By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Desmond Hatchett is petitioning the court for entry of an order reducing his child support. In tough economic times that is not uncommon. What is uncommon is that Hatchett has fathered 30 children by 11 different women. The children range in age from toddlers to 14-years-old. Hatchett earns minimum wage and half of his check is apportioned among the children. That means some mothers receive as little as $1.49 per month for one child. The prolific father has previously appeared in court in 2009 to answer charges of failing to pay any support. Then he had 21 children and promised to stop procreating. Hatchett explains the current situation this way, ” [W]ell you know what we mean, I had four kids in the same year. Twice.”
The law regards procreation as a fundamental right. Most religions support the ideal of large families with the Catholic Church banning all but the most fundamental type of birth control. Americans have long recoiled from China’s “One Child” policy to combat population explosion. Given that backdrop how does society deal with such irresponsibility? Do children have to suffer poverty or becoming wards of the state simply because some people can’t suppress their urges or behave irresponsibly? Do conservatives have a point when they argue that welfare benefits based on the number of children to be supported breeds this type of behavior?
The state has no right to order Hatchett or his “Baby Mamas” to stop making babies. Should it in such an extreme case? If not for Hatchett, for the children that he obviously cannot support?
Source: WREG (via Yahoo)
~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Nal: ” Are the mothers free from any responsibility?”
—
Do any of the mothers have 30 children?
In an enlightened country women would be in charge of their reproductive health and decisions, be educated about sex and reproduction starting early and have it be ongoing, and the government would support those decisions as a matter of simple health maintenance but this is Tennessee.
Tenessee: no emergency contraception by Medicaid and no Tl’s, vasectomies, no STD tests including HIV, no expanded family planning options, no abortions beyond the federal mandate (life of mother, rape etc.), waiting periods, parental consent laws strictly enforced and a multitude of other restrictions on women’s health.care as well as a new proposed bill that would place greater restrictions on women’s reproductive health by making public the names of all doctors/staff that perform abortions and lessen the restrictions on information privacy about women having abortions. There are 4 Planned Parenthood clinics in Tennessee and two abortion clinics.
This may be an extreme example but how many of those 30 kids were wanted or more to the point, how many of those kids would have been prevented if women’s reproductive health were treated as simple medical care instead of a religious crusade?
Actually, I don’t understand the seemingly negative light the newspaper article portrays Hatchett in, he should be declared a hero by Tennessee and the mothers should become celebrities, like the Duggars and the Octomom. This is exactly the kind of situation more or less, Tennessee wants and is encouraging as is a dozen other states. This is the new ‘Old Testament state of Tennessee’ and this is where the radical religious right- the Republican base- wants to take the country. Make these folks role models and put them on TV. (semi-snark here, but only semi)
This a great site, just plug in your state of interest and select from the menu on the left for specific information about women’s health. Use the category line for a category listing or specific subcategory items:
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/profileind.jsp?cat=10&sub=183&rgn=44
shano,
Do the math. I graduated Boise State.
The simplest answer to all of this is good sex education. We don’t have it now and we’ve never had it. I grew up with sexually liberated parents who discussed my questions about sex from an early age. I was taught to appreciate my sexual partners and that sex was about sharing, not one sided gratification. I was taught that getting someone pregnant was my responsibility and that doing it indiscriminately was irresponsible/reprehensible behavior that also could only work to my detriment. Finally, I was taught about the dangers of STD’s and how to protect oneself from them. Prior to my marriage I had numerous sexual partners, in mutually non-exploitative relationships. I found that the wisdom imparted to me by my parents actually made me more attractive to women far beyond my looks or status.
As a counter-point to that the general male outlook towards sex is an exploitative one where personal pleasure is the only goal. Condoms are disdained because “you can’t enjoy it as much”. Perhaps that is true, but it is also true that their reducing the sensation also is a assist to a males “staying power” during intercourse and with that “staying power” the likelihood of female satisfaction increases. Then too by only thinking of “real” sex in terms of intercourse, one misses out on the greater possibilities for pleasure available in foreplay. Most people don’t get that the orgasm IS NOT the measure of sexual pleasure, merely its climax.
“There is a bigger underlying problem. Many Black men understand the statistics that their life expectancy isn’t as good as white men. (That of Hispanics is even lower). Their perception is, given the level of violence and rates of incarceration, that they have few years in which to sow their seed, so they sow whenever and wherever they can. Is it irresponsible? From a white middle class perspective, yes. From the standpoint of an inner city Black man, not necessarily.”
Bettykath makes an excellent point. To which I would add that in America during slavery and after it up until today there has been a continued assault on the possible stability of two parent Black families. I don’t think this assault is an accident.
Anonymously Yours 1, May 20, 2012 at 10:15 am
Dredd,
Depends where you rack em…..
=========================
I rack em in my condominium …
More cannon fodder for the corporate state. We need a lot of poor people to fight our wars and man our airports for the TSA, and support a healthy size of for profit prisons both as the incarcerated and working as guards.
I wonder if he knows this, that he is being used by the government in this way…..Our education system is working in that people are now so uneducated that they cannot do simple math or know when they are being used by the state.
I used to have to process child support garnishments. You can only take 50% of their net pay. Sometimes there were women with child support garnishments. They were pissed. I did it anyway.
Porkem if ya gottem.
There is a bigger underlying problem. Many Black men understand the statistics that their life expectancy isn’t as good as white men. (That of Hispanics is even lower). Their perception is, given the level of violence and rates of incarceration, that they have few years in which to sow their seed, so they sow whenever and wherever they can. Is it irresponsible? From a white middle class perspective, yes. From the standpoint of an inner city Black man, not necessarily.
Having said that, this man has gone to extremes. His seed is already widely sown. The problem isn’t that he has too many children, it’s that he can’t afford to support any of them. You all know that. I think the only solution is a voluntary vasectomy. If he has any empathy at all, he needs to understand how irresponsible it is for his kids and their mothers.
He also needs to know exactly what a vasectomy is, how much pain to expect, how long it will keep him out of circulation, and that, indeed, it won’t keep him out of circulation for long. In the meantime, considering the number of partners he’s had, he needs a good education on the value of condoms for preventing additional pregnancies and STDs. Does Medicaid pay for vasectomies? If not, maybe the court could find a way to pay for it in the interests of the community. Is it ok for the court to mandate this sort of education?
Welfare benefits depending on the number of children isn’t the problem in this case nor in most. In this case, the problem is a guy who can’t keep his zipper up. He probably brags about the number of children and the number of mamas.
Holy condoms Batman. This guy is an idiot and the women who have children by him are idiots. That being said, it is preposterous to think that the government can stop people from having children. I think a municipal advertising campaign to “enlighten” the women in Tennessee about this neanderthal.
The word Bobbit comes to mind. The guy is a STD waiting to happen if it hasn’t already. Maybe one of his sex partners will accuse him of rape & put him away for a bunch of years. Cut his child support? You gotta be kidding. Increase it!
When you subsidize something you get more of it.
I don’t really see this as irresponsible or irrational in the sense that the mothers and father all know that there are resources available to raise the child. Assuming these mothers have a place to live but are not employed full-time, the additional child will earn an allocation for food, health care, cash assistance, and get a free education.
The State must not be given the power to force vasectomies or tubal ligation upon the population when certain conditions are not met, nor should the State have the power to incarcerate people for procreating.
Upon request, free sub-dermal implant contraception.
Dredd,
Depends where you rack em…..
Are the mothers free from any responsibility?
OK, as long as the amount being withheld meets constitutional safeguards (I think there is a federal law which limits the aggregate amount of child support to 40% of disposable income), don’t lower it. Hold him in civil contempt when he doesn’t pay and lock him up for 6 months. Repeat as necessary. Then offer him the deal — “Hatchet, Mr, Hatchett?”
The women should also face tubal ligation after their second child if they cannot pay for child birth or support their children without public assistance.
I think that if he wants to have his child support reduced, the court should tell him to get a vasectomy. One hand washes the other. Easy. It should have been done after about the fourth child.
It is a pretty horrible statement about this type of dude, but what of those women? I want a dead beat for my baby’s daddy?
BTW, something about that guy’s last name suggests a remedy. How to make it constitutional?
Anonymously Yours 1, May 20, 2012 at 9:14 am
I suppose this was purely recreational…….
============================
Pool is cheaper.
Ok, I give up, is he Catholic, Mormon, or Muslim?
Or perhaps just anti-condom republican?
I suppose this was purely recreational…….