The inclusion of paternafare in contemporary welfare law fulfills an ideological objective that is viewed by the leadership of both major political parties as a crucial political goal. It symbolically constructs poverty as the fruit of immoral and pathological behavior on the part of deviant heterosexual women rather than the product of the structural conditions, and it exemplifies and legitimates the neoliberal transfer of the obligation to support the poor from the State to the private patriarchal household. On an ideological level, paternafare mimics feminist principles: men should pay their fair share where childrearing costs are concerned. Poverty advocates who are seeking some immediate gains for welfare mothers under the welfare reform regime rightly point out that child support payments can lift some of these women and their children out of poverty. However, even the best designed child support regime cannot, in and of itself, transform the wage labor market that locks a substantial number of these men and women in the lowest income brackets. Further, paternafare encroaches upon poor custodial mothers' privacy rights and right to self-determination, and it uniquely imposes its heteropatriarchal model of dependence upon poor women. Finally, paternafare enhances the risk that the male payers will harass and abuse the welfare mothers and their children. In this sense, paternafare should be seen as the fruit of antifeminist ideology.