Home Fatherhood What Can We Do To Stop Men Who Don’t Pay Child Support?

What Can We Do To Stop Men Who Don’t Pay Child Support?



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.

See Also:  How Being Tactful Helps and Hinders Life

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?


  1. If it CAN be scary in Florida, then it IS scary now in Ohio.

    Regardless of the circumstances, you can’t stop any America human
    from creating. This aint China.

    As I agree with your premise of ratchet dudes and women who
    have kids in a less than ideal sitchu, this judge is on some BS. 100k fine?
    Cool. Jail? Cool. Community service? Cool. This ish? Nope.

    “you’re stripping away that child’s inalienable rights.”

    You are reaching. Inalienable rights don’t fit here. WTF are you talking about? How does not having a functional parent effect inalienable rights? At best we can say that the child gets a bad head start. But, everyone from Kevin Durant to a steel mill worker (raised by a single parent) kills that argument.

    Just because we don’t like this guy doesn’t mean that we should go for this far reaching Ohio BS. Oh BTW, this could’ve been done to a white man but it wasn’t. Show me the white guy first, if not, than this is just a ploy to get votes from people who think that this is all that black men do.

    Hell naw I don’t support that!

      1. I think that the $100k fine, albeit dramatic, at least has a
        legal basis. Jail? Well, I don’t agree but that’s the law too, so I can live
        with that.

        If this post was “tongue in cheek”, then I apologize for
        overreacting. If this post was meant to start a male vs. female, “who’s more
        responsible”, or “males have an unfair disadvantage in child support”, melee then
        I guess I missed the point.

        It is a more than slippery slope to start a legal precedent
        as to tell a minority, under any circumstance, that he/she cannot procreate. Is
        the partner an accomplice by law? Who, and how loosely, is the definition of “unfit
        to bring a child in the world”? While I share your disdain for deadbeat MFs, I’ll
        take no part in a ruling that could be used as a form of minority population

    1. Would you say that playing fields would be leaning closer towards being leveled if this kind of legislation were implemented? Yes, people achieve more than amazing things growing up in a household where a parent is a deadbeat, but the odds are so not in most kids’ favor. So, I think it does infringe upon their inalienable rights. Men and women who knowingly neglect their duties as parent, but continue to churn out babies, need to experience some real repercussions with very little ways to get around it. Some states garner wages and arrest guilty parties when they go to get their license. But, it’s too easy for people to get around those barriers and continue to not pay child support and have more kids.

      1. Mane, just because we don’t like him doesn’t mean that we should sign up for something that could be used later as minority population control.

        First you like it and you think it’s cute because this guy is an a-hole who might deserve it. Then they use that precedent to pull some ish that you get outraged about.

        Don’t say the Ghost Mane didn’t warn you.

    2. I don’t think there should be any punishment for having kids. Now if the kids get here and they are neglected with evidence to show, that’s a different story. I think the greater deterrent from irresponsible child rearing would be a decrease in government benefits.

  2. I think there should be a dead beat Dad/Mom registry. I think the registry should effect the ability to get a licence, purchase a car, fly, take trains, buses, or do anything fun, LOL. Jobs should be forced to check the registry after hiring an employee and alert the child support folks that the person is employed and start garnishing their checks. Employers should be fined heavily for employing these offenders under the table and failing to report them to the child support folks to have their checks garnished. And once you reach 4 kids, can’t prove employment/income, still get welfare, or owe a certain amount in child support, you should be forced to get your tubes tied or get a vasectomy (both are reversible if the circumstances change).
    …or something like that, lolol

    1. Cyn, in some states they have this, some do not. Plus since child support is regulated at the state legislative level, they can’t do anything once you leave the state. But please believe they garnish checks in some states. They also arrest people who go to renew their DL.

    2. Cyn your answer is the best one yet. I wholeheartedly agree with taking away the ability to obtain or renew a drivers license and registration on a vehicle.Not paying fines incurred affecting a persons credit negatively; which would inadvertently affect them being able to purchase big ticket items; like a home, car, motorcycle, and obtain credit and credit cards. I wonder how you would actually go about getting someone to forcibly have a vasectomy or get their tubes tied though? How would you prove the procedure was done? How would you protect hospitals and Dr.’s from potential liabilities, especially if something went wrong? A lot to think about.

    3. How can someone get a job to pay the child support and get out of deadbeat status with no license, no car, no ability to fly, take a train, or ride a bus? I don’t know where you live but where I live, you must have a license and reliable transportation in order to maintain gainful employment.

      1. Aside from the fact that most of these deadbeats have jobs/gfs, etc. and still don’t pay…
        …where I live, we have a reliable bus, subway, light rail, and metro service. Meaning, you can get wherever you need to go with the same money you bum for food, feet…and a good bus/train schedule. Ppl do it all day every day here. 😉

        1. Where I live, you must have a car. Most places in the United States you must have a car. Taking away someone’s license takes away a large portion of their ability to maintain gainful employment. You might as well skip the license revocation and lock them up straight away. The child support system is a total farce.

  3. Lol

    What about any religion that doesn’t believe in birth control? Child support is really just state assistance to the child. So is this a belief that any future child, who would be born receiving state assistance, doesn’t deserve to live?? So should anyone currently receiving assistance be put to death? Lol. Maybe it’s just better to do away with child support or any other type of assistance. Just a slippery slope imo. But I do understand the need to curb this trend or whatever.

      1. Yup. If the parent doesn’t pay, the child doesn’t get the money.
        Dolo may be confusing that with the welfare check which is different.

      2. you’re both right and both wrong. state does pay child support. but the non custodial parent pays the state then the state pays the custodial parent. if you dont pay child support, it goes on your credit report as you owing the state/commonwealth of (insert where you live)

        if you pay child support directly to the parent, it does not count as child support.

        also, lets not forget about how many (if not all?) states require that a single parent who files for government assistance must also place the non custodial parent on child support.

    1. No I know women on child support who receive money but the fathers still owe. Either way, this is still implying that these children don’t deserve to be born.

  4. This is setting a very dangerous precedent. This country has
    a history of forcing women who were deemed unfit or loose to have hysterectomies,while this is not the same it is too close for comfort. Unfortunately deadbeat mothers and fathers are not going anywhere. The mothers of his children were not forced to keep them (as opposed to adoption) and he was not forced to forgo protection. To say that a person can only have children if they can afford them can lead to class discrimination.

  5. I don’t think this is the answer. The responsibility lies with the parents. Or would-be parents. Stop having kids with irresponsible people. Why wait til after the fact? People are always pretending they didn’t know.

  6. This situation honestly requires a permanent fix, not just a band-aid or quick fix. Forcing someone to tie their tubes or get a vasectomy is just not realistically feasible in this country. That may work in other countries, but not in the good ole US of A. It would offset far too many frivolous lawsuits, as well as legitimate lawsuits should something happen. The first thing I’m seeing happen is Dr.’s and hospitals not agreeing to perform the surgeries for this very reason.
    What needs to happen is we need to start doing a much better job of mentoring young men and boys that we know personally. Sons, nephews, in the neighborhood, at church, friends children, god-children, etc etc etc.
    We have to do better with sex education and teaching young men the importance of abstinence and safe sex. The importance of education and pursuing dreams, passions, and goals. Instill in young boys the desire to have more to offer girls/women that just whats between their legs. Simply put, we all, as a “village” have to raise better boys to be better men.

  7. This is dumb. You stop the lower levels of the community from pro-creating, then the overall population decreases dramatically. They are the main ones having kids. The more intelligent, upwardly mobile people are shying away from having kids at all. Furthermore, you can’t legislate humanity like that. You are violating human rights.

    The solution to this problem is the upwardly mobile folks and the not-so-upwardly-mobile folks have to co-operate much more in daily walking life. The stark divide between “classes” in the black community leaves one side without the tools to function properly when it comes to raising kids … and the other side without the kids to raise.

    1. “The more intelligent, upwardly mobile people are shying away from having kids at all.” That is a very opinionated and unintelligent statement Anthony. I’m surprised that it’s coming from you of all people.
      Most all married/divorced people have kids. Most all of the married/divorced people that I know are educated, and have degrees. Many of them have advanced degrees, and are pretty financially well off. They’re homeowners, have cars, little to no debt, pretty good credit, they travel, etc etc etc.
      The key thing with what u call “upwardly mobile folks” is that most all of the ones that are married, (with the exception of maybe gay & lesbian) all have children. I won’t even get to deep into the single “upwardly mobile people” that are divorced with children. So even though sometimes from the outside looking in, it may seem as though ,”the lower levels of the community” are reproducing at a much higher rate than “the more intelligent, upwardly mobile people;” that is not the case. Most everyone I know in the DMV is divorced; and they all have at least one child. I do agree with your statement regarding legislating and regulating human reproduction. The laws of this country do not allow it. The first statement though, I do not agree with.

      1. That’s just out of the people you know. And that’s in the washington dc metropolitan area– which happens to be the richest area in the united states. Come on down to southern virginia where I’m at and things are different.

        1. I’m from Philly, and I know and have dated people in NY, Jersey and Delaware. Anthony, my point is whether they have degrees or not, most everyone who gets married has children. It’s not a problem when people are married. There are just as many people getting married and having children as they’re are having children out of wedlock. Especially now. Getting married seems to be “trending” nowadays. Obviously 2 incomes helps tremendously. However, unfortunately, people aren’t staying married for very long. Then you have divorced people who become single parents. Down to a single income. I don’t know Southern VA. But I challenge you to check the statistics, not just what you see and hear. There are more single, unmarried, never married people with no children than people realize. I’ve never been married and i have no children. Not only that, just because a person is a single parent, does not necessarily mean they are struggling financially. They’re are Dr.’s, lawyers, and business owners who are single parents. A friend of mine was a teen mom, and went on to get a Masters in Business Administration. People who have strong support systems are just fine.

        2. I know the South has some differences compared to the North; however, times have changed. It may have been like that in the 90’s and early 2000’s. But it’s 2014. There are more opportunities and means to get degrees. I know several people who’s jobs paid and are paying for their degree. There is also more government grants and funding for higher education. Unfortunately not enough people are aware of it. But if your in Southern VA and you say thats how it is, all i can do is take your word for it. I’ve never been there, and don’t know many people from there.

        3. the reality is that 70% of black children are born to single mothers, nationwide. that percentage may be lower in more affluent areas or amongst affluent people. which was my point about coming down to hampton roads to see the contrast from rich washington dc metro area.

          what you just said about being unmarried with no children is exactly my point. you seem to be educated and you associate with other educated people. as do i. most people i know that are educated are mostly single with no kids. the ones that are married may have kids but nowhere near as many as non educated unmarried people. that’s just reality and statistics back it up.

        4. I agree that more than half of black children are born to single mothers. Yes I am “educated” and I associate with a very diverse group of people from all walks of life.
          Here is the thing you seem to be missing; Educated does Not equate to having common sense. Highly educated people make horrendous mistakes and do dumb things all the time. A person can have a formal Ivy League college education and be highly intelligent, and still not have a lick of common sense. I know these types of people as well. Which is why I stand by my statement that it is not just uneducated, hs dropout, single parent home, welfare check collecting, ghetto, hood chicks having babies out of wedlock. Granted, they are the ones getting government assistance; as opposed to single parents who are “educated,” have a fairly decent income and don’t need it. So I think because of that, the attention is on them more.
          Imo there is no real justifiable correlation between a persons intelligence, and the life choices they make. I don’t know what studies show or the stats. But I know from personal experience, as well as many therapists that can tell you that smart and educated people do dumb things and make foolish life choices all the time. This is why I have a problem with your ideaology and these statements: “They are the main ones having kids. The more intelligent, upwardly mobile people are shying away from having kids at all.”
          That is generalizing, and assuming that educated, upwardly mobile people don’t make foolish mistakes and poor life decisions, when the reality is, they do. Sometimes just as much as poor, uneducated people.
          One main difference is, people who have more money and education are given a “pass” and can buy their way out of trouble. The other is that; the more intelligent and upwardly mobile people can usually afford to take care of the kids they have, and may have a stronger support system.

        5. Me and my bff are the Exceptions, Not the rule to being unmarried with no children. The majority of people I know who are “heterosexual” have kids. They are also single/not married. As I stated before, the one big difference is the people i know with kids have help, and for the most part are financially able to take care of their kids. Beyond their tax bracket, education, and earnings; they’re really not that much different than single mothers on welfare collecting government checks. Granted, at one time women did get more government assistance when they had more kids. I remember when I first went off to college in NC in 1995, they were just starting to do away with that. They were creating laws where there was a cut off point. And after 4 or 5 kids, regardless of how many more kids a woman had, she would not get anymore assistance. So women stopped having so many kids because it no longer benefitted them to do so. Regardless of being on welfare or not, at some point a woman realizes it’s getting to be too much and she stops being a baby factory. There are just not many black women in general having more than 4 or 5 kids. We do have a cut off point.

  8. I’m with the opinion that this system is a covert attack on the minority family structure. It furthers the ever-widening gap between men and women. It also assumes that the definition of a deadbeat is always represented by males. I refuse to subscribe to this notion. There are deeper issues at hand, and I already know my opinion is not a popular one. I believe that the crutch of abortion and adoption should be taken off the table if current child support laws aren’t going to be revised. I get tired of women complain about being a single mom or about the “donor” while not acknowledging the fact that 1. Most times they knew what kind of guy they laid down with, 2. They DID NOT have to have the child. I know that most ladies don’t want to hear that but its the truth. You have LEGAL protection if you aren’t ready to be a parent or simply don’t want to be one. Men, on the other hand, do not. I’m not saying that there aren’t deadbeat dads out there, but I feel like on this issue we need to spread the focus. Ladies shouldn’t get a pass that they’re a good parent just because they have a uterus, that’s all I’m saying.

  9. I really think it’s on us women to make babies with potential good fathers… I mean how you let yourself be the 5th babymama?!?! There is no trap here, with internet, with people who know people who know the father of your child, you knew he had other kids, you knew the previous babymamas didn’t get paid so COME ON…

  10. Yeah this is bull. It shows our bias that we can discuss forcing a man to get a vasectomy. Yet we won’t even mention forcing a woman to get her tubes tied. Literally the only difference between both is that when babies come the women gets help, and the man gets a bill. She is just as much of a deadbeat as he is. If she were to contribute the same amount as a man to a third party. She will be under the same hardship. Its alway some white knight willing to curtail all mens legal freedom to protect women from some perceived threat from a minute segment of the male population. Do we even asked how these women vet the men they sleep with and what measures they take “unilaterally” to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies? Nah its easier to consider sweeping laws to fix the threat of males that are not even a full percent of the population.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get SBM Delivered

Get SBM Delivered

Single Black Male provides dating and relationship
advice for today's single looking for love

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This