California Girl
Rookie
- Oct 8, 2009
- 50,337
- 10,058
- 0
- Banned
- #81
To the OP: Yes...and No.
Every situation is different. There are women who simply don't know who the father is. In extreme cases they may not have so much as a name.
There are women who know but just don't want him around, for reasons that run the gamut from them not wanting to share control of the child to the father's issues they believe would be harmful to the child if exposed to them. In that situation the father can press his rights through use of the courts and putative father registries, though. He always has recourse.
Then there are the men who abandon the mother and child and it's his choice not to have anything to do with the child. These men whether they're on a birth certificate or not aren't going to be involved and will fight taking responsibility.
Then there's the other extreme, the women who don't want or cannot supply a father's name on a birth certificate because it was a situation of incest, rape or abuse.
There are so many different situations out there it's difficult to come up with a one size fits all rule that addresses every one of them in a just manner. Which is why family laws are so complicated and the result (ideally at least) is always an individual determination. I would hesitate to apply either a one size fits all rule in this situation or allow an overworked, underpaid, cynical and most likely highly unqualified caseworker to make any kind of individual determination.
If a woman does not know the name of the man who fathered her kid, why should I be held responsible? Perhaps women should take a tad more responsibility and find out such detail before they breed with a guy? Just an idea.
I think we're all intelligent enough to work out that this kind of law couldn't apply in certain circumstances.
There is never a 'one size fits all' solution to societies problems... that does not mean we shouldn't cover the majority with this kind of process.
Agree
Right now there is no incentive for a woman to name the father. If she tries, the useless breeder pressures her not to name names. With paternity tests now, it is simple enough to round up the potential fathers and find out who the daddy is.
While I would not cut off benefits to the family without a father being named, I would pay a significantly lower rate and offer less desirable housing until a father is named
People need to understand really basic shit. Having a child is not a right, it is a privilege. If we accept that women can produce children without having a way of privately paying for that child, the consequence of that is she is required to name the father so that he can pay. Having taxpayers constantly picking up the tab for irresponsible behavior is ridiculous. It doesn't work, it hasn't worked in any other country and it won't work in ours.
Name the fucking father or get nothing. Easy.