--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]

..
..
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Phil" wrote in message
m...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

snip for length

If men are to have equal (or higher) responsibility, they must have
equal (or higher) choice. The current system of sexist laws give all
choices to women and all responsibility to men (unless the mother
chooses otherwise) and there are still some women demanding more
options
and less responsibility for women.

And that is wrong--but taking all responsibility away from men is NOT
going to fix that.

Yes, it will. It puts the responsibility on the ONE that has the
options.
If women demand 100% of the options in reproduction with it should come
an
equal % of responsibility.
The solution, of course, is to give both 50% of both responsibility and
options.

I agree with that, Phil. What I do **not** agree with is the idea that a
man can lust after a "newer model" and walk out on his wife of 20 years
and
their 9, 12, and 16 year old without looking back beause **he** did not
give
birth to them.

Of course not, because you subscribe to the idea of a man being held LEGALLY
responsible for the woman's SOLE LEGAL choice.




That, of course, is the root of the disagreement, Chris. I see a
father
as
a father--not just some individual providing for some woman's
children
until
he is tired of doing so. You seem to take the opposite stand.

For what it's worth, he is both a father AND "some individual". And
guess
what, he IS providing for some woman's child. And guess what else,
according
to their rules, he can walk at any time. It simply follows.

chuckle He is raising his own children as well, Chris. Of course,
for individuals just looking for ways to escape responsibility, that
doesn't count, does it?


THE problem here is that she has choice, he has responsibility. She
can
escape the responsibility of her choices by abortion or even after
birth
by legal abandonment neither choice is available to him. He has no
choices beyond conception yet is responsible but only if SHE decides
he
is and to the extent she allows/demands.

And once the time period for legal abandonment is past, and they are
raising the children together, that doesn't matter any more. You
cannot
hark back to the "birth choice" forever.

Why not? If, like Chris said, he generously made your house payment for
12
years and suddenly stopped he would have no legal responsibility to
continue.

A child and a house are 2 different things, Phil.

Irrelevant.

My husband and I chose to
have our children. **Both** of us made the choice.

Impossible.

Why would his choice to
have and raise these children be seen as any different from my choice to
do
so. Yes, I could have prevented the children from being born--but I
didn't.
So why do you see the children that *both of us chose to have, and have
loved and nurtured, to be only **my** responsibility?

SOLE choice = SOLE responsiblity. Quite simple.


This sounds eerily like those fathers who found out years after the
birth
of their children that they weren't their kids yet were forced to
continue
to support them because that is what the children were accustomed to,
not
that it was necessary.

But **that** is fraud! It is not at all the same thing.

Never mind the fact that he "chose" to have them, and he chose to raise them
together with the mother. It is EXACTLY the same thing!


Perhaps it would be best to limit a man's choices to the same time limit
as the mother but currently he has none and it is unlikely he will ever
get any.

I choose to be more optimistic on the prospect. I know that I talk to a
lot
of parents in my work, and I am seeing a change in attitudes toward
fathers.
I am hoping it is a good omen of things to come.

Not so long as the "child support" industry is controlled by insane people.
And guess what, that is precisely the kind of folks it attracts!






The problem is that responsibility should equal choice but in
reproductive matters, it doesn't. If women are to have unilateral
choice, they also should also accept unilateral responsibility to
match
that choice. If men are to be at all responsible, they should be given
choice equal to that responsibility.

But we are talking about older children that the parents have been
raising together. Do you really feel that a father should have the
legal
right to abandon his children at any time with no legal responsibility
toward them, Phil?

I think his responsibilty should be equal to his legal options.

There I agree with you. 50/50 joint custody should be the default. Each
parent should pay for their own 50% of the time. If one parent chooses to
have the child less than 50% of the time, he/she should pay the other
parent
suppot to cover the extra time that parent has the child.

Nonsense. There should not be a money judgement, EVER!

If a parent
decides to move and have the child 100% of the time, that parent should
pay
for 100% of the expenses. It's all about holding people responsible for
their own choices!

Except, of course, when it comes to the choice of giving birth.