Man refuses to pay child support for prostitute's child

[Nyoibo]

um no he's a scumbag because he cheated on his wife,

And while I'm at it, let's talk about the "dipping his wick" statement. The guy's wife did not agree to have sex with a guy who fucks skanky (and I'm sorry, you fuck strange guys for a living and are too low to even make them wear a rubber, you're a skank.) whores on the sly and then comes home and brings God knows what into her marriage bed. She's under the impression that the man is clean, and she should be able to assume that. Yet she can't. He's putting her LIFE in danger, and not disclosing what he's doing. Talk about a breech of contract.

I'm going to bring something up here that no one seems to have thought about, who says he was cheating? His wife may well have known what he was doing, may have even agreed to it, just because he's married does not mean that he's cheating sleeping with someone else.

Dr Fahrook, it seems that you are placing all of the blame on the woman.

I saw it as a response to others seeming to place all of the blame on the man.

Guess what 9 times out of 10 the man can just walk away and sign a monthly check while the woman has to deal with all the parenting responsibilities

The woman doesn't have to deal with all the parenting responsibilities, she has the option of abortion, or after the child is born, adoption, the woman can walk away as well, both parties have that option.

Yeah because the $100-$400 a month she's getting to SUPPORT THE CHILD is totally enough for her to just sit around and do nothing but par-tay all the time(that's barely enough for diapers and formula).

The $400 a month ,plus the $1139.60 a month single parent payment, plus the $5,185 baby bonus, yes it is enough to sit around and "par-tay" there are a lot of women who do it.

[smileyeagle1021]

I'm going to bring something up here that no one seems to have thought about, who says he was cheating? His wife may well have known what he was doing, may have even agreed to it, just because he's married does not mean that he's cheating sleeping with someone else.
.

a very good point... hell, I know my boyfriend and I have a list of people (granted most of them celebrities), that if either of us had the opportunity to sleep with, we could do without worry of it being considered cheating. Granted, the odds of me winding up in bed with Zachary Quinto, Chris Pine, or Anton Yelchin are about up there with me being able to set foot on Mars... but if it did happen there'd not be any hard feelings (well, a little bit of jealousy over actually being able to take advantage of the agreement, but no hard feelings over the agreement itself).
So yes, it is entirely possible, especially considering his wife was sick, that his wife knew of and agreed to him doing this.

[DrFaroohk]

I suggest getting a snip snip because you don't seem like fatherly material anyway.

Yeah no shit huh? I've tried explaining that to two women now who just ignored me and said "I'm gonna do what I wanna do." Now I'm a miserable fuck. Every morning I just lay in bed wondering if I want to actually get up and feed the baby or go in the bathroom and slash my wrists. So far the baby has been winning, but I'm living in my own personal hell every day.

And every day I keep it all in! I come here and vent it out, but I'm all smiles to my wife and kids, I pretend I'm sooooo happy with them and I guess I do a pretty good job of fooling everyone while a little piece of me dies inside every day. I'm sure kids are a wonderful thing for people who were actively seeking them. As for mine I expect one day they'll walk into the bathroom and find me cozying up to the toaster.

But hey, I'm still here doing my part for right now! I suppose it's easy for a father to take care of his kids if he's really thrilled and happy he's got them. I should get father of the year award for my performances.

[SteverinoNY!]

If raising your children is such a miserable thing, why not just take the coward's way out and walk out on them. It would make their lives easier I am sure. You may put on a good front for the kids, but they know that you are faking your way through loving them. Hand the kids back to the women you chose to have sex with without using the proper precautions and cut them a check every month because that would be better than faking your way through fatherhood.

This applies to any man...if you aren't 100% invested in your children and willing to put them before you, don't be a father and wrap it up so that does not happen

[RecoveringKinkoid]

DrFaroohk-I really don't know what sort of advice anyone could possibly give you at this point.

You're complaining the women in your life "do what they are gonna do" and how selfish they are. Do you not realize you're doing exactly the same thing? I understand how you and your partner might make a mistake, have a lapse in judgment and maturity, and get yourself into a situation that overwhelms you. I get that. It happens.

But am I understanding you that you let it happen twice?

And in the same thread say that "wearing a condom is not an option for you?"

Dude. C'mon. Listen, I am really, really sorry that your life sucks and that you are very unhappy. But you have to understand that you are responsible for this. You come here and vent, and that's cool, there's nothing wrong with that, especially if it allows you to keep your cool with your family. But I have to tell you, your talking like it was something that was done TO you, instead of something you did to yourself is a little hard to swallow and remain sympathetic to.

So wearing a condom is not an option for you. However, according to your own posts, these ARE acceptable options for you:

1. The woman you claim you love is subject to a medical procedure that may produce traumatic consequences both physically and emotionally. You made a tasteless joke about a coat hanger. I'm sure you didn't mean that literally, however, you're talking on some level about your wife.

2. Your life becomes filled with multiple children you neither want nor are equipt to take care of.

3. You are miserable, bitter, angry, and depressed.

4. Abortion is to be used as contraceptive. Which is okay, because it's not your body being operated on.

5, Your children grow up unwanted in their home.

All these awful things are acceptable to you, but simply rolling on a rubber for a little while during sex is not. And apparently, neither is a vasectomy.

Why? Seriously. This is something I want to know.

[DesignFox]

I'd say fine the prostitute not the brothel, it would have been a private thing.

That sounds like a good middle ground.

And why is everyone saying this guys a scumbag all the time, just because he visited a hooker?

Because he's married.

This guy neither remained faithful to his wife, nor did he prevent passing disease to her (and by extension any children they may have later). Even if she agreed to let him see a whore, he still didn't think of his family first. His actions resulted in another child, which will now take resources away from his family AND he put his wife at risk for disease.

He's a scumbag.

Personally, while I'm not arguing that it's possible, I find it HIGHLY unlikely that his wife would consent to this. But, that could be because I would NEVER consent to my partner sleeping around, let alone with a woman whose vagina is a revolving door.

[BroomJockey]

a woman whose vagina is a revolving door.

Off-topic: The mental image from this was hilarious, until I considered the painful logistics. *wince*

[AFPheonix]

Personally, while I'm not arguing that it's possible, I find it HIGHLY unlikely that his wife would consent to this. But, that could be because I would NEVER consent to my partner sleeping around, let alone with a woman whose vagina is a revolving door.

There are people in open relationships, but usually people that are care enough about their partner that they take precautions when they're out and about. Like, say, condoms.

Regardless of who's "fault" it is, the kid's here now. Since he was the sperm donor he gets to take up his portion of responsibility. He has been doing so up until this point anyways. Why the two didn't negotiate terms of child support better when he was low on money is beyond me. I guess I shouldn't really be too surprised though.

[BlaqueKatt]

The woman doesn't have to deal with all the parenting responsibilities, she has the option of abortion, or after the child is born, adoption, the woman can walk away as well, both parties have that option.

Abortion is not an option if
1. you can't afford it(pretty expensive here and no insurance covers it even if it's for medical reasons)
2. the child is already born or you're past the first trimester.
Sure put them in foster care and hope they get adopted-let the taxpayers support them.

The $400 a month ,plus the $1139.60 a month single parent payment, plus the $5,185 baby bonus, yes it is enough to sit around and "par-tay" there are a lot of women who do it.

We don't have that in the states.

All these awful things are acceptable to you, but simply rolling on a rubber for a little while during sex is not. And apparently, neither is a vasectomy.

Why? Seriously. This is something I want to know.

And don't even try to claim "latex Allergy"-Using a latex condom could kill me-guess what they now make several different types of non-latex condoms-last count it was around 5-6 different types. Just as effective.

Heck a vasectomy is an outpatient procedure done not in a hospital or surgical suite-but in a regular plain old doctor's office in usually under 20 minutes.

[McDreidel09]

The $400 a month ,plus the $1139.60 a month single parent payment, plus the $5,185 baby bonus, yes it is enough to sit around and "par-tay" there are a lot of women who do it.

Would be nice if my mother received such money. It's definitely not in the states.

Since this did happen in the states, the $100-$400 she gets a month wouldn't really be adequate to fully support a child, but it helps.

[Nyoibo]

We don't have that in the states.

Would be nice if my mother received such money. It's definitely not in the states.

Since this did happen in the states, the $100-$400 she gets a month wouldn't really be adequate to fully support a child, but it helps.

The reason I brought this up is because it happened in Melbourne, so she is elligable for all those benifits.

Also the STD thing is being thrown around alot, there would have been a reasonable assumption that she was clean given her work, to work in a legal brothel you have to have regular STD checks.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

You're right. And also, I'd like to mention that I didn't even know I was pregnant for three months. That's the whole first trimester, right there. I felt like a real dolt, but I have heard of other women who went even longer before they clued in. My symptoms were not severe. So you could find yourself extremely pregnant, irreversably pregnant, before even knowing it.

As for the vasectomy, yeah. I had a young friend have it done. Outpatient. I'm the one picked him up from the docs, got his meds for him, and took him home. He went in in the AM and was out well before lunchtime.

As for adoption....well...I was shocked to discover, some years ago, that there is an entire city of kids with no families living in the middle of town at the Children's Home. I had no idea how many children grow up without homes or families until I saw this place. And that wasn't the only such place in town.

[BroomJockey]

Since this did happen in the states,

it happened in Melbourne,

Just reinforcing the "It was Australia," bit. Carry on.

[BlaqueKatt]

As for the vasectomy, yeah. I had a young friend have it done. Outpatient. I'm the one picked him up from the docs, got his meds for him, and took him home. He went in in the AM and was out well before lunchtime.

It's also done under a local anesthetic(very low risk), as opposed to a general(which can kill you) for a tubal.


and sadly my latex allergy is bad enough I cannot enter a shoe store(too much latex in the air), be anywhere near balloons, or even so much as touch an open banana peel or I start going into anaphylaxis-it's level 5 and the scale for allergies only goes to level 6-I get to carry an epi-pen just in case(got a fun trip to the ER once when I put on a non latex free band-aid-within less than a minute my arm was red and swelling to my shoulder and the band-aid was on my finger)

[Slytovhand]

Firstly, Nyoibo - GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!! You keep coming up with the exact same arguments and thought patterns I do... and post them before I get a chance!!

Anyway.. Yes, a) who's to say the wife didn't know? After all, there are wives who will willing go out and abduct people for their male partners desire to rape and murder people, so there's no really reason to automatically assume that she didn't know, let alone condone (or even suggest) that he see a prostitute. After all, if she is ill, and the sex bond just isn't there for her, seeing a hooker is an obvious way out (if he's got such a sex drive - particularly if his is strong, and her's isn't, I can easily see her making that suggestion...).

Condom? Given that not wearing one is illegal, perhaps we can assume he was wearing one, and it failed??? Just a thought...

I'd also like to address something that was said a lot earlier, that her profession doesn't (or shouldn't) have anything to do with this. I disagree. We have a thread about what police should and shouldn't do, given various situations. Why should those situations (and what they do) be dependant on the fact that it's their profession? Should a police officer risk their lives when an ordinary citizen shouldn't? "Because they're trained to..." I hear... yes - precisely! I would suggest that, as part of her profession, it was her responsibility to ensure she didn't get pregnant, nor to catch any diseases... If she catches a disease, it is her responsibility to do something about it such that no-one else falls victim to it. Same for pregnancy. All jobs have an inherent risk, and this risk is to be borne by the person who chooses to enter into that profession, not the rest of the world.

In seeing a prostitute, there is a contract (verbal, after all, won't it be great to have everyone fill out a consent form before hand! Or mouth, or... ok, bad joke). Part of that agreement is that the prostitute is taking complete responsibility for what happens afterwards.

This situation is not the same as a relationship (be it long-term or one-night stand). It's a business transaction, therefore, it should be treated as such.

As for her having to support the child, does anyone here have any ideas just how much a prostitute makes??? A hell of a lot more than I do, and for a lot less work! It could be a lot higher than his at this stage! Especially with all the benefits that child support in this country offers - 5 hours 'work' (at, let's say $200/hr), plus $1396/month single parent, plus $5000 baby bonus, plus tax breaks... yep - well above what I'm on! (should anyone now wish to introduce an argument such as "Yes, but look at the risks she faces", isn't that what we're now discussing???)

Prostitute didn't have a choice in an abortion??? So, WTF is she doing being a prostitute??? That makes no sense to me whatsoever! Didn't know she was pregnant? So... prostitutes don't have regular tests for such things?

So, question to those who think the guy is a scumbag... if a guy and a girl get together, have a full length discussion on the topic of children and both say categorically that children are not part of the agreement, and that should it become an issue, she will 'deal with it' (in whatever form). And then, they have sex using all available resources for contraception, and then she still gets pregnant, what then if she decides to go against the original agreement and keep the child to raise herself? Tough bikkies matey, you're a dad now, suck it up and deal with it?

I'm going to suggest that the prostitute had an opportunity to take her level of responsibility, her's alone due to the profession she chose to undertake, and she chose not to do so... and in this case, it's a 'professional' choice.

I would like to suggest something that some may see as harsh.... the quality of the child's life is not automatically more important than that of either of the other 2 people involved in the relationship! Should the child's life state be such that it causes irreperable damage to either of the parents? Physically or mentally? I'm going to say 'no', as I've been on the receiving end of how that ends up! Parent alive but not around is better than parent 'curled up with a toaster'. Yes, it is a fact of life, everyone has a breaking point - do we really have the 'right' to judge where that should be for everyone else?