this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2025
399 points (97.2% liked)

World News

51499 readers
2059 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rebecca Joynes is currently serving a six and a half year prison sentence

A teacher who was convicted for having sex with two boys, becoming pregnant by one, has been banned from the profession.

Maths teacher Rebecca Joynes, 31, was jailed for six and a half years in July last year after being found guilty of six counts of sexual activity with a child, after sleeping with one pupil before falling pregnant by a second while on police bail.

The Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) convened earlier this month via a virtual hearing, which Joynes did not attend, to consider her professional conduct. A panel recommended she be banned from teaching.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Child support is for the child. The child is legally & morally entitled to full support regardless of how it was conceived.

[–] stephan262@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yes but the payments are made to the child's guardian. Meaning that a victim of rape will be forced to make payments to their abuser directly because of the rape, which I think is morally indefensible.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Not to mention that the rape victim is, themselves, a child.

But really, my comment wasn't meant to be a commentary on the child support system itself. Rather calling out a flippant remark that dismissed the gravity of the situation.

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Not necessarily: it can be made to a trust or an agency per legal arrangement. Regardless, it's still the child's & not parent's, and it's both morally & legally necessary. Money is fungible: whatever in excess of their share a custodian pays for childcare needs to be paid back by the non-custodial parents. Charges of fraud may be pursued for misspent funds.