Child Support / Rights & Responsibility of the father

invader

onlyroz wrote: »

However, when it comes to abortion, it's the woman's body so she should choose. How would you feel if a woman had the right to insist you had a vasectomy before she had sex with you?

That's the problem with abortion though, it's not really the womans body we are talking about, it's the unborn child, who has no rights what so ever (since they are just a cluster of cells and matter). I think in some situations it should be possible to get a court order to have a child aborted (e.g, If the mother is a drug addict, injecting heroin during pregnancy).
Interesting point you make about vasectomy, I think I'd be alright with it, if the law was balanced in an opposite and equal way (like I mentioned above). I'd have no problem with the courts giving me an injunction saying I had to have the snip, infact maybe all men should have the snip at puberty and require birth licences before getting it reversed?

DUTR

invader wrote: »

In any situation where a child is born without a stable marrage and financially secure home environment it is without a doubt the child who suffers, I'm not trying to advocate child abuse or anything terrible like that. I am just not sure I fully understand the rules about what happens in a worst case scenario. Also I think that men should have equal rights to women, given how much of a ear ache men got at the start of the 20th century about giving women rights. The law should not be exploitable and it really looks like when it comes to having children, expected or accidentally... women hold all the cards and call all the shots. I don't think that's fair.

From your posts I feel you are already aware of what happens in a worst case scenario, it is as you describe, pay up and shut up.
Some will cave in and adhere to the pay per view, some will feel they pay too much, some will feel they are not recieving enough contribution, often many of these scenarios appear after either party involves themself with somebody new.
And remember you already pay for children you do not see, as there are some who live off handouts which is funded by the UK taxpayer LTD. As you are not in the scenario you 1st describe then there will be little to worry about, when things will really not be fair is when the law states the NRP has to have contact even when they choose not to :eek:.

DUTR

invader wrote: »

That's the problem with abortion though, it's not really the womans body we are talking about, it's the unborn child, who has no rights what so ever (since they are just a cluster of cells and matter). I think in some situations it should be possible to get a court order to have a child aborted (e.g, If the mother is a drug addict, injecting heroin during pregnancy).
Interesting point you make about vasectomy, I think I'd be alright with it, if the law was balanced in an opposite and equal way (like I mentioned above). I'd have no problem with the courts giving me an injunction saying I had to have the snip, infact maybe all men should have the snip at puberty and require birth licences before getting it reversed?

Why should it be the men? but even so, it is not up to the law to say what male or female do with their bodies in that respect.

invader

I'm going to bow out of this topic, thanks for the people who took it seriously and gave some genuine input. You've confirmed what I thought was true but wasn't entirely sure about, I've read through the uk.gov site and looked at 'fathers for justice' which really annoyed me. I think there is a massive gap currently in equality when it comes to child support but no easy answer. The whole topic of having children is a mine field and I'm glad all my girlfriends names end in .jpeg, it's much less dangerious that way.

DUTR

invader wrote: »

I'm going to bow out of this topic, thanks for the people who took it seriously and gave some genuine input. You've confirmed what I thought was true but wasn't entirely sure about, I've read through the uk.gov site and looked at 'fathers for justice' which really annoyed me. I think there is a massive gap currently in equality when it comes to child support but no easy answer. The whole topic of having children is a mine field and I'm glad all my girlfriends names end in .jpeg, it's much less dangerious that way.

Yeah but the jpeg girls are usually littered with too much ink and metal, it is not as dangerous as you think, ensure you are witht he right person and Im sure all will be rosy.

RadoJo

invader wrote: »

If the father chooses not to see the child then he shouldn't have to pay child support. Pretty simple and clear cut I'd say.

What if the father chooses to see the child until it's, say 4 years old and then chooses to cut contact? Do you think the child's mother should put it up for adoption? Or tells the mother that they want to be in it's life but then changes his mind when it's born? I don't think it is as clear cut as you might think.

clearingout

what about the rights of the child? Courts see it from a child's perspective, not the parents. The child has a right to a relationship with both parents which will be upheld by a court if one side doesn't play ball. A child also has a right to grow up with some financial security, surely, which is why the CSA has to exist as so many choose to evade that responsibility? The Law attempts to be fair to children - it appears to favour women because it is usual that women have taken time out to care for their families and it is this stability for children that the Law attempts to uphold. There are plenty of cases where relationships break down and dad has been the main carer and has remained so post-separation. Imagine a situation where the Law says 50/50 and suddenly a small child is forced to live half his time with a dad he only ever saw at weekends 'cos dad was gone by 6am and not back in till 9pm during the week. How on earth would that be fair to the child?

And like many, I was in a stable, long-term relationship/marriage but that didn't stop my now ex-husband playing away and deciding that the grass was greener on a permanent basis. He now chooses neither to see nor support his 3 children. Shall I have them adopted into a family where they will be loved, cared for and supported financially or am I not capable of doing that myself whether that be with financial support from the Government or going it entirely alone 'cos I earn too much? Oh no, I'm a single mother therefore I am automatically a bad mother, right?

And yes, contraception is a must if you don't want children. All three of mine were conceived with no trouble whatsoever when no contraception was used. And in the third one's case, he hung on even after a morning after pill was used, bless him. No method of contraception is 100% effective so if you're going to have sex, ever, you do need to bear in mind that with the best will in the world, sometimes it just happens.

rachbc

invader wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand the law on child support in the UK.

1: If I got a girl pregnant, without being married to her; would I be forced by the law to pay the mother money to support the child? (Or is it possible and if so in what way?)

Yes - I believe 20% of his income through the CSA though not sure after the latest changes


2: If I got a girl pregnant, without being married to her; would she be able to completely deny me access to the child?

No - you would have rights to see the child and seek it through the courts if it was denied


3: If the answer to the above questions is 'yes, she can deny the father access and yes she can legally force the father to pay her money' then is there any way to legally enforce an abortion or does the father have no right to ask the woman to have the child destroyed pre-birth?

Of course no man can force a woman to have any kind of medical procedure against her will

I think that if a woman has the right to do all these things, without the man having any say in the matter it is dangerious and a system open to abuse (such as the mother using the child as a weapon, to gain money or upset the father). So can someone clear this up for me?

And yeah, use condoms boys!

Yep - the only point men have any say in becoming dads or not is before they put it in - so yes i you don't want to have to pay for any kids you have put a condom on.

FBaby

I don't think you should be shot for bringing up those questions and in some immature (I just mean young and unfamiliar with the whole system), i think they are fair questions.

The thing you need to put into perspective though is that for many men, even if they are having sex with a woman they don't love or want to start a family with, the prospect of becoming a dad unexpectedly is not the absolute end of the world. It is scary, very scary, but most end up pleased that it happened when they get on with being a dad.

Of course, it is not always straight forward and some cases lead to legal battle etc... The bottom line, if you don't want to risk going that route, or are absolutely utterly adament that you don't want a child, you need to take matters in your end. As a man, you do have the CHOICE to protect yourself. So whereas women do somehow seem to have more control over what happens to the baby once she is pregnant, men have as much control before the child is conceive.

I think it is good you are thinking about all this now as a single man so you can indeed take all the steps not to end up wondering what to do. If more men thought about it all before, it would save a lot of trouble and hurt. Keep the condoms with you at all time and make sure you use correctly and you won't find yourself in that dreaded situation. End of the debate.

Lotus-eater

invader wrote: »

If the father chooses not to see the child then he shouldn't have to pay child support. Pretty simple and clear cut I'd say. In this day and age a woman can only become pregnant if she chooses to, she can take the pill, get an abortion or put the child up for foster/adoption if she feels unable to support it financially, it seems completly unreasonable to me that women are able to exploit the law to get financial gain. It's obviously a pretty emotive topic, given how outraged everyone in this thread has become. This is headed to be pretty much just a flame war which is a shame, because it's a really importent topic which I'd have like to have learnt more about, instead of the girls reminding me why I choose to be single :rotfl:.

Yeah, that would be great, going round getting loads of women pregnant and walking away without a care. Who cares about them and the child after the man's had his jollies.

I wondered when fathers for justice would be brought up, I feel this whole thread is here because of that sentence.

Legitimate questions, but you got your view out in the end, didn't you? And then you back out of the thread.

Massive trolling and you make men look bad, which annoys me.