- What's On Your Mind?
- Love & Sex
- Relationship Issues & Advice
- Fooling Around
- Birth Control
- Being Single
- When Girls Like Girls
- STDs & STIs
- Take Our Sexy Survey Challenge!
- Your Life
- Your Body Issues
- Body Image
- Your Emotions
- Older Girls (18+, please)
- Younger Girls
- Money & Jobs
- Drugs & Alcohol
- Travel, Languages, & Pen Pals
- Your Pets
- Your Passions
- Shout Out a Story
- Fashion, Style, & Shopping
- Movies & TV
- The Internet, Gaming & Your Blogs
- Books & Magazines
- Politics, Current Events & Hot Button Issues
- Spirituality, Religion, Faith & Beliefs
- Your Art & Poetry
- Food & Recipes
- Tattoos, Piercings & Body Art
- Support & Recovery
- Eating Disorder Recovery
- Rape Support
- Suicide Support
- Cutting & Self Mutilation Recovery
- Depression Support
- Abuse Support
- Abortion Support
- Addiction Recovery
- Mental Illness Support
- Adoption Support
- Child Loss Support
- Ideas, Requests & Questions
- Avatar Requests
- Talk to the gURL Staff
- Siggy Test
01-19-2013 01:50 AM
Who would've thought this was legal?
"An unfit Florida mother ,who abandoned her four children and left them unsupervised at a Howard Johnson’s Motel in Winter Haven so that she could go out and party…has been banned from having anymore babies.
The kids were found alone in the motel room just after midnight on October 30th.
When the Police arrived… the door of the room slightly open. Three other children asleep. The room was in complete disarray with trash, clothes and food crumbs all over the floor. Lightseyreturned at around 3:00 a.m.
The children ranged between the ages 1, 3, 7 and 11.
Two of the children have medical issues, one who suffers from cerebral palsy and epilepsy and requires constant care on a regular basis.
Kimberly Lightsey, 30, was charged with Child Neglect and Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor. She appeared beforeCircuit Judge Ernest Jones Jr in Bartow, Florida who offered the plea deal as a condition of her probation.
In order to avoid a five year jail sentence… Lightsey agreed not to have any more children for the next 13 years. She was also placed under house arrest for two years and ordered to carry out 100 hours of community service.
Lightsey was already serving four years of probation after pleading no contest to child abuse. She had been charged with hitting her six-year-old son in the face with a belt in 2009."
" Judge orders deadbeat dad to stop having kids until he pays support. Corey Curtis really likes having kids. He’s quite good at it, actually. Taking care of them? Not so much. The prolific Wisconsin man has fathered nine children with six different women, but he’s been much less eager when it comes to other parental obligations — such as supporting them. Curtis has a history of failing pay child support, so one fed-up judge neutered the deadbeat dad. As a condition of his probation (for jumping bail and failing to pay child support), Judge Tim Boyle banned Curtis from having more children until he pays the $90,000 in back child support he owes."
A big part of me can't help but tthat just justice has been served. People who choose not to take care of the children they already have should not have any. The people who suffer most from deadbeat parents are the kids. But on the other hand...isn't it everyone's right to procreate? What do you think?
Quayla...20...College Senior...SOC/PSYC Major...Happily Taken
01-19-2013 03:39 AM
And privileges can be taken away. And should be when someone misbehaves.
01-19-2013 02:37 PM
The way I see it--
This women cannot take care of the children she has. In fact, it would seem that she chooses not to. Same with the "deadbeat dad" who loves having kids (read: f.ucking) but owes $90K in child support. Why should others be forced to pay for those people's children just because they choose not to? If you want to have children, you have an obligation to pay for them and support them. If you cannot do that, I don't think you should have children.
01-19-2013 05:15 PM
See when i look at if from a is it legal standpoint i say no its not legal. but when i look at it from a is it right i say yes the jugde did the absolute right thing. if a judge can by any means stop there from being one more orphan or one more abused child then i think they should be allowed to bend the rules a little. i mean its not like they completely took away their power to have children they just said they couldnt have children for a certain amount of time. if these people grow up a little and have some responsiblity then when the time comes they can settle down and have a family. but until then they have some lessons to learn about being responsible
shoot for the moon because even if you miss you will end up among the stars
Music is my life
I play flute and violin
I'm a Ginger,14 (ALMOST 15), Single but not for long, BiCurious,Smartish,Short
Before you can love any one else you must first love yourself
And I love myself
I'm a true romantic
01-31-2013 01:41 AM
That's the thing. The ball is (and always has been) completely in these people's court. They CHOSE to act in this way and now there's consequences. But they can also CHOOSE to get a job, stop being idiots and do the right thing.
He can start paying some child support and once he starts paying the Judges are much more likely to make him a deal about the back child support than if he whines about it now when he's NOT paying. So it's very likely if he starts paying that he will NOT have to pay back the $90K.
If they start acting like mature adults, they'll get their privileges/rights back including the right to have more kids since they'll be taking care of the kids they have properly. But as long as they CHOOSE to act like children, the law will treat them like children in many respects.
Choice is theirs.