Agree, while this guy should not be “fathering” any more kids, the judge has no right to impose such an order. Is the judge also going to put such an order on the women who get pregnant by him and men like him and are being supported by taxpayer money?
I am starting to think that, in the case of out of wedlock births, child support should be 100% voluntary and zero public assistance should be given. The out of wedlock birthrate would plummet, if the women knew they could not count on support from the daddy or the taxpayer.
Imagine the outcry from femi-Nazi’s if this judge had ordered some fluke not to have any more children?
Others have suggested that, including some major social analysts. I'm inclined to agree. Unfair as it is that men can walk away from the consequences of their sexual behavior, that's just the way it is. No matter how much he has sex, he's never going to be pregnant. This being the case - the unavoidable facts - public policy addressing unmarried childbearing has to focus on giving women incentives to make smarter choices about sex.
Private policy, as it were, and private charity need to be focussed on changing the hearts of both men and women so that they will make moral choices, out of concern both for themselves and for their children or possible children.