Grok On men's right to know paternity

None of this involves contract law.

"A picture valid for most modern jurisdictions, common and civil law alike.

First, it is good to understand that the child support is owed to the child and not to their mother.

It may be the mother who manages the child support, but it is clear that the mother manages the funds as an implied trustee of a child and not as a beneficiary.

There are cases when both genetic parents are forced to pay child support for a child born by a surrogate mother and even more cases when the mother is forced to pay child support to a child who lives with the father.

The whole idea of the child support stems from the fact that the child is not an object owned by its parents, but a separate human being and even a citizen with its own rights, including, but not limited to, the right to get an adequate and responsible parental care until their adulthood.

The moment when the child becomes a human being with its own rights varies by jurisdiction and is either the moment of birth, the moment of conception or some other point in between.

The responsible parenting is owed by both parents and the obligation cannot be contractually altered or transferred to other parties because it does not emerge from a contract in the first place. The existence of a child alone implies the obligation.

This is much like the taxes - you owe them, period.

The rights of the child are legally protected to a higher extent and with a higher priority than almost whatever other rights the parents may have. This is because the child is considered a vulnerable member of the society.

The question of the intent (or lack thereof) of conceiving a child is so much minor in this context that it is almost never considered in the court proceedings.

This is a profound contrast to the penal proceedings where the intent is a central point. Being a parent is not a crime in itself, so the intent is not important. You are either a parent, or not - and the possible intent is only good as long as it helps determining your status as a parent.

The parenting obligation can be transferred by other means, e.g. by adoption, but the whole adoption concept is also shaped around the interests and the rights of the child.


In regard to the "consensual sex":

The traditional view of this thing is that both men and women engage in sexual intercourse with the clear knowledge that a conception is a possible outcome. Yes, it implies a great level of trust between the partners.

As much traditional is the understanding that a woman cannot escape the parental obligations, but a man can - because he can plausibly deny the fathership.

This possibility has never been a "men's right" in the first place, it was just that - a possibility to avoid fulfilling a legal and moral obligation.

It is no more that much easy because of the technological and the social advance and not because something happened to the "men's rights".

It is also not much of a discrimination - the obligation is for both parents and this was never really disputed.

It absolutely involves contract law.

Contract law is a body of law that governs, enforces, and interprets agreements related to an exchange of goods, services, properties, or money. According to contract law, an agreement made between two or more people or business entities, in which there is a promise to do something in return for a gain or advantage, is legally binding. Contract law is the center of many business dealings, and anyone entering into a contract should that failing to abide by the contract, even by mistake, could result in serious problems. To explore this concept, consider the following contract law definition

Two parties, a man and a woman, agree to have sexual relations. Both are aware of what the outcome of that might be. If the woman gets pregnant, then the man, a party to that happening, has an equal say in the outcome of that pregnancy. That would include paying an equal part for the cost of an abortion or for the birth of the child. Both are equally responsible from conception to age of majority (18).

If that is not the case, and the man is simply a sperm donor, and the woman has full say on what occurs if a pregnancy results, then the child is hers, and hers alone, from conception to age of majority.

That is how is should be. The current system operates in favor only the woman and ignores the rights of the man entirely.
 
It absolutely involves contract law.

Contract law is a body of law that governs, enforces, and interprets agreements related to an exchange of goods, services, properties, or money. According to contract law, an agreement made between two or more people or business entities, in which there is a promise to do something in return for a gain or advantage, is legally binding. Contract law is the center of many business dealings, and anyone entering into a contract should that failing to abide by the contract, even by mistake, could result in serious problems. To explore this concept, consider the following contract law definition

Two parties, a man and a woman, agree to have sexual relations. Both are aware of what the outcome of that might be. If the woman gets pregnant, then the man, a party to that happening, has an equal say in the outcome of that pregnancy. That would include paying an equal part for the cost of an abortion or for the birth of the child. Both are equally responsible from conception to age of majority (18).

If that is not the case, and the man is simply a sperm donor, and the woman has full say on what occurs if a pregnancy results, then the child is hers, and hers alone, from conception to age of majority.

That is how is should be. The current system operates in favor only the woman and ignores the rights of the man entirely.
Thanks but I'll take the word of legal experts about pregnancy, not business.

Is it true that men are forced to pay child support for children they didn't consent to having?
"Yes. This is true in every U.S. jurisdiction, in the U.K., and in every jurisdiction of which I am aware in the E.U., and it is the rule in many other jurisdictions.

The duty to pay child support in these jurisdictions flows from the relationship between the father and the child, and is not a contractual concept based upon consent."
 
@T. A. Gardner

"Yes, contract law can apply to child support in certain situations, but it’s not the full story. Child support is primarily governed by family law, which varies by jurisdiction (like state laws in the U.S. or national laws elsewhere). Courts typically determine child support based on statutory guidelines that consider factors like income, custody arrangements, and the child’s needs—not a contract.

However, contract law comes into play if parents negotiate a private agreement about child support, like in a prenup, separation agreement, or settlement. If both parties agree to terms (e.g., a fixed monthly amount) and it’s legally binding—meaning there’s offer, acceptance, consideration, and mutual intent—it can function as a contract. Courts might enforce it, but here’s the catch: they can override it if it doesn’t meet the child’s best interests or comply with mandatory guidelines. For example, in the U.S., states like California or New York have laws ensuring child support aligns with a minimum standard, regardless of what parents agree to privately.

So, while contract law can be involved, family law usually has the final say to protect the kid. If you’ve got a specific case or jurisdiction in mind, I can dig deeper!"

Grok
 
@T. A. Gardner

"Yes, contract law can apply to child support in certain situations, but it’s not the full story. Child support is primarily governed by family law, which varies by jurisdiction (like state laws in the U.S. or national laws elsewhere). Courts typically determine child support based on statutory guidelines that consider factors like income, custody arrangements, and the child’s needs—not a contract.

However, contract law comes into play if parents negotiate a private agreement about child support, like in a prenup, separation agreement, or settlement. If both parties agree to terms (e.g., a fixed monthly amount) and it’s legally binding—meaning there’s offer, acceptance, consideration, and mutual intent—it can function as a contract. Courts might enforce it, but here’s the catch: they can override it if it doesn’t meet the child’s best interests or comply with mandatory guidelines. For example, in the U.S., states like California or New York have laws ensuring child support aligns with a minimum standard, regardless of what parents agree to privately.

So, while contract law can be involved, family law usually has the final say to protect the kid. If you’ve got a specific case or jurisdiction in mind, I can dig deeper!"

Grok
Can you grasp the difference between the system in place and an argument for a different system in its place?
 
When I read your posts, all I can think of is that either you or someone close to you got screwed over by a "dishonest" woman, and now you believe that all most women are evil. All Most women now have to take the blame for someone's experience that they're not responsible for.

No man or woman has to "settle." There are legal ways to get out of this predicament and I'm sure they're not cheap but better than the alternative.
when I read your posts, all I can think of is that either you or someone close to you got screwed over by a 'dishonest' man, and now you believe that all/most men are evil. All/Most men now have to take the blame for someones experience that they're not responsible for.
 
This is beating a dead horse but if both parties didn't use BC, why should the woman have all the responsibility if she doesn't want an abortion, while the man gets to walk away scot-free? It's axiomatic that unprotected sex can result in a pregnancy. Both may want to gamble that it won't happen but that's foolhardy. It's not equality for the man to walk away when he was a willing participant in the sex that resulted in an unplanned pregnancy.
the man does not get to walk away scot free. That's a delusional fantasy you've concocted.
 
Yeah I know it's all about the money for men. Forget that the child he helped to create has 50% of his genetic material. Forget that the woman will spend the next 18 years being the sole caregiver and provider for that man's child.

Just find every way you can to put the onus of the pregnancy on the woman alone.
nobody is doing that, despite your insistence that they are.
 
And men respond...

63e87e44ec3c4.image.jpg


"The house is all yours, BITCH!"
but in reality, the men are legally fucked.

while simps defend it.

tradcons are also gynocentric nutless cucks.
 
Back
Top