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.
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.
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.
ENTIRELY of her own volition, turned this event into a child
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)
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!