The Best “Financial” Interests Of The Child…or State

Senator Rick Jones….”People should be more responsible… shouldn’t father children outside of marriage.”

Blaming the victim is fine in our society, provided the victim is a man. It does not matter who the biological father is, only what’s in the “best interest” of the child. Really? REALLY? What they are saying in code is;  which man can the state find to best care of the mother financially.

In reality, the only thing the state truly cares about is if there’s a child that a father should be paying child support for. It doesn’t matter if he is the actual father or not. All the state wants is to find a man to pay a mother so the state can continue to receive its matching funding from the federal government. Yes, it is true. A large part of a state’s federal human services spending is based on child support collections. The more a state collects in child support,  the more that state receives from our federal government. This gives states plenty of incentives to maximize the amount of child support paid to those who file.

Have you ever wondered why family courts promote situations that have a single parent in charge of parenting (usually mothers), and the father paying child support? By tying federal funds to the amount of child support collected, the federal government hold the bait. States bite by basing child support orders on maximizing revenues instead of a given child’s needs or a parent’s ability to pay.

In fact, many state-level attempts to modify family law in order to facilitate better support for children and better relationships between divorced parents have been thwarted by state officials who don’t want to relinquish highly coveted federal tax dollars.

Co-parenting , from the state’s perspective doesn’t produce as much child support. Who really wins in this game? Certainly not children.

Child support is a joke. I’m so glad I REFUSED to pay it.


3 comments for “The Best “Financial” Interests Of The Child…or State

  1. August 14, 2013 at 12:49 PM

    Senator Rick Jones is really out of touch with things on the ground.
    Men no longer “beget” children as the Bible would put it, and have not done so for over 40 years. It is not the ‘fathering’ but the ‘mothering’ that is delinquent and needs addressing.
    Control of fertility is totally in the hands of the female these days and Senator Rick Jones has not quite woken-up to that fact. His opinions also speak of his unconscious but pre-set assumption that the maiden (all maidens) are innocent and chaste – a idyllic situation which is only ruined by men’s carnal lust.
    But don’t women and girls also have carnal lusts ?
    Has the Senator forgotten the ‘panic’ among Radical Feminists when first the concept of a male Contraceptive Pill was mooted ? The point the Rad Fems made was “How was a girl to trust a man who told her he was taking the Pill and conception would be impossible ?” The implication being he (or most men) would lie to her about taking it and she would end up with an unwanted pregnancy.
    Well guess what, Senator Rick Jones, that’s the situation men have had to face for 20 years or more ?

    And one more thing – if the states rather than the federal government organised things they might get a better (and fairer) handle on the situation, as in England where the government its considering abandoning nationwide dogma and allowing each couple (Mum and Dad) to set their own child maintenance amounts based on what they can actually afford from their wages.
    That is making women – and men – face up to adulthood rather then perennially ‘infantilising’ women.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *