Father's rights (child care, ideas, baby, appropriate)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, father's don't. If that's true, why don't more jobs offer paternity leave? When it comes to custody, why does the mom almost always get primary custody?
You're lying to yourself if you honestly believe that fathers have the same rights as mothers.
It's impossible for me to be a dad because I'm a woman and I don't have any kids.
I totally agree with the bolded.
I agree with pink
also, fathers don't really have a say in one of the most important decisions in their own life,,,and that's whether to have/keep the child, or abort
this rests solely on the female/mother, (im not saying it shouldn't)
say girlfriend/partner finds out she is pregnant, she hasn't decided if she really wants it- but she tells the sperm donor/father
father is jumping for joy,,he wants a kid
at this point,,,he has no say whatsoever, whether that kid lives, is aborted, or is adopted
on the other extreme,,,,the guy is an immature self -centered loser, he finds out girlfriend is pregnant and does not want the child at all (or her)
again, he has no say in this,,,if she decides to have child, now he is legally obligated for financial support for a kid for 18 yrs!!, and he doesn't want the kid
more responsibility lays on the female/mother she is the caretaker, nester, so the laws should lean a bit in her direction...
Father have all of the same rights as a married father, but it is limited to who have legal guardianship, including an orphanage. It is more or less how the relationship is with the woman or women in the mans life. Their are differnt kinds of relationships, to put it short.
The problem is those dysfunctional relationships usually bleed out to affect the child as well. In that case I think it's better that one of the parties just vacate themselves from the relationship with the child. I don't care who does it, just someone needs to to ensure the child doesn't grow up as a pawn between parental battles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mainebrokerman
more responsibility lays on the female/mother she is the caretaker, nester, so the laws should lean a bit in her direction...
No, father's don't. If that's true, why don't more jobs offer paternity leave? When it comes to custody, why does the mom almost always get primary custody?
You're lying to yourself if you honestly believe that fathers have the same rights as mothers.
It's impossible for me to be a dad because I'm a woman and I don't have any kids.
I totally agree with the bolded.
Um, then why are you so willing to let men off the hook? Doesn't make much sense.
They should.
Lots of opinions for someone who isn't a parent...
more responsibility lays on the female/mother she is the caretaker, nester, so the laws should lean a bit in her direction...
Although it's a complicated issue, I think the laws could be more equal when possible. Just like there is mandated mediation for child support, custody, and visitation, there should be mandated pregnancy mediation for unmarried parents. It would save the government a ton of money by cutting down on future court cases. It would eliminate much of the drama that babies are born into also.
Although the father can't and shouldn't force the mother to have an abortion or go through a pregnancy, he should be allowed to force her to put a child up for adoption if she insists on not having an abortion if the state is going to mandate he be financially responsible for a decision he had no say in. If the mother wants to keep the baby, she should show the court she can financially support the baby on her own income instead of the father being mandated to pay child support. Alternately, the father should be allowed to take the baby and raise it on his own if she doesn't want the child but is willing to go through the pregnancy as long as he proves he can financially provide for the child. Of course, there will be couples who both want the child and are eager to financially support the child, and they're welcome to make their agreement official during the mediation before the child is even born.
There are a lot of different ways to go about this if legislators thought outside of the box. It's a cop out to say a father had his chance when he had sex. That means that men don't have equal rights even in bed before conception. They were both irresponsible and made a mistake, it's not fair for the father to not have equal rights in the decision of what to do about the pregnancy. People who think it's fair for society to treat men with inequality, from before the child is conceived until after the baby is born, aren't thinking outside of existing laws and aren't even entertaining there is a possibility that there could be a better way.
In another thread it has been suggested multiple times that a father should be encouraged/forced to terminate his rights because he and the mother don't always get along well.
Also, this is vaguely off topic but in some situations unmarried fathers do not have the same rights as unmarried mothers, like in adoption cases.
It is important to note that in the other thread the fathers name is not on the birth certificate and they are waiting to get paternity determined.
I think fathers deserve the same rights as mothers, but they must work with the mother in a fair and non abusive way. ( the same could be said of the mother)
I can see terminating a parents rights or having only supervised visits if they refuse to honor visitation agreements in an abusive way, such as kidnapping a child or putting the child in harms way.( I do know a middle class father who was turned away from a strip club because he had his toddler with him and he is often drunk when supervising his child.)
Although it's a complicated issue, I think the laws could be more equal when possible. Just like there is mandated mediation for child support, custody, and visitation, there should be mandated pregnancy mediation for unmarried parents. It would save the government a ton of money by cutting down on future court cases. It would eliminate much of the drama that babies are born into also.
Although the father can't and shouldn't force the mother to have an abortion or go through a pregnancy, he should be allowed to force her to put a child up for adoption if she insists on not having an abortion if the state is going to mandate he be financially responsible for a decision he had no say in. If the mother wants to keep the baby, she should show the court she can financially support the baby on her own income instead of the father being mandated to pay child support. Alternately, the father should be allowed to take the baby and raise it on his own if she doesn't want the child but is willing to go through the pregnancy as long as he proves he can financially provide for the child. Of course, there will be couples who both want the child and are eager to financially support the child, and they're welcome to make their agreement official during the mediation before the child is even born.
There are a lot of different ways to go about this if legislators thought outside of the box. It's a cop out to say a father had his chance when he had sex. That means that men don't have equal rights even in bed before conception. They were both irresponsible and made a mistake, it's not fair for the father to not have equal rights in the decision of what to do about the pregnancy. People who think it's fair for society to treat men with inequality, from before the child is conceived until after the baby is born, aren't thinking outside of existing laws and aren't even entertaining there is a possibility that there could be a better way.
This is the absolute worst idea I have ever heard of on the CD forum. I can't believe you advocate forced adoption on a mother just because the father doesn't want to pay for a child he helped create.
I do think a father deserves to be able to raise a child if the mother wants to give the child up for adoption. She should have to pay child support too.
Although it's a complicated issue, I think the laws could be more equal when possible. Just like there is mandated mediation for child support, custody, and visitation, there should be mandated pregnancy mediation for unmarried parents. It would save the government a ton of money by cutting down on future court cases. It would eliminate much of the drama that babies are born into also.
Although the father can't and shouldn't force the mother to have an abortion or go through a pregnancy, he should be allowed to force her to put a child up for adoption if she insists on not having an abortion if the state is going to mandate he be financially responsible for a decision he had no say in. If the mother wants to keep the baby, she should show the court she can financially support the baby on her own income instead of the father being mandated to pay child support. Alternately, the father should be allowed to take the baby and raise it on his own if she doesn't want the child but is willing to go through the pregnancy as long as he proves he can financially provide for the child. Of course, there will be couples who both want the child and are eager to financially support the child, and they're welcome to make their agreement official during the mediation before the child is even born.
There are a lot of different ways to go about this if legislators thought outside of the box. It's a cop out to say fathers had his chance when he had sex. That means that men don't have equal rights in bed before conception. They were both irresponsible and made a mistake, it's not fair for the father to not have equal rights in the decision of what to do about the pregnancy. People who think it's fair for society to treat men with inequality, from before the child is conceived until after the baby is born, aren't thinking outside of existing laws and aren't even entertaining there is a possibility that there is a better way.
No, you should never force either party to put the child up for adoption. If the child is wanted by either of them then that's where the child should go.
You've basically outlined a situation where any mother making ends meet with a low wage job, or somebody in college, would be forced to have the child adopted out if they can't prove they can support it on their own income. That's absurd. Both Jersey's daughter and Ivory's daughter would HAVE to do so. That's just reprehensible. We shouldn't be taking kids away from their parents because they don't have the requisite income. Whomever decides what that is.
I certainly don't think it's fair to treat men with inequality. But that is not the answer.
Only married fathers or those in a relationship that is similar to being married should have the same rights a mother has. There are simply too many situations of 'disappearing fathers" and fathers who won't work and support their children. Women get stuck with parenting by virtue of their biology. The system should haven't to babysit unmarried fathers. If they want parental rights, its appropriate that they should have to affirmatively step forward, acknowledge their children and--at a minimum--pay regular monetary support. I would construe the failure to pay such support as abandonment of their child. The only exception would be a truly disabled father.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)