oblige a man to suffer the consequences of a woman's failure to look after herself and if society decides (as it has in lots of countries) that he should then that should be paid for out of tax revenue and not the poor innocent man who was just doing what comes naturally. No ?
Noooo! 'The poor innocent man' has to look after himself too! It is desperate to see how the woman is blamed for everything!
Why the 'poor innocent woman' is the only one who has to 'look after herself'?
Doing what comes naturally! We are not dogs who can't control their impulses, we are humans who have reason! You kind of assume that the woman should have reason and control and look after herself, and the man is allowed only to have impulses and follow them without reasoning. Yet you say that men are arguing from the position of reason! 
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conorco: Me, I would support the child but this discussion is not about what i'd do its about whether or not society should oblige a man to suffer the consequences of a woman's failure to look after herself and if society decides (as it has in lots of countries) that he should then that should be paid for out of tax revenue and not the poor innocent man who was just doing what comes naturally. No ?
In Canada if the guy's a slouch,and there's nothing to get from him our taxes will look after things and personaly i think it's a good system and the best over answer to this type of delema?------ This thread is Archived ------
tomcatwarne: Yes I agree but would it be possible to enforce this on a Belgian guy, from the courts in China???
She could try it at least. There are probably lawyers who will take a case and agree to be paid on results.
------ This thread is Archived ------
leigh2154: I can't speak for Ireland, but here in the US, and especially now that we have DNA testing, the courts will dictate that the biological father assume "his" share in the financial responsibility of raising a child...this, however, does not relieve the mother of the 24/7 responsibility of caring for the child..
Personally, I think the courts should address this issue as well and adjust the support money to reflect all the added expense a "single" parent bears while raising her child....
Same laws here as anywhere else. Man pays whether he wants to see them, or be part of their lives, or not.Personally, I think the courts should address this issue as well and adjust the support money to reflect all the added expense a "single" parent bears while raising her child....
------ This thread is Archived ------
joyaepace: Noooo! 'The poor innocent man' has to look after himself too! It is desperate to see how the woman is blamed for everything!
Why the 'poor innocent woman' is the only one who has to 'look after herself'? Doing what comes naturally! We are not dogs who can't control their impulses, we are humans who have reason! You kind of assume that the woman should have reason and control and look after herself, and the man is allowed only to have impulses and follow them without reasoning. Yet you say that men are arguing from the position of reason!
Why the 'poor innocent woman' is the only one who has to 'look after herself'? Doing what comes naturally! We are not dogs who can't control their impulses, we are humans who have reason! You kind of assume that the woman should have reason and control and look after herself, and the man is allowed only to have impulses and follow them without reasoning. Yet you say that men are arguing from the position of reason!
So Actratorguy, Leigh, Joy if a man get AIDS should the lady be obliged to share the bills? I'd appreciate a simple yes or Nooo answer, if she shouldn't and he can't afford to buy the necessary medication himself should he be let die or should the state step in?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conorco: Me, I would support the child but this discussion is not about what i'd do its about whether or not society should oblige a man to suffer the consequences of a woman's failure to look after herself and if society decides (as it has in lots of countries) that he should then that should be paid for out of tax revenue and not the poor innocent man who was just doing what comes naturally. No ?
You're doing quite a bit of winding here today.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Feel Good Music
your personality
The Best of the GOP
the way you look
men's perspective towards women
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
Unions support Democrats!
other can see but not you
The weird and the random facts around the world
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Related Forums
- Feel Good Music
- your personality
- The Best of the GOP
- the way you look
- men's perspective towards women
- Would you hire this guy - for any job?
- Unions support Democrats!
- other can see but not you
- The weird and the random facts around the world
- Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
Nooo, I was responding to your comment "the consequences should be shared equally" and Jac's comment "Therefore, shared responsibility should be taken for the consequences of that action"
I think there's little point in pursuing this topic, we've reached the crux of the matter and as usual, when there is a difference of opinion between males and females the man will rely on fairness and reason whereas the female is driven solely by expediency, in this case they are irreconcilable.