Single Women Should Not Get Birth Certificates for Their Babies

[What Would Jesus Do?]

At least not without a co-signer - preferably the father.

Republican representatives John D Cavaletto and Keith Wheeler sponsored the bill that would amend the state’s Vital Records Act. Here is the bill’s draconian thrust:

‘…provides that if the unmarried mother cannot or refuses to name the child’s father, either a father must be conclusively established by DNA evidence or, within 30 days after birth, another family member who will financially provide for the child must be named, in court, on the birth certificate.’

‘Provides that absent DNA evidence or a family member’s name, a birth certificate will not be issued and the mother will be ineligible for financial aid from the State for support of the child.’​

I assume this Illinois bill will get the treatment it deserves. But ya gotta love Republicans for regularly reminding us what absolute shits they are.

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/02...t-issue-birth-certificates-to-single-mothers/

Another link (because it almost sounds like a parody, but isn't):

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmakers_file_legislation_that_wou.php

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

That is pretty ridiculous

 

[The Tradition]

Call it the: "Identify your Baby Daddy" bill.

This is about making sure deadbeat dads pay for the product of their sperm. Not punishing single mothers.

 

[Hawk and Awe]

Call it the: "Identify your Baby Daddy" bill.

This is about making sure deadbeat dads pay for the product of their sperm. Not punishing single mothers.

It reads really bad, but this was my thought as well.

I've also heard stories of women refusing to put the mans name on the birth certificate, but still collect child support and shares custody which is just weird to me. Not sure how common that is though

 

[86Hawkeye]

Call it the: "Identify your Baby Daddy" bill.

This is about making sure deadbeat dads pay for the product of their sperm. Not punishing single mothers.

Just call this thread "WWJD's War on Women".

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Ah, typical con responses.

The bill doesn't so much punish the women - which obviously wouldn't bother you if it did - but does punish the children.

 

[The Tradition]

Ah, typical con responses.

The bill doesn't so much punish the women - which obviously wouldn't bother you if it did - but does punish the children.

How is forcing the mom to identify the dad "punishing" children? Shouldn't the child have a right to know who his/her father is?

 

[naturalmwa]

How is forcing the mom to identify the dad "punishing" children? Shouldn't the child have a right to know who his/her father is?

By taking his food away.

 

[The Tradition]

By taking his food away.

New moms make baby food naturally. No government assistance necessary.

 

[artradley]

By taking his food away.

Food is overrated.

 

[artradley]

It reads really bad, but this was my thought as well.

I've also heard stories of women refusing to put the mans name on the birth certificate, but still collect child support and shares custody which is just weird to me. Not sure how common that is though

It reads bad because, well, it only punishes the mother and the baby.

 

[Wahawk56]

What if she doesn't know who the dad it's?

 

[The Tradition]

What if she doesn't know who the dad it's?

Then she's a slut.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

How is forcing the mom to identify the dad "punishing" children? Shouldn't the child have a right to know who his/her father is?

"the mother will be ineligible for financial aid from the State for support of the child"

Come on Trad. Pay attention.

Nor does it stop there if the kid never has a birth certificate.

Why should a child have a right to know who his biological father is? Nice, maybe. A right? No.

Would "fertility clinic" be OK on the father line? How about "frat party" or "lacrosse team"?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Then she's a slut.

So what?

This REALLY IS a Republican thing, isn't it? Punish the woman, eff the kid.

 

[The Tradition]

"the mother will be ineligible for financial aid from the State for support of the child"

Come on Trad. Pay attention.

Nor does it stop there if the kid never has a birth certificate.

Why should a child have a right to know who his biological father is? Nice, maybe. A right? No.

Would "fertility clinic" be OK on the father line? How about "frat party" or "lacrosse team"?

In Canada, children have this right. I know you guys want us to be more like Canada, right?

http://canadiancrc.com/Non-Invasive...testing_DNA_Child_identity_rights_Canada.aspx

 

[The Tradition]

So what?

This REALLY IS a Republican thing, isn't it? Punish the woman, eff the kid.

So name the lacrosse team. Better chance of collecting the child support if there's more payers.

 

[theiacowtipper]

The next step in disenfranchising the poor. They don't have a copy of their birth certificate, they can't vote.

 

[belezabro]

I'm not taking sides one way or another on this, but having worked with the Child Support Recovery Unit for many years I can assure you their number one priority is collections. They do everything in their power to identify caretakers (moms or dads) and collect money from them. Collections by states means federal compliance and money. Republicans and Democrats both support identifying parents.

 

[thewop]

Dumb. I am for making baby daddy's liable for child support though, which is clearly the intent of the proposal. Clearly the mother is in the best position to make that identification, but don't punish the baby. When making a law like this, they should be constantly asking themselves, 'if this were my grandchild,' would this be ok? Making family members step up is sticky as well. This may end up with more kids in orphanages and separated from their birth mothers, which is worse than supporting them with public money while the child is with the mother (usually).

 

[Joes Place]

So....let's get this straight....

1. De-fund Planned Parenthood to limit (and/or effectively eliminate) access for poor and minority women to birth control and birth control education.
2. When unplanned pregnancies occur (due to lack of access to education and birth control), eliminate abortion as an option for poor and minority women and force them to carry an unplanned and financially unsupportable pregnancy to term.
3. When the baby is born, if the mother cannot identify who is going to financially provide for the child (father OR other family member), deny a birth certificate (and essentially proof of American citizenship) to the child.

The Republican Party has jumped the shark here.

 

[The Tradition]

Lack of education and birth control? You can get a condom for $1 in every convenience store bathroom in the country.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Disagree with this simply because it punishes children for their parents bad decisions.

Look I'm all for encouraging people to marry and for both parents to support the child both financially and emotionally. But we should work to find ways to do it that don't potentially cut a child off from food when his/her parents make bad decisions.

 

[The Tradition]

Disagree with this simply because it punishes children for their parents bad decisions.

Look I'm all for encouraging people to marry and for both parents to support the child both financially and emotionally. But we should work to find ways to do it that don't potentially cut a child off from food when his/her parents make bad decisions.

So, lets imagine that the mother doesn't want to reveal the name of the father because he's an abusive jerk who threatened to kill her if she ever sought child support from him.

Such a man should be able to escape his responsibilities by intimidating the mother to not reveal his identity?

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

So, lets imagine that the mother doesn't want to reveal the name of the father because he's an abusive jerk who threatened to kill her if she ever sought child support from him.

Such a man should be able to escape his responsibilities by intimidating the mother to not reveal his identity?

Her solution in that case is to seek police protection.

Besides, even if she does name him, it's not like he's going to be paying much child support from prison. So the state has lost nothing here.

 

[The Tradition]

Her solution in that case is to seek police protection.

Besides, even if she does name him, it's not like he's going to be paying much child support from prison. So the state has lost nothing here.

Prisoners do in fact earn money.

http://www.pjstar.com/article/20151122/NEWS/151129853

 

[IamHawkeye]

Lack of education and birth control? You can get a condom for $1 in every convenience store bathroom in the country.

And then what?

Lack of education and birth control? You can get a condom for $1 in every convenience store bathroom in the country.

Female condoms?

 

[The Tradition]

And then what?

Female condoms?

Oh, that's right. No one can figure out how to use one of these things without the banana demonstration in 3rd grade health class. I forgot.

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

Disagree with this simply because it punishes children for their parents bad decisions.

Look I'm all for encouraging people to marry and for both parents to support the child both financially and emotionally. But we should work to find ways to do it that don't potentially cut a child off from food when his/her parents make bad decisions.

So, assuming that you do not support this proposal as written and yet would like to encourage parents to support their children...what concrete steps would you, and others who think similarly, propose to help the state identify both parents?

What incentives, or disincentives, would you provide to ensure that the parents are identified officially?

 

[cigaretteman]

By taking his food away.

Well, you should all realize by now that Republicans only care about children before they're born. Once they're out, they're on their own.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

The next step in disenfranchising the poor. They don't have a copy of their birth certificate, they can't vote.

Or prove that they are citizens. Hard to know where to deport them to, but I'm sure our GOP friends will come up with a solution.

Soylent Green? I mean if they don't have a birth cert, are they really even people?

 

[artradley]

So, assuming that you do not support this proposal as written and yet would like to encourage parents to support their children...what concrete steps would you, and others who think similarly, propose to help the state identify both parents?

What incentives, or disincentives, would you provide to ensure that the parents are identified officially?

For the purposes of discussing this bill, none of that matters.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Prisoners do in fact earn money.

http://www.pjstar.com/article/20151122/NEWS/151129853

In some cases yes. But note they arn't earning much money and I'm pretty sure you can't make them do it either. And if the guy was so opposed to paying child support that he threatened to kill her if she names him then he's not likely to choose to work in prison to send her small checks.

 

[The Tradition]

In some cases yes. But note they arn't earning much money and I'm pretty sure you can't make them do it either. And if the guy was so opposed to paying child support that he threatened to kill her if she names him then he's not likely to choose to work in prison to send her small checks.

I thought the point of prison was to rehabilitate people? Paying his obligation is part of rehabilitation.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

I thought the point of prison was to rehabilitate people? Paying his obligation is part of rehabilitation.

Yes and that would be a great step, but people can't be rehabilitated unless they want to be.

 

[Gooseeman]

It reads really bad, but this was my thought as well.

I've also heard stories of women refusing to put the mans name on the birth certificate, but still collect child support and shares custody which is just weird to me. Not sure how common that is though

That or not including a man/and income as living in the household and collecting FIP/TANF and food assistance.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

So, assuming that you do not support this proposal as written and yet would like to encourage parents to support their children...what concrete steps would you, and others who think similarly, propose to help the state identify both parents?

What incentives, or disincentives, would you provide to ensure that the parents are identified officially?

I have a question. . . is this even a big problem? How many birth certificates are being issued per year with no father named on them? And how many of those end up on public assistance?

 

[artradley]

So, lets imagine that the mother doesn't want to reveal the name of the father because he's an abusive jerk who threatened to kill her if she ever sought child support from him.

Such a man should be able to escape his responsibilities by intimidating the mother to not reveal his identity?

I'd say the women herself should be able to decide whether she wants to risk her life in order to force the father to not shirk his responsibilities. Under your scenario it goes like this:

• Woman names husband so she can get a birth certificate
• Father kills her
• Thankfully, we know who he is so he gets arrested and pays the price for his transgression
• Baby has no mother, father is in prison -- but by golly we didn't let anybody get away with anything!

Yeah, well thought out law.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I came in to this thread expecting to ask this question, and yay, I was right:

Which is crazier, the proposed legislation or that people on this message board would actually support it?

 

[theIowaHawk]

It seems to start with a fundamental misunderstanding of what a birth certificate is, or does. It does not begin the process of child support recovery in any meaningful manner, it is hardly even tangentially related.

If the mother is receiving state assistance, the state's child support recovery unit is to seek out putative fathers for child support. If the mother isn't receiving state assistance, why the hell would you care?

Your strategy is to withhold the document that proves you were born? To what end? That they can't sign up for school, or related things?

Brilliant.