Posted on 07/29/2005 8:51:35 PM PDT by Lorianne
JEFFERSON CITY - Some Republican legislators want to charge unwed fathers thousands of dollars for hospital birth costs incurred by low-income mothers on Medicaid.
"But the last time I checked, it takes two people to make a baby. And there is some responsibility, not just for child support, but for the cost of bringing that child successfully into the world," said Shields, R-St. Joseph.
Medicaid pays for 43 percent of the births in Missouri. At an average cost of $3,286 a birth, the tab hit $120.6 million last year. Nearly two-thirds of the moms on Medicaid are unmarried.
Critics say mother and baby would suffer under Shields' proposal because some women would give up Medicaid and forgo prenatal care rather than cooperate in efforts to bill the father for hospital costs.
Studies in other states have concluded that birth recovery policies discourage fathers from voluntarily establishing paternity and take money that otherwise would help low-income fathers support their children. That is especially true in families where the unmarried parents live together as a family.
"In reality, there are a lot of fathers that just don't have the income," said Ruth Ehresman, policy director of Citizens for Missouri's Children.
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
er....choose their fathers....OF THEIR CHILDREN.....very carefully....
"In reality, there are a lot of fathers that just don't have the income,"
Then they should NOT be making babies.
The man does have a choice and responsibility in this decision. He can put on a condom, every time! Don’t take for granted that the woman is telling the truth about using birth control.
How can women keep pumping out kids with no reasonable means to support them?
With existing, and proven, DNA Technology, there is little reason, and then, only occasionally, reason to let anyone skate away from responsibility.
The only acceptable message is, if you don't want to raise any "chilluns", don't ever make any!
Perhaps the women should invest in a heavy duty chastity belt.
Haven't had the pleasure yet.
It's that nifty little piggy bank the village has called The General Fund.
"How can women keep pumping out kids with no reasonable means to support them?"
Women and men.
And then what? Enforced sterilisation, adoption or abortion? I think there's a routine like that in China... Why not get the man to think twice about his half of the deal?
I've never been pregnant. Do you know why?
I learned at a young age how not to be, and expanded my knowledge base to make certain it didn't happen later in life. I highly recommend it.
Don't make excuses for women who are careless, stupid or lazy. It makes us both look bad.
The only form of contraception that's really effective is abstinance.
Men need to be taught that condoms and the pill are very ineffective. They should know that every time they 'make love' they are really 'making babies' and only their attempts at contraception - a sin, no less - are maybe stopping them from becoming fathers.
Red
If the man is not married, engaged, had not made a commitment to support the baby, had not used some form of force or fraud, no. And no parental rights. Going after the "deadbeat dad" in these cases isn't realistic, and doesn't recognize where the real responsibility is. If the women wants to get pregnant, no matter what the policy is toward men, she will do so. In these circumstances the male is just a discount sperm donor, no sperm bank or doctor's office involved. Hounding them for money just subsidizes the problem system (if it even pays for itself given the bureaucracy involved.)Again, if a woman wants to get pregnant, the choices of individual men are irrelevant. The public policy answer has to be to eliminate the incentive for women to irresponsibly have babies.
Where there was a marriage, or a support commitment upon which a woman relied, that is very different, and I would hold him responsible.
It is only the woman's choice to have an abortion.
After it's the woman's choice to become impregnated (no rape charges) and carry the baby to term (chose not to abort) the baby is someone else's responsibility? It just ain't logical.
Morally a father should care for his children and abortion is not an option, but I'm talking legally not morally.
The male can affect whether the baby will have his DNA, but not whether a woman who wants a baby is going to get pregnant. Especially for low IQ, low social-status young women, getting pregnant out-of-wedlock is socially acceptable or even advantageous, and economically very advantageous. That's the problem. Politicians demagoguery about "deadbeat dads" is a diversion from the problem, ie part of the problem.
Mrs Mean used to watch Jerry Springer (I think it was) and one of the staples of the show is the girl insisting that a particular man was the father, it could be no other! So they get the guy on, he says no way, and they do a DNA test. He's not the guy. So then she says it has to be this other guy, another show, nope its not him either. Some of the girls went through six or seven guys. Great fun.
"In reality, there are a lot of fathers that just don't have the income,"
Threaten with jail and siezure of wages, loss of drivers licenses, etc.......They will dig up the cash. A wate of they cannot do it with existing staff and funds. It will never pay for itself.
Red
WOW, ridiculous. Along with their babies they are breeding a GROSS sense of entitlement.
At first blush, this seems like a good idea. But upon further reflection, it becomes obvious that if this idea is enacted, two negative things will occur. The first is that unmarried pregnant women, who already top the murder statistics, will practically become target practice for their boyfriends who don't want to foot the bill. The second negative thing that will almost certainly occur is that the boyfriends will put immense pressure on the women to get abortions so they don't have to cough up money for childbirth.
So, we have ... murder, or murder. Lovely choice. Perhaps it would be more effective just to say that Medicaid will only pay for the birth of children who are given up for adoption within one month of birth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.