Single Mother Hot Patato

[D]

It seems to me, in my locality, that a lot of single moms are finding it difficult once again to find a man.

It's not so much the women's attractiveness, or anything like that.  It's not even so much that she has a kid.  Rather it's the fact that the new man could be held responsible for that kid if the relationship should end.

He's not the father but if he lives with her long enough she can go after him for child support.  Even if she is getting child support from  another man already.  Possibly even two or three men could be paying on a child that isn't their's simply because they at one time had a relationship with her.  

So basically what's happening is these guys are treating these girls to a quickie but when it comes to longterm relationship stuff she's the hot patato.

[D]

I even meant to call it a 'syndrome'.  I forgot.  :?

[Setaseba]

I can relate. A buddy of mine is in exactly that predicament. She's demanding support for 2 daughters (who hated his guts btw) that aren't his and will likely get it. All because he shacked up with her for a while. What blows me away is that most guys aren't even aware of this stuff until it happens to them. At least it seems that way since men are dropping like flies. It doesn't seem to matter how great the woman is at the beginning of the relationship - it can always go sour and she's allowed to beat him to death financially.

What gets me is the guys who do it over and over again like masochists. Bizarre. :shock:

[Galt]

I think (but I'm not absolutely sure, and I'm too lazy to look it up) that California is one of the states in which you can be required to pay child support if you form a sufficiently close bond with the mother.  Keep in mind that this has nothing to do with it being your biological child, or even being married to the woman while she has a child from another man (that's absolutely the case in many states like Pennsylvania, for instance).

Utterly bizarre that it has gone this far.  The states need money, and pretty soon some may make a law that if you exchange more that 5 words with her, you are on the hook for support for her children.

[Daymar]

That's crazy. I didn't even know about that. Who are these morons that are allowing these laws to be passed?

[bluegrass]

I don't think there are any laws connected to it.  I think it's probably precedent set by judicial activism.

[Sir Jessy of Anti]

It's not so much the women's attractiveness, or anything like that.  It's not even so much that she has a kid.  Rather it's the fact that the new man could be held responsible for that kid if the relationship should end.

Absolutely Dan, absolutely!  The recent ruling in Manitoba which held a woman's boyfriend (of 3 years) responsible for another man's child [because the biological father was poor(er)] greatly reinforces this point.  

Many of my single, successful friends will maybe date a SM, but will not under any circumstances co-habitate or take the relationship any further than dating, out of fear that Big Mother will appropriate his property should she deem fit.   For my part, I have only ever dated one SM, and that stopped when she tried to manipulate me by using her darling child.
I could tell when I was coming over that she had hyped my arrival to this poor little girl who was missing a father figure *badly*.  I would have loved to have provided this to her, but when I saw what she was doing I knew it was time to head out.

[nebulousone]

I think (but I'm not absolutely sure, and I'm too lazy to look it up) that California is one of the states in which you can be required to pay child support if you form a sufficiently close bond with the mother. Keep in mind that this has nothing to do with it being your biological child, or even being married to the woman while she has a child from another man (that's absolutely the case in many states like Pennsylvania, for instance)

It's true-if the man is named on the bc, he's held resposible even if DNA tests prove otherwise.

Here are some links:


http://www.glennsacks.com/california_governor_davis.htm

http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2002/1029a.html

http://www.ancpr.org/paternity_fraud_bill_in__califor.htm

[Sir Jessy of Anti]

In some places, even if he isn't  on the BC, isn't the bio-dad, but has lived with the mother he can be found liable as well.

[Galt]

<<In some places, even if he isn't on the BC, isn't the bio-dad, but has lived with the mother he can be found liable as well.>>

It really kind of gets unbelievable in my book.

[Sir Jessy of Anti]

No shit!  God help us all...

[D]

I'm not even talking about whose on the birth certificate, or of paternaty fraud.  I'm talking, about for example,  a 25 year old women with a 5 year old child with unmarried/divorced etc... who starts dating a new guy.  The new guy is well aware of the fact he's not the father.  The relationship disolves in about 2 years and even though the birth father is paying child support she decides the her last boyfriend should have to be too.

That means two men are paying for one child.  This happens a lot.  Guys are waking up to it and are afriad to commit to women with children based on this.  Now this doesn't mean every women will do this, but as it's been shown things change.  So the single mom, of no real fault of her own, only by designation of what she is, is now the 'hot patato'.  Nobody wants her.  Making her desperate, impovershed etc....  Which is why the government now has such a concern of children living in poverty.  And no doubt the children they are referring to are with single moms who are unable to really bring in a substantial incom.

[Galt]

<<Making her desperate, impovershed etc....>>

I have a relative who has custody of two school-age children from his ex-marriage.  He's doing fairly well financially, and the kids seem to be doing quite well.  Perish the thought of work.

[D]

Ya.

I can tell you where many of these women end up working though.  Strip clubs, massage parlours, and a host of other places.

But on that note, it still looks like they are their own worst enemies in the gender war issue.  I believe more and more that the reason why things are they way they are in regards to conservative values is because everything else was tried and it works the best.  

Having children should not be taken lightly.  Man works, women stays home for the kids.  

But this 'child poverty' which is big right now here, is so totally communist it's funny.  And they completly mislead people as to how it comes about.   But it is a result of divorced families, single parenting etc....

[Daymar]

The reason they were the way they were is because that's how things fell into place naturally. Over time cultural values were developed and that's where the conservative stand point came from. These days there's so much excess that nothing is life threatening like it used to be so it allows for improper usage of the excess.