Complaint Review: Joel Lavon Crockett - Logan Utah

So, because a mother wishes to care for her child or children, and is asking for help, she is disrespectful and awful?

Did anyone think that perhaps the children were abused and the mother wanted to keep them safe?  Did anyone think that perhaps he decided not to have visitation when he was offered visitation?

For those guys that have been considered to be a "sperm donor" I'm sorry you have gone through that, but don't think for a second that all guys have been considered that.  Perhaps this woman thought she was in love and was trying to make it work, but if her child comes to her and says, "mommy, daddy did this to me," what is she supposed to do to keep her child safe?  For the children's safety she removes them from the circumstance.

Maybe this woman is doing her best to care for her children and eventhough she is doing everything in her power it is still coming up short.  Is it terrible to expect the father to provide a little?  If he chooses not to be part of the child or children's lives that is his choice, but should he cause the child to suffer or think that he can get away with everything and that the tears and pleading from there mother doesn't matter.

Just a thought, that although every situation is different, don't just assume mother wanted only a sperm donor.  You don't know her, please don't judge her. 

We all make mistakes and we all have trials.  If he is truly running to save his image that is an interesting thought, but who knows if that is his reason or if he just wants to save a few bucks.  Of course we may never know, so we can't judge him either.  But before commenting we should think of all possibilities of why someone is puting up a ripoff report.  Just a thought.  Take it or leave it.

Thanks. Men's Rights is not about forcing single women to abort or not abort. That choice is completely theirs. We only ask that men be given the same choices as women, single or married, and if a child is wanted by both parents, that child should be able to spend equal time with both parents. My belief is that since the Constitution says discrimination by gender is not allowed, neither is discrimination by reproductive biology, since reproductive biology is a characteristic of gender. I also believe that people who TOGETHER bring a child into the world are responsible for that child even when a split-up happens. There should then be a presumption for joint legal and physical custody; the child belongs to both equally. If the child ends up spending more time with one parent, that parent should receive compensation (support). This would keep parents who say that want joint custody to avoid support from opting out of the child's life. Many, many men just give up because the few days they are allowed to see their kids is not enough time to establish a real relationship. They see themselves as visitors with cash, if the mother allows visitation. The point these women express here is well taken. There are male creatures that lead a woman to believe they want the child, then balk at taking care the child. These men are dispicable in my book. However, when I see these reports here, I always ask myself, did SHE give him the same choices she had? (I emphasize "she" because the courts-government certainly offer no choices.) Anon, I'm a "trouble-maker" in the same vein that early feminists were trouble-makers. These things need pointed out or people will not know these problems exist. Men are people, too. We have feelings. The real problem with men, from my perspective, is they only look out for number one and basically say to hell with the other guy.

I do agree with some of what you are saying. There are many cases in which a man is trapped into being a father or just a monetary donor when he had no choice whatsoever in the matter. I have a good friend...he and his wife were in their 40's and on the verge of divorce when he found out she was pregnant with their first and only child. It was the LAST thing he wanted at that late stage in his life. They divorced before the child was born and child support was granted in the divorce papers, but visitation wasn't even mentioned. Now he pays $1100 a month in child support so mom can drive a mercedes and she refuses to let him see the child because he "didn't want him from the beginning" so he has to come up with even more money for lawyers to try and do the right thing and if he doesn't, that child is going to grow up thinking his dad is a schmuck because he wasn't a part of his life. I'm sure there are many situations like this one in which child support is unfair. 1)because he wasn't given any choices and 2)because he is not allowed to be a part of the child's life. He was forced to be a sperm donor and is now forced to fork over the money or face jail or worse. As for me, I don't feel one bit guilty. Very few of us are able to predict our future - financial or otherwise. My husband and I chose to have a child together under the misguided perception that we would be together as a family forever. In this case, I feel he should be required to at least provide partial help for the childcare so I am able to work and provide everything else. We can't assume all men are unresponsible pigs any more than we can assume all women are gold digging hussies.

"If he didn't want to be a father, he should have kept it in his pants! If he chose not to, then he needs to pay the consequences...which is paying his child support!" And all of you women need to be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen: go make me a sandwich, and grab me a beer while you're in there.LOL You had LEGAL choices to terminate your parental responsibilities. You had CHOICEs. Men do not have choice, save the one you quote, "he should have kept it in his pants." This is as archaic and ignorant as my previous paragraph. If you believe the Constitution is the law of the land, you MUST grant men CHOICE as well, as required under the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. If you use the Constitution only for your rights or the rights of those you favor, you are a traitor to the Constitution and all it stands for. "I don't know about this lady, but I pay $400 a month for daycare so I can work to keep a roof over my son's head, while his father thinks the $45 a week he was court ordered to pay is too much. That's less than half...not counting food, clothes, etc. " You made the LEGAL CHOICE to have a child. Was your child's father given a choice? "And what is that crap about giving him time to feel his guilt? Spare me. Maybe if he'd get a job, work for a living and support his offspring he wouldn't have anything to feel guilty about!" You should be the one feeling guilty. You kept your child without knowing whether the father was going to support it financially or emotionally. Bad CHOICE on your part. Millions of women have made the choice to abort, abandon, or adopt out because of finances, education, career, or because they're just not emotionally ready. Don't men have these same excuses? Shouldn't men have these same choices? MY Constitution says they do. (Men can perform a "paper" abortion by signing a legal document.)

If he didn't want to be a father, he should have kept it in his pants! If he chose not to, then he needs to pay the consequences...which is paying his child support! I don't know about this lady, but I pay $400 a month for daycare so I can work to keep a roof over my son's head, while his father thinks the $45 a week he was court ordered to pay is too much. That's less than half...not counting food, clothes, etc. And what is that crap about giving him time to feel his guilt? Spare me. Maybe if he'd get a job, work for a living and support his offspring he wouldn't have anything to feel guilty about!

If this man wanted the child at the start, there should be a reasonable expectation of joint legal and physical custody. There should be no child support between the two, just a desire to see the child loved, appreciated, and cared for. The only time there should be support is when one parent is down on their luck or if a parent stops spending time with the child. Failure to allow visitation would be punishable by fines and jail time. False allegations of any type of abuse would be grounds for revoking parental rights, but not financial responsibilities. If this man didn't want the child, then he's been screwed by the mother and the government. CHOICE for MEN, TOO!

This is a grown man your speaking of. He should have thought about NOT wanting to take care of a child before the fact not after. One you lay down without protection your responsible for whatever happens after that. This child didnt ask to have a father not be there. And deserves whatever the mother can give him, including 50.00 a week his dad is supposed to be paying. Shes sticking up for her child, maybe he could have it a little better with the support of the dad. Maybe shes already working 2jobs to keep a roof. You guys would love to send us back to the days when a man caould laye down whenever he wants with whomever he wants and then walk away with no consious. Never worrying leaving it all to the women. It takes 2 and shes doing her part. And Im sure shes sorry she stick her child with a guy who caould care less whats going on with him.

This is a grown man your speaking of. He should have thought about NOT wanting to take care of a child before the fact not after. One you lay down without protection your responsible for whatever happens after that. This child didnt ask to have a father not be there. And deserves whatever the mother can give him, including 50.00 a week his dad is supposed to be paying. Shes sticking up for her child, maybe he could have it a little better with the support of the dad. Maybe shes already working 2jobs to keep a roof. You guys would love to send us back to the days when a man caould laye down whenever he wants with whomever he wants and then walk away with no consious. Never worrying leaving it all to the women. It takes 2 and shes doing her part. And Im sure shes sorry she stick her child with a guy who caould care less whats going on with him.

This is a grown man your speaking of. He should have thought about NOT wanting to take care of a child before the fact not after. One you lay down without protection your responsible for whatever happens after that. This child didnt ask to have a father not be there. And deserves whatever the mother can give him, including 50.00 a week his dad is supposed to be paying. Shes sticking up for her child, maybe he could have it a little better with the support of the dad. Maybe shes already working 2jobs to keep a roof. You guys would love to send us back to the days when a man caould laye down whenever he wants with whomever he wants and then walk away with no consious. Never worrying leaving it all to the women. It takes 2 and shes doing her part. And Im sure shes sorry she stick her child with a guy who caould care less whats going on with him.

This is a grown man your speaking of. He should have thought about NOT wanting to take care of a child before the fact not after. One you lay down without protection your responsible for whatever happens after that. This child didnt ask to have a father not be there. And deserves whatever the mother can give him, including 50.00 a week his dad is supposed to be paying. Shes sticking up for her child, maybe he could have it a little better with the support of the dad. Maybe shes already working 2jobs to keep a roof. You guys would love to send us back to the days when a man caould laye down whenever he wants with whomever he wants and then walk away with no consious. Never worrying leaving it all to the women. It takes 2 and shes doing her part. And Im sure shes sorry she stick her child with a guy who caould care less whats going on with him.

I understand the womans situation here and think that through her terrible attraction to destroy a person because of a dept is worse then the man that has definitly ran from her to save his respect. The law in these situations has gone obviously to d**n far towards the women side. What next, the death penalty for lack of payment in a child support case. What good does it do to throw a Father in jail or worse for not paying child support. Sounds to me that this woman was just using this man for a baby in which she then would never let him see again. Then on top of that, make him pay dearly with his respect and well being as a person and if she had the chance, probably have him put to the chair. Lady, get a life and try treating your childs father with respect so he can feel the guilt of not supporting his child instead of running from your long arm of the law. Gawd, women who do this need to put the shoe on the other foot and see how terrible the fathers of today get trashed by these heartless women. The law needs to be changed to be more investigative to why these situations come about and not so much towards beating the male fathers to depression and escape from the ridiculously harsh laws. Deadbeat dads, hmmm...maybe it should be bitchbeating mothers.