If the punishment is already so severe, that means there are also several other laws which have been enacted that go towards prevention. All they’ve done is increase the powers of the authorities, which allows them to be used/abused undesirably in other non-drug related situations such as stop and search, plus creating various loopholes which potentially enable the denial of due process.
2 Likes
I grew up for a brief period of time with a deadbeat mom. For the few years after she left but before she committed suicide, she was entirely unsupportive, absent, or incoherently drunk when we visited.
My father had to prove time and time again, in courts, to the schools, and even the IRS that he was our lawful parent with custody.
At that point it wasn’t bias, it was complete disbelief.
3 Likes
I wasn’t just implying laws only. There are social pressures, cultural norms, education, protection of the family unit, and prohibitions in entertainment.
Drug use, divorce, infidelity, and marriage as a sucker’s game or trap are promoted in much entertainment media.
In this context the great society programs, while sold to the public as an attempt to help the poor… incentivised single parenthood, shiftlessness, fraud and bad decisions. They literally reward those behaviours with cash.
People respond to incentives.
I looked up Great Society Programs. I’m not sure it’s good to speak about them here unless I agree with everyone about every aspect and consequence of them. I had known of some of them but I was unaware of the overarching title.
I’m up for people disagreeing with me but I’m not into this thread going in a direction in which someone brings up AH, Stalin, the R word, both N-words, edgy websites, Raj, the alt-right, etc.
What? I thought we were talking about deadbeat dads, the legal system and the nuclear family and how government policy affected those things. Is Wikipedia edgy? What bad direction did we go In? The nuclear family of poor whites got dismantled as well, they just weren’t as targeted for welfare programs until later. I don’t think anybody mentioned race.
I don’t think anyone associated your argument with the “Men’s rights movement” either. or any swill like that.
It’s downright obvious courts/the legal system are stacked against men.
You didn’t say anything like that.
I actually like your posts here and on TN a lot! If I see your avatar pop up in a thread I’m in I usually read it.
I made the assumption because Iwould be compelled to make politically incorrect statements. But I’ll hold back. I’ll try to hold back on assuming.
With all these added things why would we need it to also be a crime to cheat on your SO?
Imagine the level of control you’d have to give the govt over your personal life for that to even be viable.
Why would this entail giving the government unlimited control of personal life? Would it be necessary?
However, if you are going to go there, you should just take the government out of marriage entirely. If no prenup was signed, there is no alimony, no division of assets, no child support.
1 Like
We can’t even figure out how to legally define marriage. Lawmakers first have to define that. Then they’d need to define the terms by which someone can be held legally accountable. Then you STILL have people being punished by the law over hurt feelings.
In a theoretical sense, I’d be absolutely on board with that. In the real world, I recognize that society has placed a very large stigma upon prenups. The concept that you’re ‘planning for failure’ with your marriage but the same doesn’t apply to your health insurance drives me up a wall, but here we are.
Imagine how much the govt would truly need to define/control to get us to a point where cheating is illegal.
I’m sorry if this is obvious, but do you just mean the two versions of the one word, or is there another one I’m missing? I realize this is beside the point, but I just couldn’t think of it.
I have mixed feelings on the ‘system is stacked against men’. I like this topic from brick because we actually talked about this in person a bit when I met him a few months ago.
So the system clearly is stacked against men in most states (if not all, I’m not knowledgeable enough to KNOW this is the case everywhere, but I think it probably is). I’ll keep this specifically to Texas law and practice, since that’s what I have personal experience with.
Texas law requires that one parent be deemed the primary custodian of a child. There is no true 50/50 custody. The standard for child support is that the non-primary custodian is responsible for child support amounting to 20% of net income, regardless of custody arrangement. And if the mother is at least capable of being ‘primary’, that status is awarded to her. There is no standard beyond a basic capacity to handle the job.
So what this has amounted to in my situation is as follows: I have my son exactly 50% of the time, legally. Over the last 2 1/2 years, I’ve ACTUALLY had him probably closer to 52% of the time, because my ex asks me to watch him on her days fairly regularly, and I usually agree to it. MY ex, in turn, receives about 1300 dollars in support from me monthly, and I pay for half of his school tuition on top of that, and half his medical bills. I provide a more stable, safer living environment for my son. My ex can barely make ends meet. I have no history of violence or criminal activity on my record, or anything close to that. I have to sit here watching my ex spend the money I earn on aerial yoga and alcohol, while my son didn’t receive a single christmas present from her, and she tells me she can’t afford to use the money she receives from me to enroll him in things like music lessons, sports, or anything else that would be an additional expense. I’ll have to pay for all these things out of my own pocket as well.
And there is zero shot that a court will reverse primary custody, because he is not in any immediate danger.
So here’s where my mixed feelings come in to play. I know that I’m an exception, and I’m aware of soooooo many situations where the father is absolutely negligent. My girlfriend has a real shithead for an ex. So i understand why the laws are structured the way they are. I think there should be more room for judges to take into account specific situations (like mine) and make decisions that would be a bit more fair for good dads. I don’t believe I should be obliged to pay the same amount that a dad who has zero involvement in their kid’s life would be expected to pay. Many states handle this with a sliding scale depending on custody arrangement, but Texas does not.
In summary: history shows us that the deck probably should be stacked to some degree against fathers, but not to the extent that it currently is.
5 Likes
The problems, like with most laws, are two:
-
Family law is it is written to deal with the most extreme situations – e…g, the proverbial deadbeat dad. It starts with the angry 1970s feminist assumption that men are bad and will avoid their responsibilities. Ergo, all men in the system are treated like pseudo-criminals.
-
It’s based on dated concept of a one income family where one person bears 100% of the domestic load and the other 100% of the income burden. This hasn’t been the realistic model since 1985.
It will not change, any time soon, however, because Republicans are trying to make in-roads with women, and pocket book issues trump basically anything else in a given voter’s mind (regardless of merit – think corn subsidies among otherwise conservative Iowa representatives) AND Democrats are are on a men-are-evil kick. So there is zero political will to fix anything.
So marry wisely (if at all) and otherwise keep your pants zipped.
Alternatively, get a solid per-nuptual agreement.
6 Likes
My ex-wife paid me child support for 5 years until my son graduated high school. It wasn’t a ton, but there was principle involved. My current wife’s ex-husband is a therapist and doesn’t pay a dime for his 4 boys. He barely works and his parents support him just to spite my wife. We don’t need his money, but I don’t understand what kind of man wouldn’t want to contribute to their kids welfare.
4 Likes
The answer is in the post. Haha.
2 Likes
I debated about replying to anything in this thread, primarily because:
a) I’m new to the site
b) I’m a woman
c) I’m Canadian, so I can’t attest to anything that happens in the States with regards to law, etc.
What I really wanted to say is I’m sorry for you - you sound like a great dad and a stand up human being, and it just really sucks that the law is in fact stacked against you. I don’t agree with it, in any capacity. The children should be with the parent who is best able to provide a stable, healthy environment (assuming the kids are of an age where they can’t/don’t have an opinion on who they want to live with).
I’ve now had three men in my life f*ck off (my father, my daughter’s bio dad, and her adoptive dad as well) and all three stopped support as soon as they were able, or never paid in the first place. They all have/had big opinions on the raising of the kid(s), without ever actually putting boots to the ground and doing the job. These are the guys the laws are written for, unfortunately sometimes moms get shafted regardless.
All that to say, kudos to you for being who your son needs, and for what it’s worth, a stranger on the internet thinks you’re awesome.
4 Likes
That’s a disturbingly authoritarian thing to believe. Thankfully you are in the minority that’s getting smaller and smaller every day.
3 Likes
so, when my son turns 12 (he’s 4 now), he will legally have a say in who his primary guardian is. Right now, he hates going to his mom’s. He cries every time he knows he has to leave me, and he’s always excited to get back to me. It sucks, because I want him to love his time with both parents as equally as possible. But, with that being the case, I expect that in 8 years, I will end up as his primary guardian. So at least this isn’t forever… lol.
my girlfriend’s ex is like this. I’m sorry you’ve had to deal with it. He is very controlling, and while he only has his daughter 4 days out of every month, he tries to force his will on the daughter and my girlfriend. He’s bought multiple cell phones and demanded that my ex let her keep them on her at all times so he can call her directly whenever he wants (she’s 9), bought her a laptop and sent it home with us, and continually signs her up for things, gets the kid excited about them (sports and other extracurriculars), then demands that we pay for it, because the kid is already excited about it and he has no money. It’s crazy. Then when he’s with her, he sits around watching horror movies that scare the shit out of her and feeds her mcdonalds all day.
I’m sad for your little guy, no child should cry when they go to anyone’s house, let alone their mother’s. My fingers are crossed that when he’s 12 he does get to stay with you “primarily” (I use quotations because it’s such a lame term, imo. Especially in cases like your’s).
Your gf’s ex sounds like a complete douchenozzle. All the deadbeats in my life were super controlling, while never actually providing anything, at least without some arbitrary condition on it that would, somehow, never actually get met, so the thing I (or my daughter) wanted/needed, never actually came through.
It’s pretty crappy how any assh*le can create a child, eh? And then bail out as soon as they aren’t interested anymore. It’s reassuring to my heart to know there are dads/parents like you in the world. Keep up the good work 