[Valpal1]

Their agreement wasn’t waiving their parental rights to the child, but instead tried to waive the child’s right to parental support.

My opinion is that children have a right to the support of their parents and that parents cannot waive the basic rights of their offspring as a matter of public policy.

Nor can they sell their children into slavery or give consent to their minor children being used sexually by others.

The judge was right and Glen Sacks picked an inappropriate case to pimp his agenda.

[BossLady]

Yours is a much more eloquent way of stating it ;)

Thank you so much!