NEWPORT, Ky. (AP) - For some men showing up in court for being habitually behind in child support, their choice is jail or a vasectomy. Family Court Judge D. Michael 'Mickey' Foellger has given the option to a few men who had multiple children and were tens of thousands of dollars behind on their child support.

Foellger said he considers it an effective way to get his message across - that having children is a responsibility. The option is made clear: Go to jail for 30 days, or have the vasectomy. The option applies to men who have had more than four children with at least three different women, and who owe more than $10,000 in court-ordered support...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040506/D82D8CIG0.html Question Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Answer Questions | Question Comments | My Questions | Favorites | +Add Question
LATEST
POPULAR PRIORITY RANDOM

All | Games | Funny | Entertainment | Quizzes | Weird | Tech | People | Arts/Lit | News | Science | Sports | Places | Misc

927 hits Rate me! Share Favorite | Flag 18 years ago by KikiPeepers

Should judges be able to sentence deadbeat dads to get vasectomies?
NEWPORT, Ky. (AP) - For some men showing up in court for being habitually behind in child support, their choice is jail or a vasectomy. Family Court Judge D. Michael `Mickey` Foellger has given the option to a few men who had multiple children and were tens of thousands of dollars behind on their child support.

Foellger said he considers it an effective way to get his message across - that having children is a responsibility. The option is made clear: Go to jail for 30 days, or have the vasectomy. The option applies to men who have had more than four children with at least three different women, and who owe more than $10,000 in court-ordered support...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/200...


Put This Question on Your Page (MySpace, Livejournal, Blog, etc)
[Preview] EMBED CODE:


Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 47)

Bottom Last Post

18 yrs ago - Friday 5/14/04 - 3:07:02 PM EST (GMT-5)
That's nasty. These men should obviously go to jail. Plus the men can have the vasectomy reversed so it is not like it's going to work anyways.
18 yrs ago - Saturday 5/15/04 - 10:26:03 PM EST (GMT-5)
Only when they start forcing trailer trash moms who pop out twenty kids and live only off child support from the ten fathers to get tubal ligations. Plenty of those in KY, but you don't see judges doing anything about them.

At least he's offering the jail option, though. If he actually forced them to get vasectomies without a second option, I'd be totally against it.

18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 4:55:59 PM EST (GMT-5)
yes. i have no mercy for deadbeat dads. i hope they will have their own special level of hell reserved for them.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 4:59:26 PM EST (GMT-5)
Sure if the man has a say in whether the woman does or does not have THEIR child.

If I can tell a woman not to kill OUR child, I'm willing to trade off putting my balls at risk if I don't pay child support.

18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:02:48 PM EST (GMT-5)
In the state of CT, if a guy doesn't want a child, he can walk away from the whole thing legally. His name will be removed from all forms. As long as he leaves before the woman is about 2 or so months pregnant.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:03:49 PM EST (GMT-5)
Hell if I can tell a woman not to kill our child I'm willing to risk not only my balls but a life sentance in prison getting ass raped by a big guy named Bubba if I don't pay child support. I'd do anything I could to keep my child from being killed.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:05:34 PM EST (GMT-5)
Slappy not a bad law in the way of equality. However it's equality in the since of irresponsibility and is still unequal in responsibility.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:20:44 PM EST (GMT-5)
"Slappy not a bad law in the way of equality. However it's equality in the since of irresponsibility and is still unequal in responsibility."

Makes NO SENSE whatsoever. I imagine you're trying to say that abortion is irresponsible, if so just say it.

18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:27:27 PM EST (GMT-5)
Abortion is always irresponsible, if/when there's a father who's willing to and has the resources necessary to take care of the child if the woman does not want it.

Also yes abortion is 99% of the time irresponsible. So is not paying child support. I don't approve of either dead beat dads, or women whom have abortions with exceptionally good reason.

The reason I say it makes things equal irresponsibly is that either party can choose to forgo responsibility for the child by either aborting it or in the mans case walking out of it's life.

However the woman can still choose to be responsible for the child even if the man walks out, where as the man cannot choose to be responsible for the child if the woman decides she doesn't wish to be responsible for it.

The law creates more equality but promotes irresponsibility. It makes it so that more children will be aborted by scared unsupported mothers, and more children will be born with no child support to help them.

18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:28:34 PM EST (GMT-5)
Chang to

I don't approve of either dead beat dads, or women whom have abortions "WITHOUT" exceptionally good reason.

18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:40:46 PM EST (GMT-5)
Wolf, you are so full of bullsh*t you would make a politician blush.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:42:35 PM EST (GMT-5)
No, judges shouldn't have the right toi limit your procreation.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:42:55 PM EST (GMT-5)
Go f-ck yourself.

I happen to feel strongly on this issue. There's nothing I fear more in this world than something going wrong and having my child's life legally squelched without there being a single thing I can do to protect them.

18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:44:44 PM EST (GMT-5)
It's archaic justice. With a little more effort on the part of the law and so called welfare institutions, this type of scenario would be eradicated. There's no need to sterilize people or cut off their hands for stealing or to sentence them to death for crimes.

All that needs to be done is decrease the welfare payment for each child born to irresponsible women and snatch 75% of the man's wages/benefits for support. This can be done even if the man shoots through. It takes man hours, of course, but so what. If this still fails, there is a system called Foster Homes where the children will be properly cared for and raised. It's not difficult. It just takes people to make a tough stand and follow through on punishments without resorting to brutality.

18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:45:18 PM EST (GMT-5)
I said what I'd do, not whether or not the law should be that way. I'd be willing to put my balls on the line, or risk imprisonment or both. I never gave a definitive yes or no. Besides I believe they had a choice of jail time or a vesectomy, their choice.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 5:50:59 PM EST (GMT-5)
haha I thought Whore-Monger and psychoman364 were the same person posting twice... damn I feel stupid
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 7:32:38 PM EST (GMT-5)
75%? how the hell would you live on only 25% of your salary?
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 7:37:17 PM EST (GMT-5)
I think it would be a nice idea...but I just don't see how it's "constitutional"...but what do I know? I just don't see it becoming a regular thing.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 7:38:22 PM EST (GMT-5)
Anyways, jail for thirty days means County jail, which is NOTHING. it's not prison, it's just plain old county. 30 days in county isn't that bad.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 7:49:31 PM EST (GMT-5)
So how exactly does this vasectomy help the child already born? I think this might even be a reward for some....
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 8:13:39 PM EST (GMT-5)
No, they may eventually learn to take responsibility.
18 yrs ago - Sunday 5/16/04 - 8:42:13 PM EST (GMT-5)
"I think it would be a nice idea...but I just don't see how it's "constitutional"..."

It's not unconstitutional, but if there wasn't a second option it would be against the patient's right of refusal.

18 yrs ago - Monday 5/17/04 - 1:09:46 AM EST (GMT-5)
Cut those balls off!!!!1
18 yrs ago - Monday 5/17/04 - 2:14:27 AM EST (GMT-5)
75% taphophile, because money is more of an incentive to keep your pecker in your trousers than a free ticket to free lovin. If threatened with a 75% wage loss per week (and the threat carried out) it's almost guaranteed to curb irresponsiblity on fathering numerous children.
18 yrs ago - Saturday 5/22/04 - 7:48:46 PM EST (GMT-5)
of course. at least they have a choice. if they said you HAD to get one, then it probaby isnt a suitable punishment.

Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 47)



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Top



10 Most Popular Questions Today
1 What does your money do?

2 If you had a genetic disease, would you reproduce?

3 Do you live in a home that has been owned by your family for multiple generations?

4 How do you pronounce the word 'Italian'?

5 Have you ever seen an Aurora?

6 Have you ever won a radio competition?

7 Do you ever leave your dog in your vehicle with the windows rolled down a bit?

8 Do people become more likeable once they`ve realized their faults?

9 If a defendant is found `not guilty`, do you assume that they are innocent?

10 Did Donald Trump commit insurrection with his speech on January 6, 2021?

More Questions
 
Edit