Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[shadenight123]

it has to be judge approved/disapproved.
in case of divorce the judge asks the children.

because yeah, we are italians, we still have on our gasoline/diesel/petrol the tax to fund the war on libya made by Mussolini.

[ChairmanPoo]

Here at least 16 is old enough to make their own medical decisions.

[Virex]

Furthermore, on the topic of fatherhood and keeping him away from the child, I'm pretty much in line with the traditional Swedish school - a child deserves a father. Not only because it might want to get to know it's dad when it grows up and because a child shouldn't be kept from it's father (unless he is considered a danger, of course), but mostly because the father was in on the fun when making the kid, and he better be ready to pay for the consequences of that fun as well - even if he wanted the child to be aborted.

If they're forcibly split apart he's going to have to pay alimony anyway. Which may be for the better, considering that no father is better than having an abusive father no matter what way you turn it. Which is another complication: In cases with domestic abuse, the one being abused is usually not able to make rational decisions.


Edit: Not saying he is abusive, that's something for the judge to determine.

[scriver]

Furthermore, on the topic of fatherhood and keeping him away from the child, I'm pretty much in line with the traditional Swedish school - a child deserves a father. Not only because it might want to get to know it's dad when it grows up and because a child shouldn't be kept from it's father (unless he is considered a danger, of course), but mostly because the father was in on the fun when making the kid, and he better be ready to pay for the consequences of that fun as well - even if he wanted the child to be aborted.

If they're forcibly split apart he's going to have to pay alimony anyway. Which may be for the better, considering that no father is better than having an abusive father no matter what way you turn it. Which is another complication: In cases with domestic abuse, the one being abused is usually not able to make rational decisions.

The point is to make the father liable to pay alimony even if they're separated by choice and the father wants nothing to do with the child. That is, a father shouldn't be able to say "that's not my child/I want nothing to do with that child" just because he left the mother's life before the child was born. And that the mother shouldn't be able to keep the father away from the child unless there is reason to (like abuse or general danger, like I said).

Here at least 16 is old enough to make their own medical decisions.

I'm not sure what the exact age is here, seeming as I never had much contact with the health system before I turned 18, but my point was that a 16 year old probably isn't mature enough to make a balanced decision on the matter (which is going to change her life forever), regardless of her whether or not she has the legal right to choose, but that it should still be her decision to make.

it has to be judge approved/disapproved.
in case of divorce the judge asks the children.

because yeah, we are italians, we still have on our gasoline/diesel/petrol the tax to fund the war on libya made by Mussolini.

So, to be sure I got understand you correctly - it is mandatory for a child to get it's father's name unless the matter is taken to court?

[shadenight123]

when the baby is born, you reach the "anagrafe".
and unless there IS a mandate of sort which prohibits the use of the fathers surname, or a reason, "father unknown", the surname of the father is then jotted down.
because in italy there is recently the "double surname" which means that, to say, i am Alberto Catellani Amato. catellani is my fathers surname, and precedes amato, which is my mothers surname. So catellani is used, and amato, while still being there, is not considered.

Unless a court settles the matter, both surnames have to be jotted down and written.

[Andir]

It's the girl's choice. She may only be 16 and not fit to make that choice - maturity-wise - but her parent's shouldn't be able to force her to do what they want. If the boy doesn't want to be a father either, well, that's unfortunate, but the choice isn't his either.

I assume this is just worded poorly.  The boy has just as much choice as the girl.  They made their choice when they decided to have sex.

[Leafsnail]

On another note, after two days Rick Perry's "Strong" video is the 3rd most disliked video on all of Youtube, falling short of Justin Beiber and Rebecca Black.

He's actually overtaken Friday now (although probably not the original version).  Justin Bieber is well ahead of him, but a difference is that there are also 1m people who have liked that video, compared to Rick Perry's 10,000.

It's only third disliked because it has only been around for a few days. It'll overtake Baby and Friday soon enough.

Everyone who hated the video and yet clicked on it anyway may have contributed to Rick Perry's campaign funds, unless there are special provisions preventing this. Probably not enough to offset the destructive power of the internet, however, I find that most people don't want to financially support the people they vehemently dislike at even minimal levels.

Don't you generally only start monetizing your videos after they get really popular and Youtube offers the service (as in the case of Friday)?  I'm pretty sure Rick Perry didn't monetize it going in, and I doubt he'd want to make a move to cash in on his own hatred now.

[shadenight123]

oh new news on the matter. (from another website)

http://it.notizie.yahoo.com/dal-giudice-per-costringere-la-figlia-sedicenne-ad-abortire.html?nc

same stuff as before, but with more info:

first off, she already got pregnant the year before, but was convinced to take the pill of the next day.
secondly, the boyfriend is without home/family in italy, and lives in a community after he was taken in for crimes (not explained which ones).
Also the parents testified how he was violent, and hit the girl, and also removed her cell card to avoid her calling her friends.

 

[kaijyuu]

Assuming these allegations are true, yeah that dude needs to be kept as far away from her as possible.

[GlyphGryph]

I assume this is just worded poorly.  The boy has just as much choice as the girl.  They made their choice when they decided to have sex.

I'm sorry, but no. The boy has some choice in the matter, but he does not have nearly as much of a choice. The girl has several distinct points where additional choices can be made and decisions can be altered, with significantly more certain knowledge about results and consequences. To say their choices on this front are equivalent is absurd. If one party has significantly more choices, you can't say the second has just as much choice as the first.

The reason the man doesn't get a say past that initial decision is for practical reasons having to deal with likely consequences of vesting them with such choice, not idealistic ones. I don't see how anyone could try to argue the difference in choice is nonexistent, though.

[Andir]

I assume this is just worded poorly.  The boy has just as much choice as the girl.  They made their choice when they decided to have sex.

I'm sorry, but no. The boy has some choice in the matter, but he does not have nearly as much of a choice. The girl has several distinct points where additional choices can be made and decisions can be altered, with significantly more certain knowledge about results and consequences. To say their choices on this front are equivalent is absurd. If one party has significantly more choices, you can't say the second has just as much choice as the first.

The reason the man doesn't get a say past that initial decision is for practical reasons having to deal with likely consequences of vesting them with such choice, not idealistic ones. I don't see how anyone could try to argue the difference in choice is nonexistent, though.

Maybe I read it wrong, but what I got was: They both made the choice to have sex and accept the possibility of a child.  Then what I read was that scriver says the man loses all choice at that point [ie: he becomes a slave to the will of the girl] (which is false.)  If the child is his, he has legal capability to seek responsibility or moral choice to not.

[GlyphGryph]

Then what I read was that scriver says the man loses all choice at that point [ie: he becomes a slave to the will of the girl] (which is false.)

As far as whether or not the child will be born, he is. (And that's okay) And it was specifically that situation that was scriver was referring to.

If the child is his, he has legal capability to seek responsibility or moral choice to not.

I... have no idea what this sentence could possible mean. Rephrase?

[scriver]

What I said that the father has no choice over whether or not the mother should have the child or abort it, and that if she keeps it, it should be mandatory for the father to help provide for it (regardless of whether he wanted it to begin with or not). The only equal choice the father has regarding child-making is whether to have sex with the mother-to-be or not.

[shadenight123]

not in italy.

in italy if you can prove you didn't want the girl to be pregnant, or the girl tricked you into telling you she was on the pill/broke a condom or similar, you can excuse yourself long enough for the case to end up being archived.
or in any case, your only voice in the matter, as a male, is wherever you want to recognize him or not.
Thanks to our glorious dictator mussolini, (did i mention WE STILL HAVE SOME OF HIS LAWS!?) only children born of marriages in a holy church *tm* establishment are automatically recognized as being of BOTH the individuals.
otherwise the father has to recognize it.
which then brings the point of why the parents of the girl don't want him to: so they can avoid shame, invent a lie of sort "she got pregnant at an orgy! or stuff!" and avoid getting marked as "the family whose daughter got pregnant with roms".
ehhh...italians, still thinking what society thinks and not what should be done.

[GlyphGryph]

it should be mandatory for the father to help provide for it (regardless of whether he wanted it to begin with or not)

Admittedly, this one isn't any different between the father and the mother in most countries. Once the mother gives birth to the baby, she has to help provide for it as well (unless they BOTH agree to give it up for adoption), even if she loses custody of it. Or at least that's how it works in the US, and that's the only reasonable way I can see to handle it.