.png)
This article made my skin crawl. An excerpt:
"We need to respect what these guys are doing, linking love and provision in a way that's meaningful to the child," Edin said. "The child support system weakens the child/father bond by separating the act of love from the act of providing."
https://hub.jhu.edu/2015/06/15/how-low-income-dads-provide/
Ummm... no. They are not supporting their children through "in kind" contributions. These gifts cannot feed them, cannot clothe them, and in a sane world, would be used as evidence of wilful nonpayment and disobedience of a court order. But we're not living in a sane world. We're living in scrote world.
I had a friend whose ex worked a very lucrative job under the table and would fly in by helicopter to see their kids, showering them with gifts. But he wouldn't give the mom a penny in support, and she had to work 3 jobs just to stay afloat.
Disgusting. Queens, do not date men who have under-the-table jobs. If they hide money from the government, you better believe they'll hide it from you.
>"What we learned is that these dads are purchasing a relationship with their children," Edin said. "They want their kids to look down at their feet and say, 'My dad cares about me because he bought me these shoes.' "
The dads are trying to link love with money, she said."
HOLY CRAP. IMAGINE SAYING THAT LITERALLY TRYING YO PURCHASE A RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMEONE, ESPECIALLY A CHILD, IS OKAY. Also lmfao when women link love with money we are called golddiggers, but apparently promoting this mindset is okay when used to excuse male incompetence & supremacy in the court system(and what about when the female kids grow up and expect this of their male partners?😮💨) I want to destroy liberal academia, actually all male academia and institutions in general
Agree that this article is trash defending trash behaviour from deadbeats. Someone is paying for the child's essentials in life if the father is not- it's the mother who is likely on an even lower income!! But honestly wish there was an option for fathers to sign away all parental rights permanently and irreversibly and then not have to pay child support. It's not possible at all in Australia, and I've heard that these agreements that exist overseas can end up being overturned by courts when the man changes his mind so not permanent by any means. That is 100% what I would prefer. I have only ever received a pitiful amount (around $30/month) in government mandated child support that is not paid consistently because my ex always ends up finding a way to plead financial hardship despite making a good income. Honestly though I don't need or want his money as I have a good income myself and would much rather if he could abdicate his rights and stop threatening to take me to court and exerting control over our lives (and complaining about paying the pitiful amount of child support 🙄)
If I was your friend I would have reported the father to the irs
Not to mention that they often take their gifts back if they’re at all valuable. A friend’s ex husband bought her daughter a car, then when she was all set to start college, took it away without any explanation. It’s almost like a form of money laundering: buy a gift for yourself, but let your kid use it first, so you don’t have to pay child support.
More male propaganda, this time from academia. Also, am I the only one that feels a racialized context here? That black single mothers are evil harpies who want to suck the poor, hardworking black men dry despite them TrYiNg ThEiR hArdEsT
It's classic narcissist behaviour. My friend's nvm never paid a dollar of child support, but gave a huge sum of cash to the kids on their 21st birthday. Scrote looks like a hero, mum looks bad for raising an objection.
Kids also enjoy living in a home with heat in the winter. Food in the fridge. A safe neighbourhood. After school activities. The list goes on. Big ticket items are a cop out
Men who don't pay child support to help support their own child are the lowest of the low.
I’m not entirely against this if a “deadbeat” dad pays for “big ticket” items in full in lieu of the full court ordered amount, like daycare/school/college tuition, health insurance/medical bills/medications, travel expenses, etc.. But I do get the point as well.