By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
SamuelRSmith on 22 December 2014
Edit Thread
pepharytheworm said:


Alright prove what you say is true and not what others think you are saying. Come up with a fairer law that has a control so as men can't simply walk out. If you say good morals are all that's needed don't even bother replying. 

I agree any father who pays support and is not unhealthy to be around for the child should be able to have visitation rights. Your assumptions of DJEVOLVE and I are way off base. We have not once mentioned that the first 9 months are all there is to being a parent. Only that that is something at this time is not part of the males responsibility and as such the laws reflect that.


Maybe I misunderstood your claims, if so, I apologise.

I'm not usually one to "propose laws", but if you insist:

1) Let men absolve responsibilities if within a certain time frame, that time frame being less than the woman is allowed to abort within the jurisdiction. ie - If a woman is allowed to abort within first 20 weeks, men have right to absolve within first 12 weeks. Same restrictions apply as abortion, so if a woman needs to go through some kind of spiel as to why abortions are bad (as they do in some states, I believe) a man must do the same, and he can't say he's absolved, there needs to be some kind of legal document signed with the mother being informed prior to the granting of the document.

This way, men can absolve, but there are hoops to jump through, and there's time afterwards to allow the mother to decide whether she wants to raise the baby without the father.

2) In cases of divorce or separation, the primary care giver should not be defaulted to either parent. If the children are old enough to decide, it should be their choice, secondly if one parent forgoes the primary caregiver role, the role goes to the other parent. Beyond those, it's a court case.

3) The primary caregiver should not be allowed to restrict access to secondary caregiver. Moreover, under a certain age, the secondary caregiver should have an obligation to see the children a certain number of days per month, refusal to do so will incur a higher financial burden on providing child support to primary caregiver.

4) If it is determined that the primary caregiver is abusing child support money, then the secondary caregiver should be allowed to place restrictions on the money, a bit like food stamps, where the money can only be spent on items like food, children's clothing, and education.

Obviously, these laws apply to "normal cases", and will not handle situations like violent partners, underraged parents, issues like non-biological parents, etc.

These laws would be far from perfect, but certainly much "fairer" than the current setup.