1) Fact: Perspective parents in very few states are assured that they will be able to be a meaningful part of their kids lives, even if they do nothing to warrant their kid being stripped away.

2) Fact: Mothers are designated as CP in divorce about 11 tiems as often as fathers are. In all but a small percentage of these cases no wrongdoing was determined to have ben committed by either parent.

3) Fact: Any perspective parent who believes that they would be less likely to be designated as CP would also believe that they would likely be reduced to less than a meaningful part of their soon to be child's life at some point in their childhood.

4) Fact: About half of all marriages end in divorce and the rate is on the rise.

With knowledge of the facts, why would any good pespective parent who believed he likely would be reduced to less than a meaningful part of their kids' life to choose to have them in the first place? Of course, perspective parents who could care less about being a meaningful part of their kids' lives would be undeterred by laws that jeopardize that ability.

Fact 5: Those are the perverse incentives established by our government.

I'm with you here, but I also think there is an answer to your question as to why people -- especially men -- would still choose to marry and start faimilies.

1. We do it because we honestly want to have children and families just as much as women do. The belief that men don't want children as much as women do is a myth.

2. The vast majority of people -- regardless of how much information is out there -- really just don't understand how bad this problem is. There are a lot of reasons for this, the main ones being the fact that this side of it pretty much is never covered by the media or politicians.

I think this leaves many people with the perspective that joint custody is really a sharing of custody -- which it's not and shared custody is actually quite rare -- and that joint custody is in fact much more common than it is.

In terms of child support, I don't think many people realize how much it is or how it works. I think if you asked people on the street how much someone making $50,000 a year should pay in CS for one child to the other parent who makes $40,000 a year I'll bet you most would say "Oh a couple hundred dollars." The actual amount would be over $700 per month. If you asked them how much they should contribute to things like daycare they'd probably assume CS should cover that. It doesn't. That would be an additional $400 - $500 per month so now that person's up to $1100 or $1200 per month for one child.

Next if you asked them how much should be payed if the parents have joint custody with nearly a 50-50 parenting time share, they'd probably assume no child support should change hands. In reality, in most states, this doesn't change the CS payment by one cent.

I think if you look at the ballot referendum in Massachuesetts that's what was being said by the voters. When asked if shared custody should be default upon divorce, I'll bet you dollars to donuts most of the people that voted yes thought that was already the way things worked.

Most do not even consider how much 10% compounded interests adds up to the already bogus amount owed for child support. Yes, it is bogus because it does not represent any actual monetary debt.

The interest payment on my child support is more than the actual child support payment. Because of this, I do not expect to be able to pay off the child support amount that the child support agency has against me unless the laws change for equity.