10/11/01

MPs would hold 12 year old boys financially responsible for pregnancies.

Two MPs talk about the current case in the UK in which the Child Support Agency is seeking to recoup £50,000 from the biological father of a child who was conceived 10 years ago when the father himself was only 15 years old. The mother, who was 30 at the time of the event which led to her pregnancy, clearly broke the law in having sexual-relations with a minor. Further, it was only some years later that the father was informed that he had actually fathered a child.

Many men are outraged that a fifteen year-old male should be held responsible for a future outcome that was COMPLETELY in the control of a much older adult - an adult who was actually committing a crime against him. And the fact that there do not seem to be any calls by the media or by politicians for the punishment of the woman for what was clearly a sexual offence merely adds further evidence to support the notion that the UK justice system is corrupt and thoroughly sex-discriminatory.

David Willets (Conservative MP): I'm not going to defend the way the CSA operates, and lots of people have horror stories about dealing with the CSA, but we should remember the basic principle on which it works, which is if you father a child, if you bring a child into this world, that is then a responsibility that you cannot escape. (Clare Rayner replies: But he was under the age of consent!) That is irrelevant. You cannot divorce your child. If you have brought a child into this world, there then follows a responsibility - and the actual circumstances do not matter - we can't get into the fine mesh judgements of exactly how it happened - who was in the right, who was in the wrong. All we have to say, very simply, is if you bring a child into the world, it brings with it a responsibility that, whatever the circumstances, you have to accept that responsibility - and that is an important principle.

David Dimbleby: Supposing this was a boy of 12? And a woman of 30? Are you saying that even if the boy was 12, - even though, technically, it would be a crime to have made love to him in the first place? He would still, as an older man, have to pay? I just want to clarify what you are saying.

David Willets: The only way we can approach this, I'm afraid, is by saying that when we are coming to this agency [the CSA] which has had a host of problems, it cannot intrude into the circumstances, the particular moral rights and wrongs - you have to say that if the father subsequently has an income that enables him to make payments - and there is a financial formula - if he subsequently has an income that enables him to make payments toward a natural child of his, he ought to put some of that money toward the natural child of his, and I think that this is the right principle; and then there is a whole question about [child] access, and the moral right and wrongs and I think that this is the only principle of financial responsibility that we can work on.

Denis MacShane (Labour Minister): ... "The law is the law. If you want the principle, that most people accept, that people should accept financial responsibility for children they bring into the world. They are not products of casual relations. They live forever. (!???) And so the law will have to be applied. Now, what I would like to know is how this story got into the newspapers to turn into the scandal that it is. That's what makes me sick. This is a horrible, tragic case. The CSA should be involved. ... This is an extraordinary trivialisation in the press of human relationships. The CSA has got a difficult job to do. A morally correct job to do. Let's stop talking about this. And let this young man and woman, and, above all their child, sort out their problems out of the glare of the rubbish publicity of our tabloid press.

David Dimbleby: So, Denis MacShane, a former newspaper man, would like it all swept under the carpet!

...

Some brief thoughts ...

1. It appears that David Willetts would entitle a 30 year-old woman to seduce a 12 year-old boy with 'wealth and prospects' and then allow the state to have money deducted from his future income to pay for the resulting child. Further, as in this case, the woman could even do this without actually informing the boy that he had fathered a child until very many years later - whereupon the CSA would seek back payments from him to cover for those years where he had no idea what had been going on.

2. The two politicians above keep talking about the fact that the boy 'brought a child into this world'. But, of course, he did no such thing. He had sex. The woman, ENTIRELY of her own volition, turned this event into a child. (e.g. see AH's Why Should a Man Bear Responsibility for a Woman who Decides to have a Baby?) 

3. The woman stole the boy's semen and his genes for her own purposes. Now the state wants his money. And it seems to matter not at all how his own family or his future will be affected by this.

4. If, in the near future, a woman steals some of a boy's saliva, and she CLONES a child from it, would he also be responsible? If not, why not? What's the big difference? Will politicians then suggest that if the boy was foolish enough to leave his saliva on the wine glass then he must bear some responsibility for the arrival of the clone?

5. David Willets has the nickname "Two-Brains Willets" because he is undoubtedly extremely clever. No-one who knows him can doubt this. His responses above, however, are nothing less that an indication of just how deep is the feminist indoctrination of our population and how successful has been the demonisation of the male gender. He shows no concern whatsoever for the plight of the male. And this would even be true if the boy had been 12. According to David Willetts, the boy's age should be 'irrelevant'!

6. If a 30 year-old man had merely fondled a 12 year old girl, he would have been prosecuted - no doubt with David Willett's full support.

(Also see AH's Rant Against the CSA)

Kansas Colleen Hermesmann routinely provided care for Shane Seyer as a baby sitter or day care provider during 1987 and 1988. The two began a sexual relationship at a time when Colleen was 16 years old and Shane was only 12. The relationship continued over a period of several months and the parties engaged in sexual intercourse on an average of a couple of times a week. As a result, a daughter, Melanie, was born to Colleen on May 30, 1989. At the time of the conception of the child, Shane was 13 years old and Colleen was 17. Colleen applied for and received financial assistance through the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program (ADC) from SRS. You can surely guess what happened next!