Naming of Fathers

In recent days a great deal of media discussion has taken place regarding those reprobates and ne`er do wells who refuse to name the fathers of their babies regardless of the fact that their refusal currently costs them a not insignificant deduction in child support benefits. It’s rumoured that some of these degenerate mothers have come to an agreement with the miscreant fathers which allows him to pay somewhat less than would be required if The State was overseeing the transaction. This may or may not be true and few of us would have any way of knowing the accurate statistics for financial deals of this nature. What I do know is that there can be very sound reasons for fathers not being named and such a decision is not always made lightly. All too often a previous partner enraged to the point of psychosis because a woman has left him against his will, or dared to give birth to his child without permission then possibly put that child’s needs before his own, will actively seek out the woman who once loved him and now lives on State Support with their child, in order to wreak a suitable revenge. The retribution at times involves strenuous attempts to disrupt the harmony of their lives and occasionally violently ends the earthly existence of both mother and child. Having experienced first-hand threats of reprisal in the past for the unspeakable iniquity of failing to abort a child when I was ordered to, I fully understand why some mothers feel it is safer all round to opt for a vague variety of virgin birth. It will heap trouble upon her head but it will always be trouble of a lesser degree than the terrifying alternative. In this debate I am firmly with the mothers!