The only true thing about this statement is that if a custodial parent has non-mutual children, the “first child” is eligible for 20% of the non-custodial parent’s paycheck in terms of child support calculations unless there are other factors to consider (criminal history as a deterrent to seeking and holding substantial gainful employment, disability on the part of the non-custodial parent, things like that). Children born of the same non-custodial parent are only eligible for an additional 5% of their pay up to a certain percentage when things like sizable arrears are not taken into consideration. But Father’s Rights Activists thinking that a woman intentionally “gets multiple baby daddies for more money and more government benefits” is absolutely laughable, especially since they disseminate “tactics” amongst themselves to try and reduce if not eliminate their obligation to pay child support. (And also, doesn’t child support typically stop at age eighteen assuming that the child is not disabled and the order is safe to collect on? Riddle me this, you bozos. Really.)