Real-life implications of "The Baby Trap."

Yeah, "best interest of the child" doesn't come off quite right if the father is also a child...

On the topic itself, though, the male child support issue when he was raped or tricked is something that me. Especially considering, from what I understand, the fact that there's no oversight to how the child support money is actually used by the mother. Meaning that it's just as easy for the mom use the money to get stuff for herself as actually using it on the child.

That's among the biggest reasons for the men's rights movement. There's no accountability for child support on top of the blatant bias in the courts against men over the issue of child custody.

edited 16th Mar '11 3:13:12 PM by MajorTom

It's really a very hard place for the law to operate in general. No matter what they do things will be unfair to someone. If they make someone have to account for what they spend their child support on, vindictive exes will be able to use it as a method of harassment and of control.

At the same time, no accountability means the kids get screwed by selfish moms. Even Kanye West admits that exists. (Amusingly in the track "Gold digger")

Exactly. It's really hard to define a system in which a selfish person can't fuck with their former partner and/or the kid.

That's why when you make accountability you make it go both ways. Prevent the vindictive ex and prevent the selfish bastard of a parent.

It's not a one or the other scenario.

then you have to account for the child's well-being...it's a rather difficult balancing act.

... and then you've created a system that takes an even bigger government bureaucracy to run it, and we know those don't fuck people over ... right? right?

"Best interest of the child" does not mean the man has to pay. The government could pay instead.

And any mother who uses the baby trap should not be allowed to raise children. There is no way such a person could be a good influence.

Surprisingly enough, I agree. Problem is that society doesn't seem to want to pay for it/people don't want to pay for it through tax dollars. And to be fair, I wouldn't say that it's only the father paying. I doubt child support covers everything.

edited 16th Mar '11 5:48:32 PM by Jordan

Of course it is not just the father paying. But in the case of trap babies, he should not have to pay in the first place.

Then again, in the case of trap babies I say take the child from the mother and put him or her in an orphanage. Better for the child to be raised as an orphan than to be raised by evil pieces of shit.

edited 16th Mar '11 6:16:39 PM by neoYTPism

Just a question, how common do you think "baby trap" situations are?

More common than common sense thinks, less common than fiction.

Less that you would think, more than you would hope.

That's what I'd think. Maury and Jerry Springer are probably not good microcosms of society.

I know of one instance among the people I know. The dumbass married her and is still married to her.

My Mom's a trap baby. It was back in the 1930s, divorce was still an enormous stigma, and my grandmother got pregnant to either 1) get my grandfather to back down from the divorce or 2) get child support payments, since she couldn't with their other kid being raised by her sister.

The judge went "And you expect me to believe this is his child because?" and the divorce went through without my grandfather having to pay child support. He was disowned by his family for it, but I think escaping my grandmother was probably worth it.

So... this kind of thing has been going on forever, probably.

That family disowned someone for refusing to give in to this kind of thing? The hell with those bastards...

edited 16th Mar '11 7:59:00 PM by neoYTPism

Old and fairly wealthy merchant class family. He was the heir, and you can't have an heir with the stain of divorce on his record.

I don't know this man or his reasons to stay, but while he may of been played like a fiddle it's not exactly realistic to expect him to able to ditch the mother of his child even if he knows he is screwing himself over

edited 24th Mar '11 4:52:29 AM by joeyjojo

Yeah, I know. Still. He was only 17, too. She was about 5 years older. She told him the doctor had told her she couldn't get pregnant. Turns out really he told her she shouldn't get pregnant.

well isn't that a shame.

A young guy I know just found out his layabout tramp of a girlfriend is preggs and gone into total family man mode at the moment.

Frankly I would of kicked her out long ago and send her to the nearest Marie Stopes

edited 17th Mar '11 1:31:50 AM by joeyjojo

Hehe.

Hey, you know what's even worse? You can probably be forced into child support for a baby that's not even yours, maybe even with a woman you never had sex with, even if you're a virgin.

Paternity Fraud laws are extremely lax.

Most of the time, I think, you can have a paternity test done. Though you may have to fight to get it. However, if you're married to the woman at the time, you're responsible even if it's someone else's.