Pregnancy Entrapment - What are your legal rights, if any?

[Concordia]

Originally Posted by otc

This is why we need the man-pill...

There's the morning-after pill for men-- it changes your blood type.

 

[GQgeek]

Originally Posted by MrG

^^ I agree. I don't think 18% of net is all that unreasonable for helping to support a child. Being divorced shouldn't make parenting cheaper for one of the parents.

I think it sort of depends upon income, no? I think that once you start hitting higher levels of income, you'd have a tough time convincing me that 18% is really needed to support a single child. As always, housing costs depend on geography, but the incremental cost of getting a slightly bigger place, food, etc can't be more than 10k/yr in most "normal" areas (not manhattan).

For the guy who's friend is paying 1500/mo, i really hope the extra money is going back into a college fund and not into his ex-wife's closet, or even worse, her new husband's car payments. =/

 

[Dakota rube]

Yes. You're correct.
It is much cheaper to raise a child if he is kept locked in the basement all the time.

 

[Mentos]

Originally Posted by Dakota rube

Yes. You're correct.
It is much cheaper to raise a child if he is kept locked in the basement all the time.

Right on. In other words, the test is not how much money it would take to keep the child alive on cheetos and dumpster scraps. You only get to continue wasting your money on clothes and hoes once your own blood is taken care of. Law's plenty clear and predictable, and anyone who fools around with the oldest equation in the book (esp. with someone untrustworthy) deserves exactly what they get. Even if you accept your responsibility, and she has the child, if you can sleep well without knowing that your child is being taken care of in a sense much deeper than fobbing off 18% net in hush money each month, you are a stunted and pathetic excuse for a man.

I've lately wondered whether SF has anything to left to offer. This thread has crystallized my central concern, which is that "style" without honor or dignity is worthless, and this place has precious little of those qualities in evidence. I know that most are just internet bad boys who would behave differently in the situation (and are in the minority here, anyway), but talk still matters, and I've got nothing to gain from reading this dehumanizing drivel or supporting the forum. So I'm turning in my name tag. Peace.

 

[CDFS]

Originally Posted by milosz

You mean, have I heard that he initially made up a ridiculous story about a woman transferring ***** from her mouth to her ****** and getting pregnant, then admitted he'd fucked her?

Yeah.

Did not know this.

 

[CDFS]

Originally Posted by Mentos

Right on. In other words, the test is not how much money it would take to keep the child alive on cheetos and dumpster scraps. You only get to continue wasting your money on clothes and hoes once your own blood is taken care of. Law's plenty clear and predictable, and anyone who fools around with the oldest equation in the book (esp. with someone untrustworthy) deserves exactly what they get. Even if you accept your responsibility, and she has the child, if you can sleep well without knowing that your child is being taken care of in a sense much deeper than fobbing off 18% net in hush money each month, you are a stunted and pathetic excuse for a man.

I've lately wondered whether SF has anything to left to offer. This thread has crystallized my central concern, which is that "style" without honor or dignity is worthless, and this place has precious little of those qualities in evidence. I know that most are just internet bad boys who would behave differently in the situation (and are in the minority here, anyway), but talk still matters, and I've got nothing to gain from reading this dehumanizing drivel or supporting the forum. So I'm turning in my name tag. Peace.

I would only pay 12% tops. Bitches should keep their legs closed.

 

[grimslade]

Sex makes babies, peeps. Keep it real.

 

[VKK3450]

Originally Posted by Mentos

I've lately wondered whether SF has anything to left to offer. This thread has crystallized my central concern, which is that "style" without honor or dignity is worthless, and this place has precious little of those qualities in evidence. I know that most are just internet bad boys who would behave differently in the situation (and are in the minority here, anyway), but talk still matters, and I've got nothing to gain from reading this dehumanizing drivel or supporting the forum. So I'm turning in my name tag. Peace.

Not all of us are woman h8ers like g33k.

K

 

[LabelKing]

Joan Crawford said no wire hangers, but maybe she didn't heed her advice.

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by VKK3450

Not all of us are woman h8ers like g33k.

K

To be fair women started hating him first, he is merely responding in kind.

 

[dfagdfsh]

this thread rules because the person most upset by this (gqgeek) is the least likely to have this ever happen to him

 

[crazyquik]

First off, the dude should get swabbed to make sure he's the father. It's possible she's pointing at him, when it was really someone else. And there is no punishment for women who misidentify the father . . . even if they do it four times or more.

 

[sunror]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[intent]

I say turn it around on her and offer to have sole custody of the baby.

^Not legal advice.

 

[BP348]

Originally Posted by MrG

^^ I agree. I don't think 18% of net is all that unreasonable for helping to support a child. Being divorced shouldn't make parenting cheaper for one of the parents.

I totaly agree that a father should have support his child the thing that burns me up is like GQ said you pay all this money and it just goes into the new car fund or clothing for the ex or whatever it is that the ex wants to buy.