To be completely honest, something has to be done about men who have children with multiple women without any means to take care of them. I’m sure the chances of those children ending up in bad situations later on in life sky rockets when you have an absentee parent who compounds the mistake by not providing any financial help too. And yes, I do place some of the blame on the woman who has children with this type of man because it takes two people to conceive a child and as an adult you should be able to see a pattern – meaning baby mama #3 and on should know what to expect. However, generally speaking I think that something has to be done about this epidemic. Especially when a man, or anyone for that matter, shows that they intend on having more children they cannot provide for adequately.
That’s why when I heard a story about a judge ordering man to pay back $100K in child support before fathering another child, I applauded that judge for his candor. And moreover, I think the claim that it’s unconstitutional to stop a man from procreating is complete bull on so many levels. Let’s think about it, you don’t have to go far to see that the very document declaring our independence says that everyone is entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Therefore, when you bring a child into this world that you can’t take care of, you’re stripping away that child’s inalienable rights. How can that possibly be constitutional at all?
See more at SBM’s weekly column at MadameNoire.
Somebody has to do something, I agree with the judge and explained why in the second half of my post. What do you all think? Do you think that’s too far or setting a dangerous precedent? Also, should the same be done to women who have children without the means to care for them?