A
female
age
36-40,
anonymous
writes:I have a question that has been bugging me for awhile. What do you think of the fact that men don't seem to have much of a say when it comes to their children (planned or otherwise)?I'll use an example to illustrate. It's what has gotten me thinking a lot about it. I have a friend who is married to a divorced man with 3 children. The mother has custody (of course). And I'm not certain about all of the financial situation, but he has to pay child support until they are done school (including university/college) as well as part of their tuition. Also, he has to pay I think it's 60% of any lessons and extracurriculars that his ex-wife signs his children up for. So, ballet, hockey, etc etc. Now, he is even getting sued by his ex-wife for more money to pay for the car (or at least a good part of the car) that she bought for one of their children. I don't know, but I was horrified when I heard this. There's no doubt that he should be paying child support for a certain amount of time for his children. But for all of these extra things that he doesn't even get a say in deciding whether they can afford to be bought these lessons and cars? I didn't even know that this was possible.
View related questions:
divorce, ex-wife, his ex, money, university Reply to this Article
Share |
You can add your comments or thoughts to this article A
male
reader, nuggs  +, writes (20 April 2011):
The system wants to avoid having to support these single mothers at all cost. And since typically women do not work as much or earn as much the system screws Dads! It is almost impossible for dads to get custody in most cases, so mom gets custody and Dad is ordered to pay for everything so they can keep their life style. Even when Dads get custody the very rarely get support and if they do it is never enforced and most women just don't pay.
A
female
reader, chigirl  +, writes (30 March 2011):
 I think those laws are there for a reason, for example the men have a tendency to bail. If they do, then they are basically out of the picture. It's if a man wants to have contact with his child, and be around, that the trouble really enters the picture. As for contraceptives. Condoms are a pretty effective method. He can also use sperm killing lotion. And pull out at the same time. Or better yet, not sleep around but stick to a girl he can trust and that takes her birth control. I don't see why men can't take more responsibility for protection, they have every possibility to step up and be more responsible. Saying they aren't is just an excuse. Women can't push down any number of hormones either, and did you ever stop to think just how these "easy" pills affect our bodies? We're doing the sacrificing here guys. If a man lives with his girlfriend, or wife, there is no reason for why he can't witness that the wife takes her birth control, or better yet use a pfc, that measures body temperature and then checks if you are fertile or not. The man can watch this to know the result as well. Anyway, I agree the children are given to the mothers custody quite often... and without another reason than it being their mother, for most part. But there are several cases where the father gets custody, you need to look at the total picture. To take away custody from one parent demands a whole lot of evidence, in fact there are several cases of incest where the children are NOT removed, due to lack of evidence. It's not an easy process, even when you deal with the serious cases of neglect. As for the car and extra things mentioned by the OP, I don't know the laws in your country. But I never heard of that happening, and Im wondering if perhaps this man could be twisting the truth about a few things? If it's really true then you are dealing with a woman who takes advantage of the system. No system is without flaw, and people often take advantage when they can. It's a human flaw we have.... In this case it is a system that benefits the mothers, and the reason for that you need to study the laws to find out. There's often good reason for why the laws are the way they are, but that they are too easy to take advantage of, or too open for misuse, or that you have a few cases that ruin it for all of those who don't take advantage. My father landed in debt to the state because he didn't have the money for child support. So it wasn't about him paying a percentage of his pay check, the state actually had to spit out the money for him. The system, in our case, helped us from poverty, as my mother didn't make much money either. She certainly didn't spend it on extra lessons or cars for us! At 13 I got my own job and paid for my own clothes! And when I moved out, before 18 the child support money came to me directly. So yes, it is quite useful, even if it doesn't benefit the father. I also got the benefit money from the state to me directly after moving out (before turning 18), money my mother otherwise would have gotten. The money follows the child, not the mother. But the mother in most cases gets the custody... However after 12 the child has a right to decide itself where it wants to live, and before then should have it's opinion taken into consideration. Unfortunately the law doesn't always listen to the child either.
...............................
A
male
reader, Odds +, writes (29 March 2011):
 It doesn't just start there. Men have no say in whether or not they even get to be fathers. Men can either abstain or rely on condoms (a relatively ineffective form of birth control) or pulling out (a very ineffective form of birth control). Women can abstain, insist on condoms, take half dozen types of hormonal control, get IUDs, or abort. Not to mention women can drop a kid off at a fire station or hospital in most states, no questions asked.
Better yet, after courts skim a percentage off of every child support payment (which creates an incentive for higher payments), there is absolutely no legal mechanism for determining how the recipient (the mom, 85% of the time) spends the money. They can legally spend child support money on a boob job.
Oh, and the father doesn't even have to be the father. If he signed the birth certificate, but later began to doubt he was the real father, too bad for him, he still has to pay. And if he loses his job, he can't apply for reduced child support for a minimum of six months in most states.
Fact is, the role of the father is not particularly valued in modern society. I'm not talking about sticoms here (the common complaint, but one I think is irrelevant). I'm talking about girls who choose to become single mothers, or wives who "fall out of love" and tear their families apart with no-fault divorce. It's taboo to tell them they're being idiots - and frankly, since getting massive child support and alimony is easy, they may have a point (in a very utilitarian way).
Another indicator is that visitation rights are rarely enforced. A close friend of mine never sees his kids, even though legally he should get to every other weekend. The court doesn't care - it doesn't get to skim a percentage off visitation time.
Add in the fact that society in general cares much less about a man's suffering than a woman's, and you have a court system that pretty much screws fathers.
Women lose sometimes - the system is designed to absolutely destroy the person who acts slowest. It rewards swift, cold-blooded legal action. There is a strong pro-female bias, but it's not insurmountable. But, as Janniepeg pointed out, women initiate most divorces. Maybe they're just more inclined to use the system, or the system is more inclined to aid women, or both. But then, guys don't even have to be married to get hit up for child support, so it's tough to avoid the risk.
It's good that you see the injustice in this. Too many people don't. Honestly, I think kids get the shaft even bigger than dads, but "It's for the children!" got us into this legal situation, I doubt it will get us out. If you can promise not to abuse the system, and get your friends to promise the same, that's progress, though.
...............................
A
female
reader, janniepeg +, writes (29 March 2011):
 Did he have a good lawyer to represent him or was he willing to spend that kind of money, time and effort to figure what's fair for him? 70% of divorces is initiated by women. The causes could be infidelity, abuse or simply just "not in love" anymore. Men are shocked, in denial, and depressed when women file for divorce. They probably are not thinking about the division of money, property and time with kids. They are thinking about what went wrong, could things be fixed, why is this happening to me. The law system does not really care about people's feelings. It's more like checks and minuses, numbers, yes or no, pieces of paper and who has motion. When women get bitter in relationships because they don't get the affection they need or choose the wrong men, they take advantage of this cold, indifferent law system to get back at husbands or to feel they at least they are gaining or winning something.
...............................
|
