Comments on: Paul Pierce’s Child Support Fight Is About More Than Money.

By: G. Waller

G. Waller — Thu, 06 Aug 2026 17:58:11 +0000

Its clearly a 2 way street. He knew the consequences when he was laying with her. She anticipated an outcome when she was laying with him. Instead of requesting a dollar amount, how about requesting a time amount? If the child is with him 50% of a month, every month, lower child support. If he’s absent, higher child support.

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 04 Aug 2026 13:27:44 +0000

In reply to P. Mitchell.

Sorry single mother. I have to disagree with your assertion that men need to be more responsible. Women completely control who is born in the United States, unless there has been some form of foul play. Otherwise, it’s a one-way street! Therefore, if a child is born, it’s because she wanted it to be, and she should have to deal with that consequence.
If you want to stop or inhibit a certain behavior, you provide a deterrent to it-you don’t reward practice of the deviant behavior. (Having babies without the means to support them can be considered deviant.) When she decides to take a pregnancy to term-then she can decide to provide the diapers, etc., and not get free access to a man’s wallet.
All we need to do is follow the money. and use baby-momma logic: give the child to Paul and pay him 30K a month, because that’s what he needs to meet the child’s needs.
She how quickly that argument falls apart?

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 04 Aug 2026 13:08:00 +0000

In reply to CLSmooth.

Your assertion is ridiculous and conflated with that new “modern and independent woman” argument that females, who have 100% choice about getting pregnant; somehow get the RIGHT to a wealthy man’s finances, while he remains powerless to tell her and her bottle-sucking choices are hers alone. What happened to “no means no?”

If there were laws enacted to stop this draconian baby-momma mill mentality, there would be a marked depreciation in the number of unwed mothers and children that are pawns for their mothers to push around the board on men for 18 years. Additionally, make them legally responsible for saddling a man with child support for children that are not his in the form of complete restitution, including jail time for fraud, and watch the result for the better.

Men don’t owe women child support just because SHE decides to have a child and he should not be enjoined to any requirement to pay her for a quarter of her lifetime because she wants to reproduce. Better yet, get a job and keep your legs closed!

By: CLSmooth

CLSmooth — Mon, 03 Aug 2026 20:38:33 +0000

While I get the absence during her pregnancy can be looked at negatively; without knowing the nature of their relationship we can’t assume it was all in Paul. I also think making it about an unborn child is a reach. During those nine months its more about the mother than the child. Making sure she’s comfortable and looked after, but if that’s not the nature of their relationship then who are we to vilify Paul. As far as the financial support during pregnancy, she makes $400k a year! Uhhh, it doesn’t sound like she needs much support in that area.

By: Charles

Charles — Mon, 03 Aug 2026 19:59:44 +0000

I think you are missing the whole mark; the system is broken. Child support should not be based on one’s salary and lifestyle but on providing for the child. 4,000 a month should be enough to provide for a child. What math are you using to calculate 29K per month for a child. What contribution do you think the mother should be making.

By: P. Mitchell

P. Mitchell — Mon, 03 Aug 2026 16:12:42 +0000

As a single mother, it doesn’t take 30k a month to meet the needs of a child. The child has two parents. What is her financial responsibility to the child. Two people created this child and they both knew what they were doing. Men need to be more responsible, and women need to not attach themselves to men through a child for gain. How did she reach the conclusion that she needs 30k a month to meet the child’s needs and wants? Where does she work and what is her income? Maybe she should give custody to the father if she needs that much money to help take care him.

By: Tony

Tony — Mon, 03 Aug 2026 15:37:03 +0000

If Paul Pierce is the test case, then the test fails miserably. Too many fathers trying to see their kids in the community are met with girls who never became women, who are trying to win some sort of game you all made up. The issue isn’t the visitation. It’s what happens when trying to visit. Imagine, trying to visit your children who see you trying to be calm while a rabid dog is trying to rip you to shreds because they need to get out every negative thought, feeling, and emotion they feel (not that you have anything to do with it.) because you’re the target they’ve laid their eyes on, or are now the local dump they can dump their frustrations about life on. ACCOUNTABILITY is important. Women in today’s day and age refuse to take it, and any leverage over men they can garner is considered fair game, even when they’re the cause. Before spouting about what he did, what did she do? She makes $400,000.00? you said he’s only pulling in about a 1/4 of that so asking for a lesser amount in comparison isn’t really the issue is it? It’s the fact women in today’s day and age need to feel like they won some prize by getting over. And $30,000.00 a month for a human being who can’t even speak, let alone tie their own shoes yet seems excessive, especially when the main caretaker is of means! Breaking men is the new game and American women have the upper hand. How long before everyone realizes the game has been rigged for too long in the female favor and begin to ask themselves, why are we still doing this? Also, you really think a kid is going to google themselves 10 to 12 years from now to see what went down between mom and dad? More likely they’ll be more interested in what new fashion or music is going on. Get real, Most of us are trying as parents. Men get the poop end of the stick in America because our society has made it easy to do. When are the girls in our society going to grow up and begin to take responsibility for their own actions and attitudes, and try to AMICABLY garner mutual understanding that they have to be willing to show up and put aside their own feelings for the BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD!?????

By: Jay Will

Jay Will — Mon, 03 Aug 2026 15:27:38 +0000

This is a real sassy hit piece. What if that man didn’t want a kid with her and she decided to keep it…? Furthermore, it does not take 30k per month for a child to be reared in the U.S.