(February 25, 2020 at 10:58 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:(February 24, 2020 at 11:00 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: Well, I think it's unethical for a government to force a father to pay alimentation. Unless the father stole the money from the mother. The father might have legitimate reasons for refusing to pay. Maybe he needs that money more than the mother does, maybe he needs that money to pay for his medication which he will die if he doesn't manage to pay. The government can't be expected to always have the information it needs to make such decisions.
All those are the kinds of things family courts routinely make decisions about; and if the father doesn't make the court aware of the relevant information, that's hardly the court's fault. Maybe where you're from the father must pay child support if he's penniless and at death's door but in these parts the courts will make allowances for the father's situation; and the mother's as well; not all women need child support to meet their child's needs.
My guess Klorophyll is from a country where, as a man, all he has to do to abdicate all parental responsibility is to face Mecca and shout "I divorce you!" three times.
Assuming he's married to the mother of his children, that is. If not all he has to do is denounce her as a whore.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home