An interesting post has been placed on ethecofem (which is a great blog that I highly recommend, by the way), and I want to address it here. Blogger Danny writes:
Kris Bucher is being held up for child support. However he says that he was raped by the mother of the child and should therefore not be held responsible for child support.
Alright we’ve seen cases before where under aged boys were held up for support of children they had with adult women. Or even worse sometimes said under aged boy’s parents would be held responsible to pay it (can you imagine being ordered by a court to pay child support to a woman that statutorily raped your son?). In this case though Kris is saying that the age difference is not the issue (and I’m inclined to agree since he was 17 and she was 18 at the time of conception) but rather that he said no to the sexual encounter that conceived the child.
As a quick reference I’ve laid out before that a woman can rape a man, so there is no need to try to question that. The hard part to think about is was he raped (he never pressed charges) and should he be held responsible for supporting a child that was conceived through rape?
I agree that a woman can rape a man, so for me, as for Danny, this is not something that needs to be questioned or discussed*. Now, my opinion on this issue is that such a person is, indeed, responsible for paying child support. I hope, of course, that every rape victim presses charges against the attacker and removes any possibility that a child would end up being raised by a criminal.
Child support, however, is not about either parent or the process of how they ended up being parents. It’s about ensuring that a child – a separate human being who never asked to be brought into this world and who in no way influenced the circumstances of his or her conception – has adequate means of support. It is the role of the justice system to defend the person who is the weakest and who cannot even speak for him or herself, namely, the child. A justice system that prefers to deprive a child from adequate means of existence in order to avoid being unfair towards an adult is no justice system at all.
The fact that a person was created during the commission of a crime in no way reduces that person’s need for food, clothing, medical care, and education. Imagine baby Anna and baby Jessica. Anna is a product of a passionate loving consensual sex act. Jessica is the product of rape (whether by a man or by a woman). Is Jessica going to eat less? Will she be less deserving of visiting a dentist? Should she have fewer toys than Anna? Can anybody reasonably argue that one of these kids should be punished because she has a criminal for a parent?
People seem to think way too often that child support is money that is given to the other parent instead of to the child. This way of thinking comes from their inability to see a child as a separate human being with rights of his or her own. What everybody needs to remember is that the moment a child comes out of a woman’s body and takes his or her first breath, s/he stops being a woman’s body part and becomes a person.
* Reader Christopher Marshall pointed out to me that the man went to the police 2 weeks after the incident and they refused to follow up on it. This is what we need to fight: the prejudice against men that positions them always as the perpetrators of violence and never as victims. Here is the real injustice in this case. A statement that a crime has been committed is dismissed by the authorities.
Clarissa's Blog 
Dear Americans, English Canadians and other non-Quebeckers, fight for real feminism before femi-favoritists take all the place in the public service sphere like here in Québec.
LikeLike
Clarissa, yes, you did answer one of my questions already. Mea culpa.
But what about other starving children, the ones that do not have 50% of their genes from you?
And why should children support their elderly parents in a country where people who work will get a pension?
LikeLike
Clarissa – I tried to talk to you over at Danny’s site – but you didn’t return.
I am not an anti-abortion MRA or anything like that – but I think the position you hold is untenable. You seem to value a child’s livelihood above all others when it comes to “fairness.”
I’d like to see your response to some hypothetical situations:
Scenario A:
A drug-addicted woman is kidnapped – raped for and tied to a bed for 9 months where she cannot have an abortion. She gives birth and her rapist/kidnapper gets off on a technicality. The court awards her rapist with custody of the child because she is a drug addict and he has no criminal record.
Would you support a court system that made the woman pay the rapist $500 a month or face jailtime to support the child?
Scenario B:
A young, attractive man works as a mechanic. He makes $1000 a month. A group of 25 women in the small town decide they want babies by him. They drug him, tie him down and surgically withdraw sperm from him – and impregnate themselves. They sell the extra sperm to other women.
In the end ~50 women become pregnant from this man’s sperm. Should he have to pay child support of $500 a month to each of these women or face jail time?
Scenario C:
John and Mary are married and trying to have a child. They are VERY low income. Eventually, Mary gets pregnant with a baby girl. While Mary is pregnant, John is raped by Sue – who also gets pregnant. John and Mary only make enough money for one child. Sue ends up having triplets, and the court awards Sue’s triplets child support in the order of $1500 a month – the entirety of John’s salary.
Because of this, Mary and John’s baby girl grows up in an impoverished home – unable to go to the doctor or get new clothes as she grows up. Eventually she dies when the family cannot afford to feed her.
Is this a system of justice you support?
Scenario D:
It is the year 2150. You and I meet for coffee to discuss your blog. After you leave, I notice a hair of yours has been left behind on the table. I take it back to my super-secret lair and merge your DNA with mine and create a zygote that I implant in an artificial womb. The child is born – should you pay me child support? There is a new life, after all – why should I have to support it myself?
LikeLike
I’m sorry I didn’t return to Danny’s blog. I’m traveling and can’t visit sites as often as I do normally. Right now, for example, I’m writing as I’m walking in a street, uphill. And barefoot in the snow. )Kidding)
As I already said, if I were the victim in all of your scenarios, I would absolutely pay child support and not have a problem with it. It’s just money, it’ nothing compared to a life of a person who is half you. This is a human being who did absolutely nothing wrong but unlike me, is incapable of making more money – or any money – at the moment. A human being who will continue me long after I die. What kind of an animal would I be if I punished that being for my victimization at the hands of another??it would be like punishing myself all over again.
I’m not personally familiar with the system but from what I hear child support is really paltry in the US. Is it 10 percent of what one makes? And that’s the money people make such a hullabaloo over? As somebody who has known really dire poverty, I’m very surprised.
LikeLike
Sorry I am late to the party. Just discovered your post, and EasilyEnthused’s response with your rejoinder.
I find it hard to believe that you accept all of EE’s scenarios as morally equivalent (in the sense that you would feel obligated to support the children in all of them because of your sharing half of your DNA with the children).
Even if the child support orders were typically only 10% of a person’s income, in Scenario B there were 50 children born, so that would result in an order 5 times whatever the man earns. In that case, the guy would go to jail because it would be logically impossible for him to pay it, and the children would be supported by the state (getting no money from the father). You still find that just?
I agree with you that the 2 people who chose to make a child owe it their full love and financial support, and that the state should be able to enforce that obligation. However, the moral obligation flows from the choice and not the DNA. The relevance of DNA is that it can be used in most situations to show that person A had consensual sex with person B and thus establish the choice. I don’t think there is anything magical about DNA that creates a moral obligation.
Scenario B illustrates that well, because you can raise the number from 50 as high as you want. It doesn’t make sense that the person who stole the sperm can create a unlimited moral obligation to their victim, with no choice on their part.
I’d like to offer another scenario. A man and a woman want a child, but the man is infertile. So the woman goes to a sperm donation clinic and gets artifically inseminated. I would say that the man and the woman are responsible for the well being and upbringing of the child because they both made a choice to bring it into the world. I don’t think the man’s obligation is any less than the woman’s, even though his DNA is not involved. I also think the sperm donar should not be held responsible, even though his DNA is involved. Do you agree with that analysis?
I would also like to hear your moral analysis of anonymous sperm donation in general. Do you find it an honorable practice, or do you think it should be against the law? What about in the case where the woman decides to get pregnant without having any contact with the donar, and also chooses to raise the child without a father of any kind? Should a single woman be allowed to violate the rights of a child like that?
LikeLike
“I find it hard to believe that you accept all of EE’s scenarios as morally equivalent ”
-I find it hard to believe too because I never said anything like that.
As for sperm donations, this is a completely separate topic. It would be really great if people read before posting long, meaningless diatribes.
LikeLike
Wow, you’re trying to be an authority on child support, yet you don’t even know basic facts like how much child support costs. Your arrogance is matched only by your arrogance.
LikeLike
Yet, it stays on the blog like it’s been glued to it. Puzzling.
LikeLike
Thank you for your reply, Clarissa. I’m really impressed by the amount of blogging you do and how much time you put into responding to folks – I appreciate it.
I also want to apologize for those commenters above who were derailing this into a discussion about abortion. You were surprisingly patient with them.
Lastly, I want to say that my position isn’t that I want the children to suffer. I came from a very, very poor two-parent household and I have a great deal of sympathy for those children. I would propose that our government set up a system to better support children in this country, especially in the areas of medical care and education. I have no problem with my tax dollars (and I’m in a very high tax bracket now) going towards raising children who had a parent die or was the product of rape.
I will probably revisit this on my blog this weekend and fully flesh out what my stance is, but thank you again for responding.
LikeLike
So if a man rapes a woman, and gets her pregnant, he should get shared custody of the child if he wishes?
“The fact that a person was created during the commission of a crime in no way reduces that person’s need for”…. a male parental figure.
And since you’re obviously defending a female rapist keeping custody of a child, in the interest of equality you’d surely have no objection to a male rapist having shared custody of a child.
In fact, following your logic, a man should be able to rape a woman, then sue for custody (since you’re defending rapists as parents), and demand that the victim pay him child support (the child needs support). And since he has a child to care for, he should be able to get an early release.
Well done, you just made rape a practical alternative to surrogacy!
(Why pay $20k to hire a woman to have a baby for you, when you can just rape one, and make her pay child support to you for 20 years.)
LikeLike
You stupid unhinged freak. If you read the thread before responding to it, you wouldn’t look as stupid as you do now. All your stupid little points you bring up have been discussed a gazillion times before. Nobody here is in favor of giving a rapist of any gender custody. Only such an irredeemable fool as you could have missed that.
LikeLike
Amusing isn’t it.
You’re the on that thinks rape victims should be paying money to their rapists, and yet I’m the “stupid unhinged freak”.
LikeLike
I’m glad you confessed you are an unhinged freak. I appreciate the honesty. Now, you should either provide a quote where I say victims of rape should pay rapists or buzz off.
This is a blog for intellectuals. Not for illiterate freakazoids like you.
LikeLike
Tsk tsk, name calling again.
That’s not very becoming of you. Especially when it’s apparently unprovoked…wow….immature much?
LikeLike
Find some dignity, buddy, and go away from a place where you are not wanted.
LikeLike
All of the freakos who have been trying to leave comments in this thread: I delete them unread. You are wasting your time because nobody reads what you have to say.
LikeLike
It would appear that you’re the one who is incapable of rational discussion.
I don’t see anyone else here resorting to petty insults and personal attacks.
Ad hominem attacks are the last resort of those who have nothing useful to say.
LikeLike
Then go away already. It isn’t like anybody is keeping you here, is it? Why are you wasting your precious life trolling the blog of an irrational person? What does it make you?
LikeLike
“In fact, following your logic, a man should be able to rape a woman, then sue for custody (since you’re defending rapists as parents)”
It’s impossible because the women victim can abort the conception. That’s why both parents should not be forced to pay child support before the end of the conception.
LikeLike
woman
LikeLike
Adoption would give Jessica the food she needs.
Besides, child support does more than simply pay for the things that a child needs. How much does a child cost? Let’s see – going from a 1 bedroom to a 2 bedroom apartment, assuming the custodial parent doesn’t already have a house (no change in rent for that situation) would be $200. Food for a child would be $100-200/month, maybe more as they grow older. Clothing and other things come out to $500-1000/year. So let’s pick the high range and say $6000/year increased cost due to a child. Cut that in half, for each parent’s responsibility, and we have $250/month in fair child support.
All of this assumes that the non-custodial parent has no extra costs for themselves. If they have partial custody, then they also have to get an extra bedroom in their apartment. It wouldn’t be fair to require the non-custodial parent to pay for an extra bedroom in the custodial parent’s apartment if the custodial parent doesn’t have to pay for an extra bedroom in the non-custodial parent’s apartment.
Ask the majority of non-custodial parents how much their child support is and compare it to the amount above.
LikeLike
Who said anybody is interested in adopting her? Why bring in completely unrelated issues? It would also be great if she suddenly inherited a billion dollars. So? What’s the point of discussing things that may not take place?
LikeLike
Should the rape victim not be entitled to the option of abortion or adoption?
LikeLike
Anybody should be entitled to abort any fetus they have inside their body. This has also been repeated in this thread ad nauseam.
LikeLike
What about protecting these individuals that are the most vulnerable? And No, fetuses are not body parts.
LikeLike
Why is it implied and expected that the woman in this scenario get custody of the child? If the father decides to keep a child carried to term after rape, as opposed to giving it up for adoption (because, let’s face it, the mother should be in jail for rape and wont be able to be a “parent” anyway), it should be up to the mother to pay child support to the father to ensure the well-being of the child.
Merely you, Clarissa, making the allusion to the idea that the father should be forced to pay child support to his rapist is a ludicrous notion that shows a glaring problem with our society. A male rapist wouldn’t be allowed near ANY child, much less his own, why is it okay to imply that a female rapist would not only receive payment for raping another person, but also not be held to the same restrictions as males?
LikeLike
No, the father should not pay his rapist. He should give money to his child. Referring to a newborn as a rapist shows you have extreme psychological issues.
LikeLike
im sorry this is a complete joke , you rightfully state that men can be victims of rape yet you feel that if this results in a pregnancy the rapist decides to follow through with then the victim is indebted to the rapist for 21 years for a child that was conceived through non consensual sex ? you seriously cant see the flaw in that ??
LikeLike
No I don’t feel that at all. I have never said anything like that. You are arguing with yourself here, buddy. And I do see a flaw in that.
LikeLike
@Guy Faux #184 stop the hysteria. I swear this whole paranoid scenario is the postmodern version of the old “she got pregnant to trick him into marrying her” line from an earlier era. Here it seems to be “she raped him so she could get pregnant and take his money for child support.”
I just don’t buy the scenario — far too unrealistic as something done intentionally — and I am betting that what the guys on this thread are actually concerned about is stuff like drunken college sex that ends up in pregnancy and in people getting tied down with a child.
Convenient to say “oh, but she raped me, so I want out of it!” But really what all of this speaks to is the need for more sex education, more birth control, less awkwardness, and so on.
LikeLike
Another comment I kept nodding to vigorously as I was reading it. Hysteria is exactly what it is. You have no idea how many comments from these MRAs I had to delete today. And the ones I did see before deleting them were a lot more unhinged than this one.
LikeLike
I’d be surprised if you didn’t smack the ban hammer on my post.
LikeLike
I see where the absurd notion of forcing a female rape victim to have an abortion has come up, but I don’t see where the issue of the male rape victim forcing a female rapist to have an abortion has come up. Even though it is her body, she did use it to rape someone, and being forced to abort would be just in that case.
LikeLike
Thought experiment…
If someone can generate a “sperm” from a hair clipping, stole one of your hairs off your head on the train, and then fertilized their own egg with it. And out pops a genetic offspring, would you have to pay child support? You would be a biological father (in the hair clipping example, this would work even for women).
Does that make sense?
LikeLike
This has been answered already. Please read before posting the same question for the fifth time.
The answer is yes. And if it were my hair used this way, I’d gladly pay child support. Because I’m a normal human being. Don’t post any more inanities before reading the thread.
LikeLike
wow a slave master justifying slavery “for the benefit of the children”. Did you know that slave owners used the same excuse “to feed their children” to justify slavery over a century ago in the old south?
What a horrid person you are. Only a soul-less beast could justify slavery in this day and age.
P.S
It wouldn’t work for women the hair clipping scenario. the DNA to decide a babies gender either male or female exists in the male dna alone(an offspring from female dna would be a sterile female like creature, if it survived as that method is 110% unstable).
LikeLike
I’m letting comments from this idiot in so that people can see how insane and ridiculous MRAs are.
LikeLike
This proves that feminism is nothing but a female supremacist hate movement. One thing I love about the internet and history. The internet records all and if you read into the details of history you will see the Western matriarchy is about to collapse and male hating bigots like the op will be rounded up and sent to “re-education camps”.
Crack open a history book, the pattern is there. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some kind of a coup within the next decade or less.
You are truly a vile and disgusting person. First you celebrate the fact that a young man was raped(then quick add in a disclaimer) then you justify his enslavement to his rapist. It seems like feminist got tired of telling lies about women being oppressed and decided to make all that come true.. for men though.
Child support is slavery and slaves have an inherit right, a pejorative to utterly destroy their masters and seek freedom.
Women didn’t want equality nor do they want supremacy. Read up on what the women’s right movement really wanted. Total dominion over their children and the average man.
21st Century Women= White and Men=Black.
LikeLike
Do you know egalitarianism is. Lets say for the sake of argument that a woman is raped but she doesn’t report the rape. Now the man fights for custody and gets it. Than the woman raped is ordered to pay child support. Would you feel the same way? Of course not, what your basically saying is that men can’t be victims so screw them.I swear fem-nazis are getting worse by the day.And you don’t even understand your own argument. On a further note our child support system is crap.If you can’t support the child on your own then you don’t need the child. Let the other parent have them.Plain and simple.And the MRA comment was funny.You seem to think that sex,or lack there of, is our basis for all thought .Well sorry to spoil your baseless accusations but sex is to easy to get for that statement to make sense.
LikeLike
If sex is so easy for you to get, then just go get it already. Maybe it will help you curb your hysteria.
LikeLike
LOL, that’s the only thing you wanted to comment on.Out of all that , that’s what you zero in on. Priceless.
LikeLike
This is the last inane comment I’m letting through in this thread. Chronophages and idiots have infested the thread and filled it with their stupid observations. Go find something else to do with your time, losers.
LikeLike
And what has escaped your notice is that clarissa’s original post was talking about what the man’s obligation should be assuming it was a rape (and could be proven to be).
LikeLike
Not “the man’s” but “any person’s”. This is why it has been said that this is not a gender issue.
LikeLike
The logical extension of a proven rape would be imprisonment and the removal of the child from the rapist. Then the victim has the choice as to what to do with the child – turn over to the state or raise it themselves.
Therefore, the post is really about what ought to be done in the case of an ‘alleged’ rape. Allegations without proof are nothing more than assumptions. In the absence of evidence, no crime took place. Therefore, he’s responsible for supporting his child.
LikeLike
I think I understand your position now, Clarissa. Regardless of how the DNA gets from a donor to an accepter, and regardless of who is the non-consenting party, you believe that both are responsible for the (possibly) resulting child, correct? If this is right, I’d like to take this a little further.
This seems like a moral standpoint. Why should this opinion be applied to all people? It’s fine to hold yourself to such a standard, but why should it be law for all? I’m just curious, because typically laws are in place for good reasons, not just morals.
LikeLike
Yes, this is exactly what I’m saying. This should be law because it’s the government’s role to protect those who can’t protect themselves. In these situations, children are the most vulnerable party. As I said before, an adult can always make more money. A child is incapable of providing for him or herself. Protecting the rights of children isn’t about morals. Just like what I say isn’t about morals. It’s about providing for those who are financially and legally helpless.
LikeLike
Careful Clarissa, that’s almost a Pro-Life statement.
LikeLike
I’m talking about people, not body parts. It would be kind of weird if the government decided I don’t treat my left kidney right and tried protecting it from me.
LikeLike
A fetus is not a body part.
LikeLike
“A fetus is not a body part.”
– Yes, it is. Stop repeating one stupid statement like a parrot.
LikeLike
Apparently you don’t seem to understand the issue here. Child support is assigned to the parents, they can be adoptive, they can be victims of paternity fraud or be the biological parents. If you are saying that people who have contributed genetically to the child must take care of that child then the same can be applied to female rape victims who then must go through forced birth and then be liable for that child.
LikeLike
No, child support is not assigned to adults. That’s why it’s called “CHILD support” and not “parent support.”
This meaningless “forced birth” issue has been discussed here at length. Please read the discussion before posting inane arguments that have been addressed at length.
LikeLike
I think when silver163 said child support was ‘assign to the parents’ they meant that the parents were held responsible for paying it, not that they were assigned to receive it.
While it is true that the intent behind child support is to allow the custodial parent to take care of the child, as a practical matter the check is usually written to the custodial parent, and the custodial parent does not have to account for it very carefully by, for example, providing receipts showing what they spent it on.
LikeLike
Maybe you shouldn’t translate what other people said and let them speak for themselves. Once again, I ask you to address what is being said and not your assumptions and fantasies. This thread is almost 300 comments long as it is. We don’t need to go off on strange tangents prompted by people reading whatever they want into somebody else’s comments.
The distribution of child support funds is a completely separate issue. If you are suggesting that the rape victim in question contribute child support to a trust fund held for the child and inaccessible to the other parent, I don’t think anybody would disagree. This is not the issue in this discussion, though.
LikeLike
So let me get this straight.
Woman rapes a man. Woman carries child to term. Since said man has no say so over terminating the pregnancy (which I ultimately agree with) you say said man should be held responsible for child support.
My problem with this is one that has been a problem for a long time. The fact that a woman carries the child instead of a man gets translated into the mother has control over that man’s role in the child’s life.
(Out of curiosity if this were a consensual situation and the mother was trying push away the dad who was actively trying to be in the child’s life while at the same time trying to get child support out of him what would you think? Assume there is no abuse.)
I question this because it really does support the idea that a once the sex act is done all rights and responsibilities of the father and father’s role in the child’s life rest solely in the mother’s hands. You know what I don’t have a uterus but I’m willing to say that 9 months of gestation should not grant a woman that much control over other people.
LikeLike
“My problem with this is one that has been a problem for a long time. The fact that a woman carries the child instead of a man gets translated into the mother has control over that man’s role in the child’s life.”
-I don’t understand this at all. Child support is assigned by the court system, not by anybody’s mother. So where does the mother’s control over any man begin?
“Out of curiosity if this were a consensual situation and the mother was trying push away the dad who was actively trying to be in the child’s life while at the same time trying to get child support out of him what would you think? Assume there is no abuse.”
– The only way of “getting the child support out of him” that I can imagine is going to court. In court, she can bring up the issue of child support, while he can address child visitation or transferral of custody.
“I question this because it really does support the idea that a once the sex act is done all rights and responsibilities of the father and father’s role in the child’s life rest solely in the mother’s hands.”
-This shouldn’t be this way and doesn’t have to be this way. The court system is, indeed, inclined to hand the children over to the mother way too often in this country. This is why I support the system that was recently adopted in Aragon where in 90% of divorces, joint custody is awarded. I think this is a system all civilized countries should move towards. Here is my post on progressive child custody laws in Aragon: https://clarissasblog.com/2010/06/03/aragon-makes-shared-custody-the-norm/
“You know what I don’t have a uterus but I’m willing to say that 9 months of gestation should not grant a woman that much control over other people.”
-Nobody disagrees. The court system has to be reformed and pushed towards greater equality. However, while the fight for fairer custody laws goes on, no child should be left without financial means of support.
LikeLike
-I don’t understand this at all. Child support is assigned by the court system, not by anybody’s mother. So where does the mother’s control over any man begin?
Unless the child somehow asked for it on their own…
LikeLike
While I understand you aren’t being malice at all Clarissa (sp?) I think your argument rests on the assumption that the victim is a participator in the child’s creation. The victim is NOT a participant, they are a hostage/victim. By calling the victim a participant and holding them responsible, you are holding them responsible for their own rape. Now I know you don’t blame victim, but in this instance, you pretty much are. As far as the child care goes, I believe that if the victim wants the child, then the rapist CANNOT contest, and MUST lose the child. If the victim doesn’t want the child, I propose the child be put up for adoption and the rapist must pay for that child’s care and put that child through college.
LikeLike
Nobody is holding the victim responsible for anything. I’m just stating the obvious fact of reality that the circumstances of conception don’t remove 50% of the kid’s genetic material that belong to the father.
Your last suggestions are impracticable because the victim in this case did not report the rape. This has also been discussed at length in this threaad.
LikeLike
Genetic material does not make a parent, so genetic material is completely moot. The only reason we hold genetic parents responsible is because they were both to blame for the child, while a rape victim was not.
I wasn’t talking about the particular case, but in general principle.
LikeLike
“Genetic material does not make a parent”
-Newsflash: yes, it does.
” The only reason we hold genetic parents responsible is because they were both to blame for the child”
– Blame for the child?? Wow. So whom do we blame for you?
LikeLike
Hardly, you can have as many children as you want, but if you aren’t being a parent, then you aren’t one. You should, however, be responsible for them.
Would responsible be a better word? You dodged my point. My point is that we hold people responsible for their children because they are the only two people responsible for that child’s creation and it would be unfair to burden everyone else. A victim of rape is NOT responsible.
LikeLike
“Hardly, you can have as many children as you want, but if you aren’t being a parent, then you aren’t one.”
-I have no idea what this means. Every person on this planet has one mother and one father. This is biologically determined. I’m not talking about the emotional connotations of being a parent. I’m talking about the simple biological fact of reality that is indisputable. Your father and your mother contributed equally to creating you. That’s just a fact. Whether they were good parents or responsible people is not germane to this discussion.
” My point is that we hold people responsible for their children because they are the only two people responsible for that child’s creation and it would be unfair to burden everyone else.”
-We hold people responsible because they are responsible? I’m sorry but you’ll have to express yourself more clearly if you want to be understood.
“A victim of rape is NOT responsible.”
-Of course. But she or he is still this person’s parent. Once again, that’s a biological fact.
LikeLike
I define it emotionally, you define it biologically. My point is that we shouldn’t hold someone responsible for a child unless they did something to make that child. In other words, had sex with the opposite sex. Otherwise if someone hasn’t done anything then they shouldn’t be responsible for whatever results.
LikeLike
In case you haven’t noticed, we are talking about the legal framework for child support laws. No sane court system in the world can rely on random emotional definitions of particular individuals.
” My point is that we shouldn’t hold someone responsible for a child unless they did something to make that child. In other words, had sex with the opposite sex”
-Why is a child supposed to care about the circumstances of his or her conception? How is it fair to deprive a child of basic necessities because of something that happened before the child was even born? Once again, the government is supposed to defend the weakest person. Isn’t it obvious that the most helpless person here is the child?
LikeLike
The govt. can care for weakest individuals but it shouldn’t do so at the expense of the individual rights of others.
LikeLike
“Nobody is holding the victim responsible for anything”
You want to hold the victim responsible for child support payments, even if he could prove that he was raped (for example, if he had gone to the police immediately, or if they had not dropped the matter when he went to them 2 weeks after the incident, and either of these lead to a conviction).
LikeLike
Please reread the thread you are responding to and try to abstain from posting inanities for the fifteenth time in a row.
LikeLike
You know of thousands of fathers who avoid their financial responsibilities out of a country of over 250 million people? It there are no more than that, they the average father is very unlikely to walk away from their children.
LikeLike
It is very frustrating that after I requested people not post inanities they still do it. Patrick obviously is not acquainted with 250 million people. What’s the use of pointing that out?
LikeLike
if a woman can rape a man, then we agree that women can be perpetrators of sexual abuse, ie criminals.
if we agree that criminals (and particularly sexual abusers) should be deemed unfit to raise children, then it follows that female rapists should not raise their children.
thus, when rape results in impregnation and the victim is a man, he should technically be given custody of the child, as the only parent fit to raise the child.
however, female rape victims have the right to opt for abortion if they don’t want the child. men don’t have that option, and this is unfair.
forcing the man to pay child support is the same as forcing the woman to give birth and raise the child.
LikeLike
Have you even read the post you are responding to??? The man in question never pressed charges or sought custody. Had he done so, the woman would be paying child support and none of this would even be an issue. I’m shocked at people who come here to share theor ridiculous suggestions that have nothing to do with what’s being discussed. This is extrenely annnoying.
LikeLike
The man went to the police 2 weeks after the incident and they refused to follow up on it. So he did try to press charges.
LikeLike
And that is really wrong. This is what we need to fight: the prejudice against men that positions them always as the perpetrators of violence and never as victims. Here is the real injustice in this case. A statement that a crime has been committed is dismissed by the authorities. I wish people who came to this thread concentrated on this horrible injustice rather than seeing how they can deny money to an innocent newborn.
LikeLike
“This is what we need to fight: the prejudice against men that positions them always as the perpetrators of violence and never as victims. ”
I appreciate your advocacy on that point. You might want to update your original post to point out that the man did try to press charges and what a shame is was that the police dropped the matter.
LikeLike
Great idea! I definitely will the moment I get to the office.
LikeLike
How about the rapist pays for it? How about she gets a fucking job?
LikeLike
Have you just dropped from the Moon or something? Nobody is agreeing that both parents should pay for their child. And I’m the last person in the world to defend housewives.
How about you learn to fucking read?
LikeLike
a person CONVICTED of a crime should not get support from there victim-that would be rewarding the perpetrator of the crime—should sperm donors pay support cause the child is an innocent victim NO if the mother needs support from the father she shouldn’t have made the choice to get sperm from a sperm bank-same thing here if the mother didn’t want to raise the kid without support she shouldn’t have raped the guy(IF she did as she has not been convicted and INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY FOR ALL.
if you want to make rape victims pay support why don’t we just take all the kids in the world and randomly assign them to random people and tell them they must support kids no matter if they are theirs or not or even if they have never met the kid—it makes about as much sense as how we do it now or how you apparently want it huh???
LikeLike
Are you truly such an idiot or are you faking it? No, a person convicted of anything shouldn’t get support. No adult – whether convicted or not – should get alimony from another adult. But this is not what we are discussing. We are discussing CHILD support. Awarded to children. Who don’t have any victims because they are small.
I have never seen such a bunch of illiterate idiots as the ones who flooded this topic to leave their stupid thoughts.
LikeLike
but you see the guy has no control over how that money is spent-it could be going to the child or the rapist could use it on herself-so like i said should sperm donors be forced to pay,what about people who give there kids up to adoption-should they be forced to pay because hey the child is innocent and couldn’t control that their father was a sperm donor so should he have to pay NO! are you honestly telling me you would be fine with sending off a check to the rapists address every month for 18 years-for a child you created through no fault of your own,would you be okay with that-i will answer your question for you NO WAY!-would you even dare to discuss this if the genders were reversed again i doubt it.
LikeLike
Once again: please read the discussion before responding. Yes, I would support any child of mine irrespective of how it came to existence. I’d do it because I’m a normal person and that’s what normal people do.
I said a gazillion times already that my position would not change a bit if the genders were reversed in this situation. Or in any situation. Both parents have to support their child financially.
I will not respond to any more questions that have been addressed twenty times already within this very thread. Read the discussion and only post if you have something new to contribute.
If you can’t respect this simple request, I’ll have to ban you.
LikeLike
NO!!! a person CONVICTED of a crime shouldn’t get support from the victim-that would be rewarding the perpetrator of the crime.Now i don’t know if the woman in this case is guilty but for the sake of argument lets assume she is-the victim had no control over what happened and shouldn’t be punished by being made to pay money—being forced to give money to his rapist-whether its for the child or not would make him feel he is getting raped all over-again do you want that? he shouldn’t have to relive that experience because a woman made a choice to rape him and got pregnant.Why don’t you stand in his shoes how would you feel getting raped and being a parent through no fault of your own and paying support-BUL*SHIT!!! Should sperm donors pay child support because its not the childs fault its dad is a donor—NO if a woman doesn’t want to support a kid without help here’s a tip DON’T RAPE SOMEBODY!!!-Why don’t we just take all the kids in the world and take a random person and force that person to support a kid that’s not there’s and hasn’t even met them-it makes about as much sense as making a rape victim pay child support. I am responsible for my own actions so i will take responsibility for my actions i will NOT!!! take responsibility for the actions of someone else and certainly not my RAPISTS actions!!!
(i love this blog even if i don’t always agree with everything)
LikeLike
for everyone who wants to keep this from happening get a vasectomy!!!
LikeLike
but there is no other crime in which the victim must take responsibility for there actions because if you are not responsible for what you did(impregnating by rape)-you can’t be responsible for the result(child)-i think i hear the faint echo of the words best interest of the child-if you ask me a rapist is in no way suitable to care for a child and it would be in the kids best interest to not be raised by a rapist.
LikeLike
“what you did(impregnating by rape)-you can’t be responsible for the result(child)”
-This is a completely ridiculous premise. What about people who get born because their father pinches holes in the condom? Or the mother lies about taking birth control? Do they also not deserve to visit a dentist, have shoes, eat, get toys and clothes? Seriously? And how are you so sure that this is not the way you were born?
As for the issue of the kid’s custody, it has been discussed at length. There is no evidence that the father in this case asked for custody. If he did, then obviously it should have been given to him. As has been said in this thread over 50 times.
LikeLike
make the person who did the act(birth control,poking holes in condoms)-the person who did that should support the kid on there own because they got themselves into this matter so its there fault-NOW i see what you are saying but your argument about the child needing support but do you think a sperm donor should pay child support if the mother and child need it? should a donor have to support the kid because the child had no control over the fact that their dad was a sperm donor so should we do that?-make sperm and egg donors pay support?-because in this case that’s all the guy is a forced sperm donor.i mean if you rape someone and sperm is forced out of you that sperm still belongs to you and was stolen-shouldn’t you get it back?-if you can’t get the sperm back then you can’t be held liable for support when your sperm was stolen.-i don’t believe you have addressed this but if you have i apologize, thank you for taking the time to read and answer this.
LikeLike
“make the person who did the act(birth control,poking holes in condoms)-the person who did that should support the kid on there own because they got themselves into this matter so its there fault”
-What are you, three years old? “It’s his fault!” is an argument that works at the playground, not in real life. Grow up already.
‘a sperm donor should pay child support if the mother and child need it?”
-This discussion is pointless because sperm donors are anonymous and nobody can sue them for child support on a practical level.
“i mean if you rape someone and sperm is forced out of you that sperm still belongs to you and was stolen-shouldn’t you get it back?-”
-Feel free to scrape it back out of the resulting child, if you know how to.
“if you can’t get the sperm back then you can’t be held liable for support when your sperm was stolen”
-Once again, are you three? How does a child who requires support steal anybody’s sperm? And how does the child do that before getting born? You want to punish a child for somebody stealing something from somebody else before the child came into existence? And you want to be taken seriously with these arguments?
LikeLike
i am saying that a person shouldn’t be held responsible for something that was forced out of them-i realize that the child didn’t steal it but the mother did-example if i steal from you and give what i took to someone else does that make it theirs? so even though the child didn’t steal it the sperm is still mine and since i can’t get it back i can’t be held responsible-and sperm donors can and HAVE been held liable for child support-they are not always anonymous-Google sperm donor/child support you get 221000 results-take these cases
Pennsylvania Court Orders Sperm Donor to Lesbian Couple to Pay Child Support
Sperm donor liable for child support, judge rules,MELVILLE, N.Y. — A New York man who said he donated sperm to a female co-worker as a friendly gesture and sent presents and cards to the child over the years likely will owe child support for the college-bound teenager, according to a judge’s ruling.
Sperm donor to pay child support
A man who donated sperm to a lesbian couple is being made to pay maintenance by the Child Support Agency (CSA).
Andy Bathie, 37, from Enfield, north London, claims he was assured by the couple he would have no personal or financial involvement for the children.
so there you have it sperm donors can and have been made to pay child support
and the his fault argument does make sense why should i have 2 pay 4 something i couldn’t help-the kids mother should support them she got herself into this mess she can get herself out.
AND 4 your information i am not 3yrs old for i turned 4 last month.
LikeLike
” realize that the child didn’t steal it but the mother did”
-This is why the mother shouldn’t get any support. If the court system works right, she will go to jail. However, how is it fair to punish the child with indigence and lack of medicals services for something its mother did before it was even born? Until you answer this question, there can be no continuation to this discussion.
“sperm donors can and HAVE been held liable for child support-they are not always anonymous-”
-If a sperm donor is not anonymous, he is not a sperm donor. You need to be more careful with terminology.
‘A New York man who said he donated sperm to a female co-worker as a friendly gesture and sent presents and cards to the child over the years likely will owe child support for the college-bound teenager, according to a judge’s ruling.”
-This guy is not a sperm donor. Sperm donors go to a clinic and donate anonymously.
‘A man who donated sperm to a lesbian couple is being made to pay maintenance by the Child Support Agency (CSA)”
-Same here.
“so there you have it sperm donors can and have been made to pay child support”
-No, I don’t. You need to figure out what a sperm donor is before quoting this kind of garbage on my website.
“and the his fault argument does make sense why should i have 2 pay 4 something i couldn’t help-the kids mother should support them she got herself into this mess she can get herself out.”
-We are not talking about the mother’s mess. We are talking about CHILD support. Gosh, what have your parents been doing to you that you have such a pronounced tendency to pretend that children do not exist in the situations where they are the only thing that is being discussed.
LikeLike
if i give something i am donating it-therefore if i donate sperm i am a sperm donor-whether anonymously or not if i donate sperm i am a sperm donor—if your saying that you have 2 be anonymous to donate something like sperm your are dead wrong.—-so ppl who donate sperm that aren’t anonymous ARE still sperm donors.-so should they have 2 pay support,should we release the names of donors so they can support their kids?-it is not a persons job 2 support their kids when it was forced on them and if the kids go through poverty or don’t have enough that is sad and tragic but not my problem or job 2 make up 4 it.if 2 ppl willingly create a kid then its both their jobs to support the kid 50/50 cause they both were willing and knew what would happen. BUT if 1 person forces the other and has a kid then it’s the rapists fault completely and he or she should provide 100 percent of the support .- and my parents haven’t done anything 2 me i have these views myself that i made myself.(probably because i admit i spend a little 2 much time the computer and probably need 2 get out of the house more LOL).
LikeLike
“if i give something i am donating it-therefore if i donate sperm i am a sperm donor”
-Just listen to yourself. Under this definition, every parent of either gender is a sperm and egg donor. Who’s going to feed the kids in your worldview?
“if your saying that you have 2 be anonymous to donate something like sperm your are dead wrong”
-No, I’m not.
“,should we release the names of donors so they can support their kids?”
-Who are “we”? Are you saying you are in possession of the names of sperm donors and you are planning to release them? If so, be prepared to those donors suing the daylights out of you and winning.
‘BUT if 1 person forces the other and has a kid then it’s the rapists fault completely ”
-The only person who’s disagreeing here is you. The rapist is the only person at fault. But YOU suggest another person be punished, namely, the child. How is that logical? Do you understand what it means to be denied adequate housing, medical assistance, dental care and food when you are a little child? Isn’t that the true punishment here that cannot even begin to be compared with an adult paying a few bucks out of his paycheck? How can anybody seriously compare these two kinds of sacrifice and decide that the adult losing a few dollars is a greater form of suffering?
LikeLike
okay where 2 begin first by sperm donation i mean a dude ejaculates into a cup and give it 2 someone 2 have a kid—that is a sperm donation if it is anonymous or not is irrelevant—so that would be a sperm donation-should donors have 2 pay?
the next thing is when i said “,should we release the names of donors so they can support their kids?” i meant should the sperm banks do it and well should we?
and finally—the child will suffer as a result of the rapists actions and that the kid will be denied support is solely the fault of the rapist—because the rape is solely the rapists fault the consequences are her fault as well ,thus a child being born is solely her fault and her job 2 support on her own,and if she can’t that’s her fault.-and with child support being based on what is made it’s gonna be a lot more then a few bucks-that a child will suffer is not my job to make up 4—should we all have 2 give money 2 charity because there are ppl who need it more and it will mean more 2 them NO! just because someone will suffer doesn’t mean we should force ppl 2 pay something that is unethical.(child support as a result of rape)
LikeLike
“okay where 2 begin first by sperm donation i mean a dude ejaculates into a cup and give it 2 someone 2 have a kid—that is a sperm donation if it is anonymous or not is irrelevant”
-It’s the only thing that’s relevant. The anonymity makes it a donation and removes all financial responsibility from the donor. Any lack of anonymity makes the whole issue personal and removes the possibility of a person being a donor. Are you really saying you never heard about this distinction??
‘and finally—the child will suffer as a result of the rapists actions and that the kid will be denied support is solely the fault of the rapist”
-Oh so it’s going to relieve the kid’s toothache, feed him, clothe him and educate him to know that the rapist is to blame? Yes, this really helps.
“should we all have 2 give money 2 charity because there are ppl who need it more and it will mean more 2 them NO”
-We are not talking about any people. Only about those who are 50% you.
‘ just because someone will suffer doesn’t mean we should force ppl 2 pay something that is unethical.”
-It isn’t “someone”. It’s the most unprotected, helpless person involved in the situation. The government’s role is to protect those who are incapable of providing for themselves. In this situation, the government forces an adult whose only burden, I repeat, is simply to make a few extra bucks to provide for a child’s vital needs.
‘and if she can’t that’s her fault.”
-Try to get rid of this infantile language.
LikeLike
So if someone’s father dies young it would be okay to force you to pay hundreds of thousands of your own money, Clarissa, in order to pay for this child?
LikeLike
“So if someone’s father dies young it would be okay to force you to pay hundreds of thousands of your own money, Clarissa, in order to pay for this child?”
– If I’m this child’s mother, I will gladly take the cost of raising the kid on myself. Only immature losers like you have to be “forced” to take care of their own. But it’s useless to try to explain this to a loser like you.
LikeLike
since we have been going at it 4 hours and don’t seem 2 be getting anywhere why don’t we just agree 2 disagree cause we both have better things 2 do than go at it 4 hours so this will be the last thing i say and if you post anything else i really don’t feel like going at it more so i am not being a coward and don’t think you have defeated me but if you do think so whatever i have better things to do than argue with you more than i already have,so again this will be the last thing i say on this topic.-so here i go
okay well by your logic should we have anonymity because that would deny a child their right 2 support and knowing that the father is a donor won’t relieve the kid’s toothache or feed it so should we ban sperm donations then because of the best interests of the child having a parent 2 support them NO if a person doesn’t want to support kids on their own don’t go 2 a sperm bank as that is what they are 4,as for the 50percent thing should we be required to support our parents if they cant support themselves when they get older because they are 50percent of us NO! because we didn’t have control over them creating us so we shouldn’t support them(we would never have been created i know but we still didn’t choose 2 be born)-support is saying that when you willingly make a choice 2 have kids take responsibility for that decision,but if you were raped you didn’t do anything and thus are not responsible for what happens(child support).. —and again i know the kid will suffer and that knowing the rapist is 2 blame won’t help it but then shouldn’t it be the rapist’s job 2 make a few extra bucks 2 support the kid -after all it was her that did the raping and is solely at fault of the child being created.Check and mate.
LikeLike
“since we have been going at it 4 hours and don’t seem 2 be getting anywhere why don’t we just agree 2 disagree cause we both have better things 2 do than go at it 4 hours ”
-I couldn’t agree more.
LikeLike
I kind of liked this blog until I read this post…
Logic by Clarissa:
Neither sperm donors nor rape victims sign on to pay for the child they ‘give up’, so we can leave it out of the equation, which leaves the following.
Sperm/egg donor:
1. Agrees to give hir DNA.
2. Agrees to conception.
Thus: can’t be held responsible for child’s future (even if the other party is single and falls in dire straits).
Rape victim:
1. Doesn’t agree to give hir DNA.
2. Doesn’t agree to conception.
Thus: must be held responsible for child’s future.
The appeal to emotion you throw in is a cheap one, since law commonly allows women to abandon an unwanted infant, the financial obligations falling on the state. Also single some parents adopt kids, and don’t get bioparents’ money, single mothers voluntarily raise kids without biodad’s support (donor or not), or receive state-funded help.
The ‘victim pays or child starves’ dichotomy exists in your warped imagination only.
LikeLike
Buddy, this has all been asked and answered gazillion times before. All of your arguments are beyond boring. Either come up with something original or just buzz off already.
LikeLike
Only you never addressed these points, you gave no argument for the ethical relevance of the distinction between donors’ and quasi-donors’ participation obligation-wise that would explain why the former are relieved from parental obligations, leaving us with the deluded idea of DNA being the only indicator of who’s responsible for the child, with all its bizarre implications, like having to take care of one’s clone created from stolen genetic material.
You never said why rape victims can’t can’t simply put up the infant for adoption (since a rapist should be denied custody anyway), when non-victimised mothers have the this option. Or should no women be allowed to relinquish custody of their infant after birth (like pro-life women who don’t want a kid but don’t want to ‘kill’ a ‘baby’)? Whether you oppose one of above or both it’s still an anti-choice position.
You never cared to explain how a rape victim participates their own rape more than a donor in giving zir genetic material, or why the distinction between enthusiastic participation and no participation at all should be deemed irrelevant and how these are not anti-choice positions. Since they are I suggest you settle with the the classic pro-life argument about the conception via coitus being more magical than other forms. It’s better than nothing and way better than I just wanna punish people for having reproductive organs and you weren’t pro-choice anyway, so hey.
This may be a distant issue for you, as female-on-male rape is uncommon, but in my country only rich women can afford abortions leaving many facing the dilemma of raising an unwanted child (often conceived in rape) or relinquishing any rights to it. There are of course those quick to point out how they are awful evil women, and according to you they are – it’s not the child’s fault abortion is illegal after all.
What makes any discussion with you totally pointless is your complacency, nothing anybody says will ever make you question yourself for a second.
LikeLike
“the ethical relevance of the distinction between donors’ and quasi-donors’ participation obligation-wise”
-Why would I address ethical dimensions of what is a legal issue? This is what we are discussing here, you dense creature: legal issues. You can keep your ethics and morals to yourself.
“eaving us with the deluded idea of DNA being the only indicator of who’s responsible for the child, with all its bizarre implications, like having to take care of one’s clone created from stolen genetic material.”
-You need to learn to write if you want people to respond to you. This is a completely meaningless statement.
“You never cared to explain how a rape victim participates their own rape more than a donor in giving zir genetic material”
-I’m not going to “explain” your crazy inventions to you. You said this crap, you explain it to yourself.
“why the distinction between enthusiastic participation and no participation at all should be deemed irrelevant ”
-Yes, this has been addressed probably over 1000 times. Are you illiterate, blind, or stupid?
” Since they are I suggest you settle with the the classic pro-life argument about the conception via coitus being more magical than other forms.”
-And I suggest you stick your suggestions up your ass.
“There are of course those quick to point out how they are awful evil women, and according to you they are”
-Are you delusional, you creep? I support abortion rights at absolutely any stage of the pregnancy.
“What makes any discussion with you totally pointless is your complacency, nothing anybody says will ever make you question yourself for a second.”
-You are not an anybody. You are a stupid nobody who repeats garbage as a trained monkey.
LikeLike
Shouldn’t the care of the child be the responsibility of the State? I mean, in this instance, the father is a non-consenting party and the mother is a rapist. Neither should carry the burden of a child.
Honestly I feel that if the court system finds the woman guilty of rape either an abortion should be required or the child would be given to foster care. The former is more reasonable, as it saves money and no child wishes to grow up in an adoption home.
LikeLike
I’m sure you are aware that you have just recounted the main tenets of fascism to us, right?
Or are you like Monsieur Jourdain who was shocked to find out he spoke in prose?
LikeLike
Enlighten me, please.
LikeLike
About fascism? The idea that the citizens’ bodies belong to the state, that the children belong to the state, that the state can invade and dispose of the citizens’ bodies at will is the core of fascist philosophy. The state is more important than any individual. Forced abortions were really big with Hitler. Are you telling me you didn’t know all this?
LikeLike
Well an abortion isn’t legally disposing of a body (unless of course you’re arguing against Roe v Wade). Forced abortions were popular with Hitler for eugenic reasons, not for sex crimes. My post was defending the forced abortion only in the instance in which the pregnancy was a result of a forced sexual encounter, rape. (Also, see Godwin’s Law.)
I know it’s a pretty extreme opinion in contrast to yours, but if a woman rapes a man and gets herself impregnated, the State should hold the right to abort the fetus (given it’s safe). Although the fact that our judicial system does make mistakes, it should err on the side of caution and take the baby away from the criminal and into the hands of an adoption home or a foster home.
LikeLike
Nobody is a criminal until proven to be so in a court of law. In the case that is being discussed here, no official charges were brought against any one, let alone a verdict. You want the “state” to proceed without a court decision? That’s fascism.
As to forced abortions for any reason, that’s a fascist idea. What else here to discuss about this specific issue? If the state has the right to cut a fetus out of a woman against her will, what’s to stop it to decide it needs your kidney next and rip it out of you. Just think about it.
LikeLike
Yes obviously the State cannot act without court order, in the argument I made.
The reason I made my original comment, though, is because I find it ethically reprehensible that a man become a (biological) father through non consensual means, and then be required to pay child support. Assuming the woman did indeed rape and impregnate herself, and is not found guilty in a court, it’s an unfortunate result that the crime is perpetuated against the biological father through his having to pay money.
Since no charges were brought against the woman in your post, I think it’s largely a moot point though…
LikeLike
“a man become a (biological) father through non consensual means, and then be required to pay child support.”
-Not just a man. A woman, too. As I said, this is not a gender issue for me.
“Since no charges were brought against the woman in your post, I think it’s largely a moot point though…”
-True.
LikeLike
Hate to break it to you, but you support violating the individual rights of men and forcing men to work against their will for the benefit of someone else. This sort of reminds me of slavery.
LikeLike
“Hate to break it to you, but you support violating the individual rights of men and forcing men to work against their will for the benefit of someone else. This sort of reminds me of slavery.”
– Gosh, what an idiot. 🙂 🙂 Don’t worry, loser, nobody will force you to work. You will continue being an unemployed loser that you are right now. You are also not likely ever to have any children because no woman is stupid enough to want to give birth to something that shares any part of your defective genes.
LikeLike
Nope, what I said was accurate.
LikeLike
“Nope, what I said was accurate.”
– OK, since you have exhausted your tiny stock of “arguments”, you are off the blog. Bye bye, loser.
LikeLike
I have one small question.
What would the law in the US expect if the male was below the age of consent and the female above the age of consent ?
I assume the male would not have to report he was raped as it could be determined by the progress of the pregnancy that a statutory rape had occurred.
But what then, is a minor still responsible for child support in this case? Indeed, are minors responsible for child support in any case?
LikeLike
Of course, a minor cannot be responsible for child support. However, after they reach the age of adulthood, they definitely should be.
“I assume the male would not have to report he was raped as it could be determined by the progress of the pregnancy that a statutory rape had occurred.”
-It’s extremely difficult to prosecute such cases because juries routinely fail to see a male minor as a possible victim of rape. There is such a huge gender imbalance in the way such cases are prosecuted that it’s simply egregious.
LikeLike
It’s incredibly easy for you to have this position when you are NEVER going to get put in such a situation.
LikeLike
“It’s incredibly easy for you to have this position when you are NEVER going to get put in such a situation.”
– I already told you that you are a hopeless idiot. Do you enjoy to be humiliated and spit on? Fuck off from my blog, you miserable insect.
LikeLike
If the woman is a rapist. Pay her child support. But charge her with copyright theft of your genome, after all she will be making a derived work with it.
LikeLike
Once again, child support is NOT paid to adult women. It’s paid to children. Hence, the term “child support.”
As for alimony, I’m completely and utterly opposed to it.
LikeLike
We call making a payment “paying”, indeed the person you give the money to is the person you “pay”. The purpose of the payment can be totally unrelated to the person that you pay.
I get your probably in a bad mood having read some of the above. However, I doubt that 1 day old children generally have the capacity to receive payment, I assume it is the mother that takes the payment in the bulk of these cases. Of course the expectation is that she will use this on the behalf of the child.
My point is simply pay what the law says is due and then take other action as a punitive measure for the unauthorized use of your genetic material.
You might think this is a weird way to look at it, but if your genetic material was taken without your permission and then used without authorization by say a drug company you would expect to be able to take such action. Especially if you thought the final use was unethical in some way.
LikeLike
At the end of this long thread, we all agreed that the rapist should always go to jail and be denied custody of the child. In this situation, however, it didn’t happen. It’s tragic that the kid is in the custody of this kind of person. This is the real wrong that should be addressed. However, none of this makes the man any less the child’s father.
LikeLike
I don’t see a convincing rationale for forcing raped males to pay child support when they did not consent to sex, regardless of which position on when personhood begins (conception or viability) I would have.
LikeLike
“I don’t see a convincing rationale for forcing raped males to pay child support when they did not consent to sex, regardless of which position on when personhood begins (conception or viability) I would have.”
– That’s because you are very stupid.
LikeLike
ok I cant stand it any longer,
seems like nobody has a clue what they are talking about,
Child support IS paid to the mother (I know because I paid)
very little went to the child, and the question, whether the child would starve, or not be able to see a dentist or have cloth etc was never an issue.
Sure if the child’s survival is at stake than all the moral obligations apply.
In no case I have seen (not very many, but a few) was that the case.
It boiled down to that the recipient of the child support, the mother!
had a nicer life. In these situations the argument if child support is fair for all the discussed reasons becomes a valid point.
And another thing: 10% Hah! Nobody would give a crap about 10%
its more like 60%. The court battle over the amount is a fine tuned money making machine applied by lawyers, Why? Because if the Dad is stupid enough to fight in court and hires a lawyer, the billable hours are just ticking away, the higher the amount sought the fiercer the battle the higher the bill.
Plain and simple, nobody “normal” would object to pay for his child; but if the amount is unbearable its only human to look for outs on any level.
LikeLike
“very little went to the child, and the question, whether the child would starve, or not be able to see a dentist or have cloth etc was never an issue.”
– This is a completely different issue of a horrible relationship between former spouses.
“Nobody would give a crap about 10%
its more like 60%. The court battle over the amount is a fine tuned money making machine applied by lawyers, Why? Because if the Dad is stupid enough to fight in court and hires a lawyer, the billable hours are just ticking away, the higher the amount sought the fiercer the battle the higher the bill.”
– You are describing a very immature man.
“Plain and simple, nobody “normal” would object to pay for his child; but if the amount is unbearable its only human to look for outs on any level.”
– Every divorced person I know manages to figure this issue out easily and with zero problems. Ask yourself why your case is so different.
LikeLike
Don’t be hysterical, that’s boring!
LikeLike
So it is possible that an 11 year old boy could get an adult female pregnant and then at the age of 18 become responsible for child support?
That doesn’t seem like a really good outcome given how young the boy was at the time.
LikeLike
I hate pedophiles with a passion that makes me foam at the mouth. However, the horrible circumstances of the child’s conception cannot in any way cancel the fact that the boy is that child’s one and only father and will always be one.
LikeLike
This whole argument of demanding that a pedophile rapist be given custody of a child and money by her victim is the height of illogic and should be offensive to anyone who cares about child abuse victims. You may as well demand that Jerry Sandusky be given custody of children and money to house, feed, and clothe them by their parents.
If a child was raped, there is absolutely no possible argument that the rapist should be given a child to care for, let alone money demanded of the victim.
We’re talking about a pedophile rapist. So, this should not even be a question. If the rape victim cannot or will not care for the child, there are 2 million couples who want to adopt. This is simple.
LikeLike
“This whole argument of demanding that a pedophile rapist be given custody of a child”
-Are you insane? What argument about custody? Go have your head examined, idiot. Nobody made such arguments here.
LikeLike
But since the rape victim never asked to be raped, the rapeist should pay, or the child support be provided by the welfare state. If a woman was raped, she can abort the child, while the man can not abort the child support, but he raped her so he should pay anyway. But if the law allowed the baby to be given to the rapist (which sounds crazy, but that’s waht happened here, just the woman is the rapist) should the female victim pay child support?
LikeLike
You are not serious, are you? All of these questions have been answered dozens of times in this thread. The non-custodial parent of ANY gender should pay child support irrespective of the circumstances of conception. As for the welfare state, the situation we are discussing happened in the US where there is no welfare state. Please try to pay attention before commenting.
LikeLike
Actually, your position is contradicted by Baby Moses laws, by women giving up offspring for adoption without the man’s consent, and by a previous case where a raped woman or girl was allowed to avoid paying child support.
LikeLike
“Actually, your position is contradicted by Baby Moses laws, by women giving up offspring for adoption without the man’s consent, and by a previous case where a raped woman or girl was allowed to avoid paying child support.”
– Is English not your first language? Do you not see that this sentence makes absolutely no sense?
LikeLike
What exactly did I say here which was inaccurate?
LikeLike
“What exactly did I say here which was inaccurate?”
– You said you were a human being. That was a patent falsehood since you are obviously a cockroach and not a person.
LikeLike
As an adult, a woman, a feminist AND a rape survivor, I STILL find your views on the subject vile, hypocritical, disgusting, backwards and just plain wrong.
But whatever. If you want to act like a mentally handicapped little girl throwing a tantrum because no one agrees with her and who cannot understand the most basic of concepts, be my guest. But dont you DARE call yourself a feminist while doing it, because it’s morons like you that give us feminists a bad name!
LikeLike
Oh, after I have read these extremely convincing and reasonable arguments, I have totally seen the light!
Buddy, who cares what you do or do not find? Who cares what you think about anything? People who believe that “But whatever” is a convincing argument should hardly expect to be taken seriously. And I don’t want to be your guest because you are weird.
LikeLike
LOL, thanks for proving my point. And you expect others to be convincing and reasonable when you are anything but? Please. Also, who said I was arguing? I was just expressing my surprise that someone could be so ignorant.
But you are right about one thing…other people’s opinions don’t matter…I should have remembered that before I commented, but I was just so shocked that some people could still be so incredibly stupid, that I commented, and for that I apologize. I should have remembered that a moron’s opinion doesn’t count solely BECAUSE they are a moron.
And you seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is “weird.” Get over yourself and grow up. LOL.
LikeLike
What a sad case of verbal diarrhea.
LikeLike
You have continued to make that precise argument. The rapist can’t recieve child support from her victim unless she is granted custody. Since you are the one demanding that the rapist be paid child support by her victim, you are arguing that the rapist, most whom are pedophiles in this situation, be given custody of another child.
LikeLike
Please read the story before posting garbage. Unfortunately, there was no conviction in this case. Everybody would have preferred for the rapist to be jailed and to be removed as far away from the child as possible. But here, this is not the case. No charges were pressed. And that’s the story we have been discussing.
Please try to pay attention.
LikeLike
It doesn’t matter whether there was a conviction or not. If a rape of a child occured, ensuring that the child is removed from the pedophile rapist’s custody should be the only issue, not arguing for the pedophile to continue having custody, partly financed by her victim.
LikeLike
Who is going to ensure that and on what basis if there was no court decision? Who is going to engage in the removal of the child if no complaint against the mother officially exists? Are you aware that custody cases are adjudicated in court?
Are you just trying to spam the thread or something? Are you the same Eric who was trying to spam it at the very start? I can waste five minutes and find out, so just confess. If you are the same troll who has nothing to contribute except this kind of stupidity, save me the time and go away now.
And once again, for the especially stupid trolls: nobody here is arguing that pedophiles should have custody of anybody, OK?
LikeLike
If the police, DA, and courts decide that no rape occured, then there is nothing that can be done. However, if, as you stated, “Alright we’ve seen cases before where under aged boys were held up for support of children they had with adult women” there is nothing to decide. A rape of a child occurred. But, even in such cases, the law and courts will and have awarded custody to pedophiles.
If no rape occurred, there is no issue to even discuss. I’m done here now. Unsubscribing.
LikeLike
Another case of verbal diarrhea from a long-time troll.
Funny how this creepo runs away the moment I caught him stalking the blog where he so obviously not wanted for months.
LikeLike
This article is stupid and the writer should feel stupid. In this case, the child should become a ward of the state and the rape victim should not have to pay child support.
LikeLike
Compared to you, buddy, everybody in the universe is a genius. Because you respond to an article you haven’t even read, you brainless twit.
LikeLike
The funniest thing of all in this article is the completely surreal assumption that a female rapist, i.e. a sexual offender, still has the right to raise a child. I don’t know what crazy world you live in, but in civilized society we don’t generally want to let children live under the roof of a qualified sexual molester.
Here’s a better solution society can agree on: a mother who raped the father to get his sperm should have her child under protective care of child support services, be it with the father, a relative or put up for adoption.
LikeLike
Wow, you read the entire thread. That’s impressive.
In this case, no charges were ever brought. The victim’s attempts to bring charges were laughed out of the police station. 😦 So the mother did end up with custody.
Of course, if there’d been a trial, etc., we would have no need for this conversation. But rape is not easy to prosecute and often the willingness is not there on the part of the criminal justice system.
LikeLike
(cont.)
Secondly, the currently solution being advocated to the “who pays child support” issue in progressive courts (and Europe/civil law countries where the family court system is a bit more sane) is that, if the father never consented to sex, and to the sharing of reproductive rights/duties, what the authorities should do is try to find a way to feed that child (certainly the priority here) WITHOUT commiting that grave injustice against the father. In first world countries, there’s more often than not many a ways of achieving this, and what we see is that the child support responsabilities usually turn to
– the mother’s parents/immediate family
– the mother’s relatives
– government institutions/adoption
Should these options all be extinguished, and still not a way to feed and care for the child is found, THEN we begin to consider imposing child support duties on the father, even against his will. In short, even if the child’s needs are the utmost priority, you don’t fight injustice with more injustice.
But hey, America.
LikeLike
Here’s a question for you–if the man paying child support dies young, and all these three options of yours (the mom’s parents, relatives, govt. institutions) are extinguished, who should be the one paying child support? What if the man’s second cousin is his closest living relative at that moment (excluding the child himself/herself, of course)?
LikeLike
“Here’s a question for you–if the man paying child support dies young, and all these three options of yours (the mom’s parents, relatives, govt. institutions) are extinguished, who should be the one paying child support? What if the man’s second cousin is his closest living relative at that moment (excluding the child himself/herself, of course)?”
– Your idiotic question has been answered four times, you dumbo. If the government institutions are extinguished, child support will be that baby’s least significant problem.
LikeLike
The problem with your argument is that this same argument could be used to justify forcing other people to pay child support–for instance, a man who is paying child support dies young. Should the man’s brother be forced to pay child support afterwards, since he would be the man’s closest surviving relative? What if the man has no siblings or parents–should the man’s first cousin then be forced to pay child support? Should the man’s better-off neighbor pay child support if the man dies young? If you truly cared about the well-being of children, then you’d support forcing the man’s brother or cousin to pay child support as well in the event that the man dies young.
In regards to abortion and child support, your position is sexist against men, as well as inaccurate. A fetus is not a woman’s body part. However, if you’re arguing that the fetus is not a person and that women should be able to get elective abortions, then it would be purely the woman’s decision whether or not to create a new PERSON and give birth to him/her. Therefore, why hold the man liable and responsible for the woman’s decision (regardless of whether or not he consented to sex)?
LikeLike
“The problem with your argument is that this same argument could be used to justify forcing other people to pay child support–for instance, a man who is paying child support dies young.”
– No.
“Should the man’s brother be forced to pay child support afterwards, since he would be the man’s closest surviving relative?”
– No.
” What if the man has no siblings or parents–should the man’s first cousin then be forced to pay child support?”
-No.
“Should the man’s better-off neighbor pay child support if the man dies young? If you truly cared about the well-being of children, then you’d support forcing the man’s brother or cousin to pay child support as well in the event that the man dies young.”
– Are you an idiot or are you just pretending to be one?
“A fetus is not a woman’s body part.”
– Yes, it is.
” However, if you’re arguing that the fetus is not a person and that women should be able to get elective abortions, then it would be purely the woman’s decision whether or not to create a new PERSON and give birth to him/her.”
– They are able to do that in civilized countries. Once again, are you an idiot?
“Therefore, why hold the man liable and responsible for the woman’s decision (regardless of whether or not he consented to sex)?”
– Do you see yourself as somebody’s decision or as a human being? If a decision, I have to say, it was a pretty crappy one.
LikeLike
First of all, please have some manners.
What about the miserable children? Why shouldn’t they get financial support from someone else if the father dies young? Why should they be denied food, clothing, toys, et cetera simply because one of their parents died young?
Secondly, it appears that you are showing your stupidity by strawmanning my positions. Please read what I wrote again and figure out what I actually meant.
And No, fetuses are not body parts. You can make stupid statements like this all you want, but they still won’t be true.
I am a human being, but it was purely my mother’s decision to give birth to me. This is a fact.
LikeLike
“First of all, please have some manners.”
– You don’t deserve being treated with respect.
“Why shouldn’t they get financial support from someone else if the father dies young? Why should they be denied food, clothing, toys, et cetera simply because one of their parents died young?”
– Seriously, are you brain-damaged? Because the parent is not in existence and can’t provide support from the grave.
“Secondly, it appears that you are showing your stupidity by strawmanning my positions. Please read what I wrote again and figure out what I actually meant.”
– Why would I waste my time on deciphering the rantings of a congenitally stupid loser like you? 🙂 🙂 Losers should know their place.
“I am a human being, but it was purely my mother’s decision to give birth to me. This is a fact.”
– So you are a human being? Are other children also human beings?
LikeLike
“it was purely my mother’s decision to give birth to me”
– Big mistake on her part. Huge. Why spawn if you can’t provide the product of your brainless spawning with basic education?
LikeLike
Breeding is always a mistake.
LikeLike
You don’t look like a mistake to me. 🙂 Actually, I’d give you as a result of a very successful breeding. 🙂 And then let’s take me. What a phenomenal breeding success! Can you imagine a world without me? That would just be tragic.
LikeLike
I said that breeding is a mistake, not that actually existing humans are a mistake.
Thank you for kindness, though. 🙂
LikeLike
But humans happen as a result of breeding. And some turn out to be really really cool.
Of course, nobody should breed if they don;t feel like it, that’s a given.
LikeLike
Hi Clarissa,
Hypothetical case: You get an in vitro fertilization. Nurse steals one of your eggs and gets pregnant
Do you pay child support, because “Child support, however, is not about either parent or the process of how they ended up being parents. It’s about ensuring that a child – a separate human being who never asked to be brought into this world and who in no way influenced the circumstances of his or her conception – has adequate means of support.”
If not, then you are just another female hypocrite picking cherries for herself.
LikeLike
“Hypothetical case: You get an in vitro fertilization. Nurse steals one of your eggs and gets pregnant
Do you pay child support”
– It is very frustrating to answer the same question 50 times in a row just because people are too lazy to read what they are responding to. The answer is YES, ABSOLUTELY. I would consider myself ultra-happy and super-privileged to support any child of mine no matter how s/he came into existence.
“If not, then you are just another female hypocrite picking cherries for herself.”
– I’m sorry your personal life is so horrible. Have you tried going into therapy?
LikeLike
After reading through this mountain of comments and going over the original posted entry, there are a few questions I have for you Clarissa. You stated that a fetus is a body part. You’ve also stated the ‘shared DNA’ point about both contributers being responsible (financially or otherwise)for the child if it is carried to term and born, regardless of how that came to be..
I would like to understand a bit more about the thoughts or beliefs behind that<-this is question #1
I'd been taught that during the embryonic period the lungs and spinal cord, brain and heart all start to form and by week six the heart pumps blood, that that embryo/fetus is a seperated form of life than the one carrying it and providing it with sustenance. I've never been quiet about my pro-choice stance, but I am not really following where or why this came up in the first place.
I thought this was about rape victims and child support. So I'll only go as far as to say I believe the placenta is a shared but temporary body part between the woman and lifeform within her. The only situation where a boy/man should not be held responsible to pay child support, in my opinion, is if he already had the woman charged and convicted of the rape. It does happen, and has been well documented over the past few years. I think it is admirable that you would care for a being because it shares half of your DNA, but I also think that there are many people who disagree and that does not make them stupid or idiotic. They simply have beliefs or values that are different from your own, and I did not see anyone who was deserving of any anger being directed their way because of that fact..
My second question is, How many people have been kept from posting their opinions on the matter, and will I be one of them too? I'd noticed there were people who claimed their posts werent being added to the comments. It made me wonder whether I was wasting my time typing this up at all. You'd said in one comment (which was a reply to someone else who seemed to have irked you) that you knew this topic would bring the types of comments you're seeing, but did not take a deep breath and handle those comments you knew you'd get with anything but anger and name calling. Would love to know more about your views on this topic without the public display and name calling involved 😛
LikeLike
Buddy, try to concentrate, control the verbal diarrhea, and formulate a question according to the rules of the English language. Make it brief and to the point. And for Pete’s sakes, learn to spell the word “separate” correctly.
LikeLike