Comment 8 for bug 449265

Hey friend,

I've just read an article about some nice stuff, what do you think about it? You may read the article here http://more.localstalk.co

Best regards, Massimo Marra

From: Bug 449265 [mailto:<email address hidden>]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 3:21 PM
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: I'd do this too.

Regarding the restraining order thing, I would think that would be unnecessary. Surely the kind of person who financially aborts has no interest in being a father.

A restraining order just create issues and complicates what would otherwise be a very simple process. For example, consider the case of someone who has sex with someone, financially aborts, and then in a few years, has children of his own. His children could end up going to the same school as the kid he has a restraining order against, which obviously causes issues.

Besides, what would we need a restraining order for? The guy is not a threat or anything. He just doesn't want to pay for the kid. That's not what restraining orders are for.

If the guy ends up being a crazy stalker, sure, get a restraining order then, but that's completely unrelated from the fact that he financially aborted.

Of course, there's the issue of when the father "financially aborts" but stays with the family (ie, just saying that he doesn't want to pay child support if he ever leaves) which could be handled in the same way that we already do: child support is dependent on whether or not you support the child. It's not automatically given and would have to be requested if either parent decides to stop supporting the child. And presumably if the family gets back together, the child support payments would stop. This requires a court system with some discretion, which seems like a challenge (okay, that was a bit snarky, but we can't deny that the courts can be extremely inconsistent), but not unbelievable.

As an aside, a complete alternative could be to use basic income here. You may be familiar with that (if not, checkout /r/basicincome). It usually covers adults, but could easily cover children, too. The children's pay could be given to the parents until they child becomes an adult and could be appropriately chosen so that it's always enough to raise the child. I don't consider people having many children to get money to be an issue since child support already exists and the basic income would only be enough to raise a child and not significantly such that you could become rich from it.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10