5 Legal Rights Women Have That Men Don’t (primarily USA focused)

[Mr Khan]

Jlaff said:

Mr Khan said:

This is because of the problem of deadbeat parents, post-divorce. They had to be "harder" on non-custodial parents simply because of the long history of the deadbeat dad (though i don't doubt there were more than a few deadbeat moms as well). I understand that the laws certainly look unfair, but consider this: if we loosened the guidelines for child support payments, how many people would choose to pay the bare minimum? If there was an option to find a legal way out, how many people would just take it, and then the old deadbeat parent problem comes back.

So you're advocating for discrimination based on public policy concerns, as in exactly what I suggested you were. 

So... now I'm curious what your thoughts are on stop and frisk laws. 

Also, any thought given to what pool of funds cost incurred by a non-custodial should come out of? Like those costs for food, clothing, entertainment, having an additional bedroom that are given no consideration under support tables unless that time exceeds 40 percent of the days in a year? 

The two are related, but not in the way that you suggest. Stop and Frisk was wrong because it discriminated against people without any actual suspicion that they had done something wrong. The regime of child support payments is wrong only in that it is a one-size-fits-all approach to a problem which is more nuanced, but is superior to the alternative of the legal right-of-surrender, because of how damaging poverty is to a child's development, and the likelihood that single-parenthood is to contribute to poverty.

It is an imperfect system, but not an unjust one, per se.