I saw part of it, and what I saw, he said pretty much what he said on the Tyra Banks show.....They practiced 'safe sex' most of the time. He can see the baby, but mostly on the Palin's conditions. I guess Bristol is now going around singing the praises of abstinence. That horse is out of the barn. In my opinion, both Bristol and Levi come from troubled families and wish they would all go away. JMO Dottie

I got the impression that he wasn't seeing as much of the baby as he would like. He did say he had a lawyer so there may be some legal action to follow. His mother and sister were on with himn. Then I fell asleep.

He;s pretty unsophisticated, and on his own he is no match for the Palins. I really think he's in over his head.

I too fell asleep in it, but felt that Larry King was really urging them to say more than they were...like he really wanted them to open up with the 'dirty' scoop.

I thought both Levi and his Mother were very reserved, and chose their words carefully so as to not come across as bad mouthing the Palins. I admired them for what they maybe did 'not' say, though they might have been thinking it.

They do have an attorney. They have not really done anything yet...though Larry acted like the should be doing 'something' now....again, egging them on, imho.

I'm sure they will want and need to set up legal arrangements for the support and for visitation (is that what it is called? ) of the baby, but they just are not jumping the gun, making any big demands at the moment.

That was my 'take' on what I saw anyway. I 'think' they maybe think that in time, it will just all work out. Levi has not been allowed to 'take' the baby for visitation away from the Palin home...but then he is young, inexperienced, and the baby is quite new. In time he and his parents will, I imagine, have the baby per the courts set up schedule....hence having an attorney to represent them when the time comes.

Sue

The only thing I did not like about Levi, was his comment that he won't be paying support until it goes to court. There is nothing stopping him from paying support now, and it shows good character as well as a sense of responsibility to the child to do it now rather than waiting until he is legally forced to. Support obligations have nothing at all to do with visitation-they are two separate issues. I feel VERY strongly about this. His mother should be encouraging him to pay support now.

I still think he's unsophisticated, but I don't think that's why he's not paying support.

I agree with you Susan, that comment really bothered me too. Why wait for the courts to tell you, do the right thing now.

I suspect that this is what Larry King was fishing for them to come out and say - the "why" over his not taking legal action over more rights to have the baby - the why being that he doesn't pay child support. That is a news story, broken by the Larry King show.

Once he pushes legally, he is going to be forced by the courts to pay child support - and buying diapers and clothes is not child support, that is simply what a parent does - he is under the wrong impression if he honestly thinks that this counts in any way. The check needs to be sent, that is the only form of child support the courts recognize.

I feel sorry for this kid. His family and his representatives need to take him away from the cameras and dreams of making a bunch of money because he is in the spotlight.

He never finished high school. In five years people won't even recognize his name anymore. I suspect that in five years, people won't remember the Palins anymore either - her term of Governer will be past by then.

In 15 years, his child will be aware of the statements his father made way back when and if this kid is a person of basic integrity, he is going to regret a lot of this in his future. He is just a kid, the adults need to look after his best interests, and this isn't in his best interests. What's wrong with that Mother of his?!?

They need to see to it that he keeps his mouth shut to prevent embarrassment over what he is saying now to come back and haunt him in the future. He needs to get that high school diploma and then get the training be the electrician that he says he wants to be. In five years, he is going to be five years behind the 8 ball as far as his education and his earning potential goes. They are not doing him any favor by trying to cash in - that money he *might* make now will be long gone and he will be left with egg on his face in his child's eyes. He isn't old enough to understand this right now but his mother sure is.

Just my opinion - just a sad case. And, Bristol isn't doing her child any favors by keeping the child's father so far removed, child payments or no. The child needs his father in his life, warts and all. Bristol is too young to grasp this, but her parents aren't.

I feel, shame on all the adults in this sad mess. Just my take on it.

Generally a client is advised not to pay any support until the court orders it when there is going to be issues. It's like setting a precedent or something of that nature...

In Canada, visitation has absolutely nothing to do with support. Even if the father does not want any contact with the child, he still has the same support obligation as if he had visitation. Support is calculated by things like the payor's (father, in this case) income and number of children. There is a simple chart that is used to determine the amount of child support that will be paid. There's no issue of setting a precedent at all.

I wondered if maybe it isn't like what Ruthie said above.

It might be too, that the Palins or they have all agreed that there need not be any support until it goes to court and the amount is set, along with the visiting time for Levi and his parents.

Bristol is young and inexperienced too, when it comes to having a new baby, not just Levi. It takes two to make a baby so I don't see why he has to answer to HER (or her mother as the case may be). Of course, he should be making child support payments but just because the Palins have money coming out of their you-know-whats don't make them any better parents.

Personally, I wish they'd all dry up and blow away.

I don't really care what happens to the whole Palin family and all their off-shoots.

That child will be taken care of very well, regardless of whether he starts paying child support, now, court-determined schedule, or never. I'm not sure that there are details that have not been surfaced, but it's probably just a case of the family rallying 'round the Mom, and the fact that this kid is not up to their standards. Plus there is the story about his friends - what a reason to make a child or parent suffer! I'm sure though, Mom's family just wishes he would just go away. That's tough, especially if there is no way this kid could ever give as much as the Mom's family could, but his love. I'm not saying he shouldn't pay child support - they both have a responsibility to provide. But if the shoe was on the other foot, and Mom had to pay child support, her family would be helping and it wouldn't be as much of a burden.

As far as starting to pay now - I think he should get legal advice, for sure. This family will try to take him to the cleaners. And I'm sure they would find a way to say that he didn't honor their agreement, or that it wouldn't be enough. I'm sure he would be called a dead-beat because he couldn't pay what they think is fair. But that wouldn't necessarily be true.

I'm so not against child support. I'm a victim of a dad that walked out and hid from even the IRS (didn't work) so no one could find him (EXCEPT ME) and force child support. We had just moved into an upper-crust home, and bought a brand new car. Of course he left the car payment and mortgage for my Mom to pay on a measley nurses salary. We made it, but I think the stress led to my Mom no longer being here. But, in the situation of the Alaska folks, I think this guy will be left holding the bag. I just hope the child does not continue to be the victim of the childishness that is going on now. You gotta pay to play - we all know that, but also, let's be reasonable. The child will not suffer from a financial standpoint if the Dad can't pay. He needs love and attention as well. What little bit he could pay will not make an ounce of difference to a family that can take care of the child without his money. It will only be on principle. And when it is all added up, and the truth be told, I'm sure there was some suggestion of going-along to get-along to keep any bad press from hitting the streets during the election.

Break-ups happen - that's just reality. The Dad needs to pay something, according to his ability, without tearing his life apart. The Mom's family will not be torn apart if they dont' get the optimum amount. Unless she leaves the family, Mom will be fine, and will have a good life.

Sorry for the long post, but I guess I'm an advocate for fair and reasonable justice, especially when children are involved.