patrick.net

turtledove says

The better a job you have the tougher it is when it comes to non-payment. You guys with good jobs are a Child Support Enforcement agent's favorite kind. For the dollars they collect, they can get federal matching funds... So they like to go after the guys with solid jobs because you are easy to find and your income is easily garnished.

That's generally true in the collections business. A collections agency is more likely to go after $300 from a doctor than $3000 from a guy who works at Starbucks.

turtledove says

We tried so hard to include expense accounting in the new law. I think the issue is the practicality of having to treat each and every child support case as a unique situation. With standard rates, you simplify the cases a bit. Even though the amounts were reduced, you still had padding. For example, 7% of the GA support amount was for activities.

I agree that this lack of expense accounting and the lack of individuality is rather lazy on the part of family courts. Child support should be treated as if it were a trust account for a child. If the money were in an actual trust, the trustee would be liable if the money was not used according to the terms of the trust, i.e. for the best interest of the child and for the basic needs of the child. The trustee, the custodial parent in this case, should be liable for any misspent funds and should have to account for all expenses spent on the child, just like they would if this were a trust fund.

The current system doesn't make sense, and it's because family courts are too lazy and incompetent to do it right.

Family law is run in the best interests of the lawyers. Plunder the marital estate and turn it into outlandish legal fees, make sure the divorce goes on forever to keep up the fee generator, get the parties to hate each other forever, and use the kids and the ex as a permanent boot lock on somebodies income.

i can see that it's fair to support your own biological progeny if it was your choice/irresponsibility to create them and they are provably yours.

the part of our law that really horrifies me is that men can be forced to pay child support for children their wives conceive while cheating on them.

corntrollio says

Child support should be treated as if it were a trust account for a child. If the money were in an actual trust, the trustee would be liable if the money was not used according to the terms of the trust, i.e. for the best interest of the child and for the basic needs of the child. The trustee, the custodial parent in this case, should be liable for any misspent funds and should have to account for all expenses spent on the child, just like they would if this were a trust fund.

Especially when they use specific expenses to justify additional dollars. In our case, she argued that she wanted to make sure that she had enough money so she could save for college. You would think that this would go nowhere, because it's a backdoor way of collecting post-majority support in a case where post-majority support was never court ordered. She got up on the stand and cried that she wasn't able to save for college. Of the three times she tried to get increases that was the only time her argument worked. You can imagine our genuine surprise when she tells her son, ten years later, that she doesn't have any money to give him for college. Oh the temptation to order a court transcript and give it to the son....

the part of our law that really horrifies me is that men can be forced to pay child support for children their wives conceive while cheating on them.

The presumption of paternity is horrifying. In my days of working on child support reform, I heard many horror stories, including guys who had paid for years, learned that they weren't the father and were still required to pay child support even though the child wasn't theirs. If the court decides it's in the child's best interest then you will continue to pay. Here I'm thinking you should be entitled to damages from the lying, cheating ex. Shows what I know.

corntrollio says

The reality is that the type of women who do this are probably low income/low educated types who are also dating similar men.

And the smart ones will target guys like you. You are educated, you have good jobs, most of you are reasonably decent people... I can see how a young woman with a tough situation could see you as her meal ticket. She buys a positive test, tells you she's pregnant, gets you to marry her quickly, suffers a "miscarriage," and then gets pregnant for real. She treats you well enough so you don't suspect that you were the victim of anything.

Of course, crazy is hard to hide for very long. Eventually you divorce, and she is set for a long time. Certainly she's in a much better situation than she was before she met you. And don't worry, she'll be lining up her next meal ticket as soon as possible. Because she now has some money to throw around, she should be able to marry-up the second time around.

turtledove says

I can see how a young woman with a tough situation could see you as her meal
ticket

You gotta wonder about the lack of thinking on the part of the dudes who are established that will get with chicks who are in a "tough situatiion." Social darwinism at work....

turtledove says

I can see how a young woman with a tough situation could see you as her meal ticket. She buys a positive test, tells you she's pregnant, gets you to marry her quickly, suffers a "miscarriage," and then gets pregnant for real. She treats you well enough so you don't suspect that you were the victim of anything.

Yes, this is why you have to verify things (again, see my anecdote of the resourceful nurse who managed to get a fake ultrasound), and why you should have more anal sex and less banal sex with women you don't trust.

Just as a practical matter, there's no reason to get married today just to have a kid with someone you don't know, and there's very little reason you can't wait a few months anyway. My old apartment building was right near a spot that was commonly used for wedding pictures, and you would see brides in all stages of pregnancy, including some that looked like their water might break during the photos. To be honest, some of them may have also gotten pregnant in that location in the first place.

If you are a lawmaker and you look at this problem, you realize a large part of young women are too silly to take their pills consistently, and as a result, children will be born in bad conditions.

So next you look at who is going to get stuck paying for this, and young (or not so young) men, innocent or not, are the perfect targets.

Crazy bitches are just unintended consequences.

thunderlips11 says

My guess is that middle class white guys don't see themselves as victims

And a sense of "duty" gets pounded into every boy's skull at an early age. Time to pay the piper, boy!

Speaking of Male Privilege...

thunderlips11 says

Speaking of Male Privilege...

Add to that rape victims: more men than women.
Yes, thanks to prisons, more men are raped in the US than women.

Obio says

Lesson for men: Buy a pregnancy test on the way home. Mark the stick in some
recognizable way. Get her to pee on it.

Also pick up a few Frappuccinos while you're in there. Pregnancy tests can be the strongest anti-diuretic in the world. Even after chugging 24oz of iced tea and driving nearly an hour to some obscure distant clinic of her choosing, she might not be able to produce a drop.

Before all this, pay attention to her cycle and use the moon as an ovulation guide. The most strident "Right now is safe- I know my body!!!" women tend to be full of shit.

This is based on experiences from my 20s. Come to think of it, now that I'm in my upper 40s, there are STILL female cohorts with very selective understanding of how reproduction works.

Automan Empire says

there are STILL female cohorts with very selective understanding of how reproduction works.

Can't be worse than what Republican males know about the female reproduction system.

Wow, a woman sparked one of the most misogynistic threads that I have ever read on Patnet. And I have read a few. Just sayin'.

The other problem with child support is that judges have been known to 'impute' income. For instance, if a judge figures that you should be making $100k, and you're unemployed, or you're working for a start-up only taking $25k/year cash salary -- they have no trouble calculating the support obligation as though the payor makes $100k/year.

In this economy, where a lot of people are involuntarily underemployed, especially in the tech sector, this is scary. Some judge might read one of the various nonsensical "shortage of tech workers" articles, and accept an argument by the baby momma's attorney that their inability to find a job is voluntary.

I personally know a few farmers/ranchers who have been caught up in this. Their child support or alimony obligations are calculated based on cashflow, which does not include long-term depreciation expenses. It effectively robs them of the ability to re-invest in, and make their business more efficient. Thus damaging their long-term ability to pay support. Of course this doesn't matter to some greedy ex-spouse who is just looking to extract the maximum amount of short-term cash possible.

lahossain says

Wow, a woman sparked one of the most misogynistic threads that I have ever read on Patnet. And I have read a few. Just sayin'.

Oh, please. Telling it like it is is not misoginy. It is just the truth.

However, supporting the current state of family law and the current practises of family courts is definitely misandric.

There's no proof of anyone's gender around these parts....

lahossain says

Wow, a woman sparked one of the most misogynistic threads that I have ever read on Patnet. And I have read a few. Just sayin'.

Most likely worse than what Democratic males know about the male excrement system.

Dan8267 says

Automan Empire says

there are STILL female cohorts with very selective understanding of how reproduction works.

Can't be worse than what Republican males know about the female reproduction system.

lahossain says

Wow, a woman sparked one of the most misogynistic threads that I have ever read on Patnet. And I have read a few. Just sayin'.

How is it misogynistic to note unfairness in our system? Is it simply misogynistic because men are saying it's unfair? I don't think that anyone is saying that men don't have a responsibility to their own, but there are, in fact, women who try to profit from their reproductive prowess. We do, in fact, have a legal system that promotes such behavior.

If a women were to go to a doctor and have a tubal ligation.... and that tubal ligation failed.... and she got pregnant.... she could sue that doctor for wrongful pregnancy. Our system has no tolerance for even the mere appearance of forcing a woman to have a child, yet men are NOT given any such protection against wrongful pregnancies perpetrated against them.

This isn't about hatred of women. To me, it's about fairness and responsibility.

lahossain says

Wow, a woman sparked one of the most misogynistic threads that I have ever read on Patnet. And I have read a few. Just sayin'.

How is acknowledging the truth misogynistic?

justme says

Wow, a woman sparked one of the most misogynistic threads that I have ever
read on Patnet. And I have read a few. Just sayin'.

Oh, please. Telling it like it is is not misoginy.

As a child of the Womens' Lib era, I came of age trying to treat women as equals, which put me at a strong love life disadvantage until experiences demonstrated the folly of this belief.
It seems that MOST women cherry pick all the advantages of the old patriarchal ways, yet shoulder none of the burdens of the new equality. Men are expected to hold doors, pay for everything from dates to children that aren't even theirs, endure physical attacks without lifting a finger, to name a few. For their part, name ONE positive action that women are expected to perform under the new notion of equality.
Don't attack the messenger; the idealistic part of me badly wishes it wasn't so.

turtledove says

This isn't about hatred of women. To me, it's about fairness and
responsibility.

Exactly!

Who's not going to agree that a woman/person who tricks someone with a pregnancy test is not absolutely deceitful? It is, I agree. But I am sure the cases of this are so rare and wonder if it's a fair launch off point to discuss child support laws, which no doubt needs some revamping.

This thread maintained a very male perspective, not surprising with the general readership of patnet, with general mood of paranoia against woman predators seizing on incomes of men through marriage and family formation. For every one of those cases of real unwanted pregnancy an subsequent child support there are plenty, maybe more, of women having an abortion and never even telling the man (husband or not).

The thread seemed unbalanced towards defending male interests in marriage and household No harm, lots of patnet threads turn into generally innocent snarky fun. I strongly suspect that the membership gender ratio might explain why things are so skewed. So hey, I just know that I am outnumbered and that threads turn into a talk therapy for dudes. So no big deal, just sayin'. I meant the comment "lightly."

Automan Empire says

turtledove says

This isn't about hatred of women. To me, it's about fairness and

responsibility.

Exactly!

I always find it amazing that a person would be surprised that a woman might fight for a man's right to equal treatment under the law. Like women have to side with a theory that's profoundly unfair simply because we are women and it benefits women. Well, some of us have sons. It's not difficult to see how he could be a victim of something like this if people don't speak up. Our only option shouldn't be to advise our sons to freeze their sperm for future use, followed immediately by a vasectomy.... Just to keep them safe from predatory women who then will be richly rewarded by our legal system.

Automan Empire says

For their part, name ONE positive action that women are expected to perform under the new notion of equality.

I think that a lot of women work very hard. There are plenty of women who work and take care of their families. In the past, men shouldered the entire burden of funding the family. Now women are expected to do the same. And many do. Of course, instead of having more as a result of the dual incomes, we simply inflated the cost of everything. The additional workers didn't do much for wages. So, in many ways, it didn't improve lives to have women enter the workforce in droves. And now we're trapped because most families need both incomes just to live. But many of us women are still expected to take primary responsibility of the children, cooking, and cleaning. When I was working, I would come home to my husband saying things like, "I'm so glad you're home! I'm starving!" Or, "I'm almost out of shirts." So, we went to work, just like the men, but we don't have wives who take care of the domestic chores. We are the wives.

How about looking into the reasons WHY some women feel they need to entrap a man or lie about a pregnancy?

The world is NOT FAIR. Women don't make as much as men in the same job, even if you are the fricken Editor of The New York Times! Not only that, if you don't accept lower pay you are called a rude bitch and fired, while a man is called ambitious, tough, and is promoted.

This world is NOT FAIR. Not only do women make less in the exact same jobs, the types of jobs most women are naturally inclined towards do not pay as much as jobs men are naturally inclined towards, in general. I know there are exceptions to this, but this is a generality. Think: hair stylist vs. finance

The world is NOT FAIR. Women by far do most of the child rearing all over the world, both within a married or committed relationship or as single mothers. And all that child rearing is unpaid.

The net result: WOMEN make far LESS than a man! And they are doing at least as much work or more if you include a family.

I am not saying it okay to ever lie to anyone, but how about INSTEAD of vilifying these women, why don't we focus instead on trying to change the huge underlying inequality that leads women to feel they have to lie in order to get what they need and want from life?

If a person feels a sense of their own power and that their needs will be met through their own productive work, their need to scheme, manipulate and lie falls away.

Cherry picking the patriarchal system. I can see that for some things.

On the other hand the US does a pretty good job at giving women no special treatment for bearing children. It is 6 weeks off with partial pay and then get your ass back to work or else forfeit your pay. I disagree with your notion that young men pay for dates and open doors. These rules of engagement have changed-- check out online dating as it happens these days. It very much reduces the male courtship aspect.

But allow me to refer to another thread where someone wanted a Raquel Welch robot to be their domestic assistant. What shall we say was going on there on terms of gender expectations?

No doubt, gender relationships have a lot to be desired. But let's concede, it's complicated and not just a matter of expecting women to make as much as men and doing the same things. Especially in light of reduced pay and glass ceilings.

I generally am amused by the threads of patnet, but on occasion one can make me wince.

I did not mean to hijack the thread. Carry on the jousting.

I hear the ATM machine the guy screwed last week purchased a false pregnancy test, and is suing him for child support.

Indiana Jones says

I am not saying it okay to ever lie to anyone, but how about INSTEAD of vilifying these women, why don't we focus instead on trying to change the huge underlying inequality that leads women to feel they have to lie in order to get what they need and want from life?

Of course women doing something evil should be vilified. It's not acceptable that a person would screw an other to "get what they need and want from life".

Women earn less because once they have 2 kids, they spend less hours working a job. This is not a bad thing. They should work less. The other side of that is fathers have to support their kids, and so the extra money they earn goes to that. No one is arguing against child support by fathers in general, just specific cases and what choices are given to men.

Arguing for strict pay equality is ideological stupidity. Men and women are different. Different things make them happy. Equal access makes sense. Equal pay doesn't.

lahossain says

But I am sure the cases of this are so rare and wonder if it's a fair launch off point to discuss child support laws, which no doubt needs some revamping.

Perhaps this particular method of deceit is rare, but the practice of entrapping men is not. This is just another way to do it. It's one of the oldest stories in the book. Clearly most women don't subscribe, but how often is too much? Do the laws that we have encourage more women to subscribe?

lahossain says

So hey, I just know that I am outnumbered and that threads turn into a talk therapy for dudes. So no big deal, just sayin'. I meant the comment "lightly."

And you should voice your opinion. Of course, there are some guys on this board who will never listen to anything that might alter their world view, but those people exist everywhere.

Are you kidding me? Heraclitus -Did I read clearly you think that women should not receive equal pay? Where do you think women's wages are going? They are going to support the children and family as well.

And you must not have children if you think taking care of children is not "work".

You are making a false comparison. Raping someone is not the same as verbally lying to someone -- go ask any lawyer or judge.

Your argument that women to make the same as men when they take time off for child rearing is nonsense. What the hell do you think a woman is doing when she's having a baby or taking care of children? She is not vacationing in the Bahamas.

Other industrialized countries understand this, and give adequate child care and support to both women and men to raise the next generation.

Indiana Jones says

Your argument that women to make the same as men when they take time off for
child rearing is nonsense. What the hell do you think a woman is doing when
she's having a baby or taking care of children? She is not vacationing in the
Bahamas.

Other industrialized countries understand this, and give adequate child care
and support to both women and men to raise the next generation.

This is neither an excuse nor justification for scheming. I agree that united states could improve with more paid time off after pregnancy and I would be all for universal or greatly subsidized childcare but the absence of these things do not justify scheming or entrapment. People who practice these have fundamental character flaws and need to be shunned by society.

Automan Empire says

Men are expected to hold doors, pay for everything from dates

I don't think that this is "expected" anymore. There's no reason to date a woman who "expects" this either let alone end up in a long term relationship with her. Woman who expects this is a bonafide golddigger and should be treated in the words of snoop dogg like "7 up."

turtledove says

I always find it amazing that a person would be surprised that a woman might fight for a man's right to equal treatment under the law.

Damn straight. Half of your descendants are going to be male and half are going to be female. So even if you're incapable of empathy, it's in your own selfish interests to strive for equality under law and happiness for people of both genders.

Same goes for all other arbitrary criteria like race, nationality, class, sexual orientation, etc. Eventually your descendants will run the gambit of these traits. Bigotry of any sort ultimately harms your family no matter what arbitrary tribe you currently find yourself.

Indiana Jones says

Are you kidding me? Heraclitus -Did I read clearly you think that women should not receive equal pay? Where do you think women's wages are going? They are going to support the children and family as well.

Yes they should receive equal pay for the same professional work, and they are not doing the same. There are differences in professions and within professions there are differences in how many hours women spend.

Yes taking care of kid is work. It's not my fault if it is not generating a salary. That's the way it is. And consequently women need support from men from whom they have these children.

This doesn't excuse the evil schemes this thread is about, nor the anti-male discrimination written in the laws.

Indiana Jones says

Raping someone is not the same as verbally lying to someone -- go ask any lawyer or judge.

Lying to someone to obtain a financial rent is a form of fraud that should be punished as such.

dublin hillz says

Men are expected to hold doors, pay for everything from dates

I don't think that this is "expected" anymore.

I'm specifically thinking of couples I see where the man walks the long way around the car (now equipped with central locking and even remote), unlocks and holds open the door, then waits till she's settled in and closes it for her.

To me, this smacks of patriarchy and the underlying presumption that the woman is a delicate flower needing to be treated with kid gloves. Fine if it works for that couple, but does it also include the other trappings of patriarchy, like the woman being subservient to the man, letting him make all of the decisions, staying home barefoot and pregnant, etc ad nauseum?

My position is, I'll open the restaurant door, and maybe the car door IF we're approaching it from the passenger side, BUT, open your own damn door some of the time, and also be free to make your own decisions in life with me as an equal partner.

lahossain says

I am the one that does all the power drilling and hardware installing in my
household

Now THAT is HOT in my opinion. I guess I'm a pretty unusual case; blue collar by trade but striving for 21st century gender equality. In middle school, the first grown woman whose image gave me tingles wasn't Farrah Fawcett or Raquel Welch, but a textbook picture of Rosie the Riveter.

turtledove says

But many of us women are still expected to take primary responsibility of the children, cooking, and cleaning.

It's my experience personally, and I've read elsewhere, that this is the old-fashioned way but is much less common today. Many men I know work all day, take care of kids at nights and weekends, cook and clean. That happens in the modern era even when the woman does not have a job.

Automan Empire says

To me, this smacks of patriarchy and the underlying presumption that the woman is a delicate flower

My Republican FIL insisted I ask for his daughter's hand in marriage and I refused on those grounds. I told him that she was not property, and adult and capable of making adult decisions.

Then I said, "where's my dowry?". The point being, "traditionalists" often want the parts of tradition that benefit them, which is logical from their point of view. I don't have to abide by their warped sense of entitlement though.