Illinois legislators tackling the important issues

[nolanvt]

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmak ... at_wou.php

[HokieFanDC]

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmak ... at_wou.php

Meh, typical big govt loving social conservatives.

[nolanvt]

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmak ... at_wou.php

Meh, typical big govt loving social conservatives.

Correct


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Major Kong]

Duh it's just the Maury Povich amendment.

[HokieJoe]

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmak ... at_wou.php

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmak ... at_wou.php

Meh, typical big govt loving social conservatives.

Uhh, do either one of you realize why this is necessary? Expectant mother or already mother goes into her friendly local welfare office and applies for welfare benefits. She doesn't name a father on the birth certificate, so she is sent over to the Child Support office so they can begin the process of determining who the father is. She either lies, or refuses to provide the information. Usually she just lies so the welfare office won't cut off her benefits. Either way, the child is legally fatherless. So, who is to pay for the services she receives on behalf of the child in this instance?

Tax payers, that's who.

“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.”

The point of putting a family member on the birth certificate is to make someone financially culpable for the benefits received. This has nothing to do with 'big government conservatives'. It has everything to do with making people responsible for their actions.

[USN_Hokie]

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmak ... at_wou.php

Meh, typical big govt loving social conservatives.

Correct


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe I'm slow - what's the social aspect here?

That article is ridiculous.

[BigDave]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

[Major Kong]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

I believe in Virginia the order of Paternity comes thru the courts or the Maury Povich Show.

[HokieJoe]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

I believe in Virginia the order of Paternity comes thru the courts or the Maury Povich Show.

Most states require court adjudication of paternity as far I'm aware (which in most cases relies on dna testing).

[BigDave]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

I believe in Virginia the order of Paternity comes thru the courts or the Maury Povich Show.

Most states require court adjudication of paternity as far I'm aware (which in most cases relies on dna testing).

I found this form from Virginia: http://www.dss.virginia.gov/files/divis ... 30-eng.pdf

On page six, it says, "You must identify both parents in order to receive TANF."

The reason for it is obvious - you want to know who the non-custodial parent is because they should be on the hook for child support before taxpayer $$$ are used.

If you say Bob is the father and Bob says he's not the father, then you adjudicate it ... but you have to at least declare who you think it is in order to get government aid. That's just plain common sense.

Only in a liberal mecca where government is the primary caregiver - not parents - does it make sense to not care who the father is when applying for benefits.

[HokieFanDC]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

I believe in Virginia the order of Paternity comes thru the courts or the Maury Povich Show.

Most states require court adjudication of paternity as far I'm aware (which in most cases relies on dna testing).

I found this form from Virginia: http://www.dss.virginia.gov/files/divis ... 30-eng.pdf

On page six, it says, "You must identify both parents in order to receive TANF."

The reason for it is obvious - you want to know who the non-custodial parent is because they should be on the hook for child support before taxpayer $$$ are used.

If you say Bob is the father and Bob says he's not the father, then you adjudicate it ... but you have to at least declare who you think it is in order to get government aid. That's just plain common sense.

Only in a liberal mecca where government is the primary caregiver - not parents - does it make sense to not care who the father is when applying for benefits.

It makes sense, to avoid welfare fraud, and to attempt to have someone take responsibility, but the child is really the one getting hurt here.

[HokieFanDC]

http://chicagoist.com/2016/02/20/lawmak ... at_wou.php

Meh, typical big govt loving social conservatives.

Correct


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe I'm slow - what's the social aspect here?

That article is ridiculous.

It's a hot take, man. Enjoy it!

[Major Kong]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

I believe in Virginia the order of Paternity comes thru the courts or the Maury Povich Show.

Most states require court adjudication of paternity as far I'm aware (which in most cases relies on dna testing).

Virginia has voluntary adjudication if both parties agree...also the fact of being married is considered as establishing parenthood unless the parties disagree.

My nephew was involved in a nasty paternity situation in Bristol, VA back in 2013 between him and his ex wife. Long story short he was not the father and everybody knew it unless his penis was 3000 miles long (Afghanistan to Germany).

[HokieJoe]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

I believe in Virginia the order of Paternity comes thru the courts or the Maury Povich Show.

Most states require court adjudication of paternity as far I'm aware (which in most cases relies on dna testing).

Virginia has voluntary adjudication if both parties agree...also the fact of being married is considered as establishing parenthood unless the parties disagree.

My nephew was involved in a nasty paternity situation in Bristol, VA back in 2013 between him and his ex wife. Long story short he was not the father and everybody knew it unless his penis was 3000 miles long (Afghanistan to Germany).

Correct. If, both parties agree. If the child is born during the marriage, the husband is considered the legal father. If paternity were to become an issue, the court would have to order a paternity test.

[BigDave]

It makes sense, to avoid welfare fraud, and to attempt to have someone take responsibility, but the child is really the one getting hurt here.

What does that even mean?

If the mother doesn't fill out the form, then the child is the one who doesn't get fed. Should we dispense with forms all together?

If the mother doesn't go to the grocery store, the child is the one who doesn't get fed. Should we dispense with grocery stores and just have the government bring food straight to your house?

It's not an onerous requirement to say that you have to fill out a form saying who the father is in order to get aid.

I assume that by the time the final bill comes out, they will amend the language a bit to allow for the possibility that a mother may really have no idea who the father is (i.e., she conceived the child while having anonymous sex with strangers at an orgy or some such thing and has no way to track the sperm donor). But for the 99.999% of pregnancies in Illinois that were not the result of mass orgies, the mother ought to have to say who the father is.

[HokieJoe]

I thought this was already the law everywhere. I'd be stunned if it's not the law in Virginia.

I believe in Virginia the order of Paternity comes thru the courts or the Maury Povich Show.

Most states require court adjudication of paternity as far I'm aware (which in most cases relies on dna testing).

I found this form from Virginia: http://www.dss.virginia.gov/files/divis ... 30-eng.pdf

On page six, it says, "You must identify both parents in order to receive TANF."

The reason for it is obvious - you want to know who the non-custodial parent is because they should be on the hook for child support before taxpayer $$$ are used.

If you say Bob is the father and Bob says he's not the father, then you adjudicate it ... but you have to at least declare who you think it is in order to get government aid. That's just plain common sense.

Only in a liberal mecca where government is the primary caregiver - not parents - does it make sense to not care who the father is when applying for benefits.

It makes sense, to avoid welfare fraud, and to attempt to have someone take responsibility, but the child is really the one getting hurt here.

The child is hurt by not knowing who it's real father is. The child is also hurt if the woman goes off of welfare and there is no one to pay child support.

[HokieFanDC]

It makes sense, to avoid welfare fraud, and to attempt to have someone take responsibility, but the child is really the one getting hurt here.

What does that even mean?

If the mother doesn't fill out the form, then the child is the one who doesn't get fed. Should we dispense with forms all together?

If the mother doesn't go to the grocery store, the child is the one who doesn't get fed. Should we dispense with grocery stores and just have the government bring food straight to your house?

It's not an onerous requirement to say that you have to fill out a form saying who the father is in order to get aid.

I assume that by the time the final bill comes out, they will amend the language a bit to allow for the possibility that a mother may really have no idea who the father is (i.e., she conceived the child while having anonymous sex with strangers at an orgy or some such thing and has no way to track the sperm donor). But for the 99.999% of pregnancies in Illinois that were not the result of mass orgies, the mother ought to have to say who the father is.

It means that there a lot of kids born with fathers who won't do anything to support them. You're making way too big of a deal over a snarky comment. I don't really care one way or the other, it has very little impact on me.

[Hokie CPA]

It means that there a lot of kids born with fathers who won't do anything to support them. You're making way too big of a deal over a snarky comment. I don't really care one way or the other, it has very little impact on me.

Ah, but if mom is getting aid from the government, the government goes after dad for reimbursement. They garnish his wages. The real ässholes are the fûckers who jump jobs every time the state catches up with him so the state never gets reimbursed. Basically, when a guy jumps, he gets several weeks of work at the new job before the state finds him and orders the garnishment, at which time he jumps again to get a few more weeks at another job. THOSE guys are a real piece of work...

[HokieFanDC]

It means that there a lot of kids born with fathers who won't do anything to support them. You're making way too big of a deal over a snarky comment. I don't really care one way or the other, it has very little impact on me.

Ah, but if mom is getting aid from the government, the government goes after dad for reimbursement. They garnish his wages. The real ässholes are the fûckers who jump jobs every time the state catches up with him so the state never gets reimbursed. Basically, when a guy jumps, he gets several weeks of work at the new job before the state finds him and orders the garnishment, at which time he jumps again to get a few more weeks at another job. THOSE guys are a real piece of work...

There are tons of those guys. My father-in-law has spent his entire life and has never lacked work.