I gave an interview today, and while giving some suggestions for making marriage work for the 80 or so percent of the US population that is not part of the SWPL overeducated elite, I brought up the matter of equal custody. I said that people will often accuse men of wanting custody so they don’t have to pay child support, but instead of saying “that’s not true,” I said “so what if it is?”
Most fathers really do love their children, so it’s an unfair accusation and a low blow in most cases, but not wanting to pay child support is indeed a motivating factor in custody battles. Likewise, receiving child support motivates women quite a bit, and has been found to contribute directly to likelihood of divorce. Money matters.
But think about this: if taking care of one’s child and being an involved father is a good thing, then isn’t it good that men would rather take care of their kids than cut a check every month? Is there anything wrong with them preferring parenting over being an ATM?
Only if the mother has a problem with it, and that’s exactly what’s wrong with the current system of mother custody combined with state enforced child support. If anyone cares to know why fatherlessness became endemic in the black population, and now the Hispanic and white working class, it’s just this refusal to allow men to act on this incentive to raise their kids. If the state were truly interested in reducing fatherlessness, fathers would be allowed to avoid child support by taking care of their kids half the time. If parents don’t want their kids, then fine — have them pay CS. Otherwise, let them do their part and raise their own kids.
Such a policy could only have a positive social effect. Men with children behave better, boys with fathers around tend to stay out of jail, and girls are less likely to get knocked up. Furthermore, it would encourage those who don’t want to raise their own kids to be more careful about getting women pregnant just the same as child support enforcement. Maybe even more. Seeing one’s friends stuck at home or having to arrange a babysitter to get out tends to have an edifying effect on players who might otherwise think little about the consequences of fathering a child.
Would it be more dangerous for children? Not at all. Children are even safer with their biological fathers than with their mothers. When with dad, the kids’ clothing might not be as well-ironed, or their hair as well-combed, but they’d have full bellies, they’d get to bed on time, and they’d feel safe and confident with daddy keeping an eye out for them, and they’d still have half time with their mother.
So what’s stopping this? Basically, women on child support or welfare. Well, too bad for them. It would be better for the rest of us – including other women – if for once they didn’t get their way.