OK...
...so I didn't go straight to bed. I found an article that I thought was interesting and I wanted to comment on it.
It dealt with unwed father's and their "rights" to the children that they father. Did you know that if a man father's a child, he has 30 days after the birth of the child to make it known that he wants to keep the baby himself if the mother doesn't want it? If he misses his opportunity, he loses his parental rights forever with no way what-so-ever to get his baby back. That rule applies to a man who doesn't even know that he fathered a child! I find that stunning.
Men are screwed every way they turn in this country when it comes to their rights as fathers. We demand that they pay child support and if they don't, we call them "deadbeat dads". We take away whatever licenses they may need to perform their jobs and we send them to jail if they don't pay. If they don't want anything to do with their child, we call them bums and other such nasty words. But when they DO want to be in their kids' lives, we do everything in our power to stop them. It just doesn't make sense and it harms the children EVERY SINGLE TIME!
If they find out, years later, that the child they've been paying for isn't theirs...they have absolutely no redress in court.
Yet, if the man wants to parent the baby and the mother doesn't, they're screwed. Only a total moron could possibly think that the way men are treated in this arena is fair.
The article that I read stated:
"Unwed fathers who contest adoptions are often faulted for not taking affirmative steps to find out about the child's existence, and in some cases are blamed even if they were actively deceived by the mother. Often, they're suspected of being abusers whose real hidden motive is to control the mother."
That's the truth, men are ALWAYS suspect when they do anything that a woman doesn't like. The men who do try to do the decent thing are almost always accused of some hideous offense and when they fight back, they rarely win.
Decent, thoughtful women would agree with me. Only a nutty broad would think that a child would be better off with a strange couple than with a father who loves the child. If a woman doesn't want her baby and chooses to give it away, what possible reason could she have for not letting the father raise the kid? There is NO rational reason to keep a decent man from his child. Only a wench from hell would be selfish enough to use her child as a weapon with which to hurt the father.
I think that men should be able to file a one time petition with the court system that states that they would never, under any circumstances, agree to terminate their parental rights. Then, a deceptive woman couldn't give the child away without his permission.
That way, no adoption agency in the world would even consider finding a home for a kid without the father's permission and you wouldn't have those dreadful cases where the kid ends up in the middle of a tug-of-war between the adoptive parents and the father.
As a child of a decent man myself, I would have preferred that my father himself be in my life over him sending cash. Our priorities in this country are totally ascew.
Read the rest of this enlightening article at:
http://www.fathers-resources.com/Default.aspx?tabid=581&EntryID=2348
OK...NOW I am going to try to go to sleep.
See ya in the morning!
Meg
...so I didn't go straight to bed. I found an article that I thought was interesting and I wanted to comment on it.
It dealt with unwed father's and their "rights" to the children that they father. Did you know that if a man father's a child, he has 30 days after the birth of the child to make it known that he wants to keep the baby himself if the mother doesn't want it? If he misses his opportunity, he loses his parental rights forever with no way what-so-ever to get his baby back. That rule applies to a man who doesn't even know that he fathered a child! I find that stunning.
Men are screwed every way they turn in this country when it comes to their rights as fathers. We demand that they pay child support and if they don't, we call them "deadbeat dads". We take away whatever licenses they may need to perform their jobs and we send them to jail if they don't pay. If they don't want anything to do with their child, we call them bums and other such nasty words. But when they DO want to be in their kids' lives, we do everything in our power to stop them. It just doesn't make sense and it harms the children EVERY SINGLE TIME!
If they find out, years later, that the child they've been paying for isn't theirs...they have absolutely no redress in court.
Yet, if the man wants to parent the baby and the mother doesn't, they're screwed. Only a total moron could possibly think that the way men are treated in this arena is fair.
The article that I read stated:
"Unwed fathers who contest adoptions are often faulted for not taking affirmative steps to find out about the child's existence, and in some cases are blamed even if they were actively deceived by the mother. Often, they're suspected of being abusers whose real hidden motive is to control the mother."
That's the truth, men are ALWAYS suspect when they do anything that a woman doesn't like. The men who do try to do the decent thing are almost always accused of some hideous offense and when they fight back, they rarely win.
Decent, thoughtful women would agree with me. Only a nutty broad would think that a child would be better off with a strange couple than with a father who loves the child. If a woman doesn't want her baby and chooses to give it away, what possible reason could she have for not letting the father raise the kid? There is NO rational reason to keep a decent man from his child. Only a wench from hell would be selfish enough to use her child as a weapon with which to hurt the father.
I think that men should be able to file a one time petition with the court system that states that they would never, under any circumstances, agree to terminate their parental rights. Then, a deceptive woman couldn't give the child away without his permission.
That way, no adoption agency in the world would even consider finding a home for a kid without the father's permission and you wouldn't have those dreadful cases where the kid ends up in the middle of a tug-of-war between the adoptive parents and the father.
As a child of a decent man myself, I would have preferred that my father himself be in my life over him sending cash. Our priorities in this country are totally ascew.
Read the rest of this enlightening article at:
http://www.fathers-resources.com/Default.aspx?tabid=581&EntryID=2348
OK...NOW I am going to try to go to sleep.
See ya in the morning!
Meg
posted by Meg Kelso | 9:06 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home