Why is that men abandoning/not supporting their children is not taboo?

[CrapolaDeVille]

I was wondering this as I drove home today. When I was 19 I met a guy, at a mates house, who was in his early thirties with 5 children and three different mothers, he was single. Bleating on about how being a father wasn't for him, I did not hide my contempt and told him that if 'fatherhood' wasn't for him perhaps he should embrace 'condomhood' (I was very proud of this pun). He seemed to think it was okay to have kids and walk away as they were better off w/o him, as if that made him some sort of hero.

When did it become okay not to 'man up'? Is it just because women who have these children must all be slags and therefore these poor men haven't grown up and can't be responsible? (obviously not my opinion)

Go to your local pub on a Friday 5pm, it's not full of mothers.

How many people on here would be keen on 50-50 residency?

i want 50-50 residency.

My DH has residency. It took 5 years of court battles

I was recently persuaded on here that 50/50 residency is perfectly fine, assuming 50/50 parenting up to that point and that it wouldn't be too difficult for the children in terms of distances - the parents would both need to live near the school etc. And of course no abuse or anything on the part of either parent.

It would take a culture shift in workplaces for it to happen.

My suspicion is that many/most men, at the moment, wouldn't actually want this.

I think you need to change the culture and how society looks at things and workplaces and so on before you can really think about this properly.

I suppose my point is that 50/50 residency might be possible when society is 50/50 on everything else. And people are all behaving a bit more like grown ups.

basically we all need to turn scandinavian

Make 50-50 the standard (as it is in Scandanavia) no need for NRPs,CSA or maintenance.

wellnerfind my suspicion is that a lot of men wouldn't actually want it.

If most won't pay to look after them.
And lots don't see them or it is sporadic.
Why do you think they are going to be keen to have them live with them?

Do they get child benefit and tax credits in Canada?

SGM that sounds spot on IMO. except for teh maintenance part. why is maintenance being paid if care is shared?

I'm going to design a website where men can be named and shamed if they don't contribute to their children's upbringing, what do you think?

www.financiallyfecklessfathers.com www.fff.com

I probably operate in a very small social circle, but I can't think of a single person I know who would be indifferent to a man not supporting his children. On the contrary, I am certain they would disapprove quite strongly. Meanwhile, I have several female friends who are lone parents for most of the week, and they are not villified or stigmatised at all.

So I'm with Bennifer on this one.

Reality- you're happy for him to see the children and he just refuses?

why is that SGM if both parents incurr the same costs taht one should pay money to the other? and how is it worked out? say if one parent earnt £12,000pa and one earnt £100,000pa. how do they work out what should be paid? is tehre a threshold that the lower paid parent should be at financially?

We need to do what they do in Canada.

ah right. yes i can see how that is fair.

wow....I had no idea that Canada was soooo far ahead!!

crapola, i was thinking along the same lines re the pub. the dm castigating feckless fathers only serves to reinforce the idea that it's women's work.
'jim, you're fecking useless, you are. you want to be looking after them kids o' yourn. when was the last you saw 'em?'
'nah, that's wimmin's work, luv. men ain't cut out for it. gis another pint.'