Deadbeat Dads (and moms)

[Grace]

he is supporting his child....not the ex wife..that is called alimony....

500 bucks a month aint mal when it comes to supporting a child.....125 bucks a week....

i got zero sympathy for anyone who complains about child support

Sorry..but that is incorrect. My ex pays child support. The DA (welfare) gives it to the skank in behalf of the children. SHE buys drugs by selling her foodstamps. SHE is the one that got both boys in to drugs because in her words "I'd rather they get high with me than in the streets". Stupid bitch skank that she is, she never thought to tell them to say NO to drugs and be better than she is. So no. Money sent to the parent raising the children is not for the children in quite a few cases. It goes to drugs, new dresses, dinners out with new wannabe boyfriends, booze, makeup, new hairdos to attact a new john, etc etc etc.

(Speaking from personal experience of witnessing this shit).

For awhile there, he didn't pay support. By then the kids were grown, gone, had their own kids (probably taught their own kids the same thing their skanky mother did). So back child support will be paid for ever by the ex. IF the money had gone TO THE KIDS via an unbiased person keeping an eyeball on where those funds went, great. But that didn't happen...and it still doesn't happen. That fat ho sat on her 300 lb ass and gobbled her way thru every cent.

 

[strollingbones]

sounds like he was making poor choices and paying dearly for them....if he believe the mother unfit...he should have taken action to get his kids...i always hear people slamming the ex but not wanting to take custody

 

[Moonglow]

sounds like he was making poor choices and paying dearly for them....if he believe the mother unfit...he should have taken action to get his kids...i always hear people slamming the ex but not wanting to take custody

If you have thousands of dollars to spend fighting custody then be my quest.

 

[Anachronism]

sounds like he was making poor choices and paying dearly for them....if he believe the mother unfit...he should have taken action to get his kids...i always hear people slamming the ex but not wanting to take custody

I understand where you're coming from, bones. My friend in PA has custody of her 4 kids. Her ex has constantly complained about the amount he is forced to pay in child support, but he has routinely called at the last moment to cancel weekend's he's supposed to have them, and the only time he even considered fighting for actual custody was thwarted by his lawyer reminding him that it actually costs more to support the kids for a month than what he was paying, so it would actually have been a net loss to him, financially.

 

[strollingbones]

sounds like he was making poor choices and paying dearly for them....if he believe the mother unfit...he should have taken action to get his kids...i always hear people slamming the ex but not wanting to take custody

I understand where you're coming from, bones. My friend in PA has custody of her 4 kids. Her ex has constantly complained about the amount he is forced to pay in child support, but he has routinely called at the last moment to cancel weekend's he's supposed to have them, and the only time he even considered fighting for actual custody was thwarted by his lawyer reminding him that it actually costs more to support the kids for a month than what he was paying, so it would actually have been a net loss to him, financially.

exactly....they bitch and moan but do nothing....i have known some people who did step up and gain custody and yea it took a while and it took some money but arent your kids worth money?

but in all fairness....many times i have thought my husband was not the best husband in the shed but i knew that he was the best father my son would ever have....that counted for a lot

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You have to look at how the courts award child support. In my state they do it with no regard to the parents ability to pay.

I have a cousin that pays 500 a month for his one child. That was fine when he was making good money but since he got laid off he cant afford it. The courts refuse to lower the amount. Since he is poor he cant afford a good lawyer.

Since he cant get the amount lowered and cant pay it he lost his drivers lic. Now he cant get to work and lost his job. Now they are going to throw him in jail.

Did we not learn that debters prison does not work. The child support system is corrupt and wrong in some states.

PS: He was married to the mom for 5 years she left him for another man.

This is what happens when we let the government get involved in family affairs.

 

[frazzledgear]

I'm conflicted in this issue. I believe that non custodial divorced parents ought to pay support for their child, but I also think that since we don't jail custodial parents when they lose their job and ability to provide support for the child, then we shouldn't jail the non custodial parent who is unable to provide support either. That being said.. I believe that child support laws should only apply to divorced parents not those with children born out of wedlock.

I'm not the least bit conflicted on this. Imprisoning people because they owe MONEY is an antiquated and totally counter-productive response for failure to pay on ANY debt. The fact this particular debt is child support doesn't change that fact. Which is why we eliminated debtor's prisons in the first place. Throwing roadblocks in the way of those you actually want to PAY what they owe and making it even harder for them to do it -is a medieval and completely unproductive response. PERIOD.

Why should child support only apply to the divorced parents while giving a free pass to those who CARELESSLY reproduce and then expect to skip free of their responsibility for the new life THEY helped create? I don't like a system that rewards a woman with child support for her selfish decision to have a child outside of wedlock -but that wasn't a decision the child made. It was the decision of BOTH unmarried parents to not insure their consensual sex act did not result in the creation of a new life. BOTH must support that child and excuses a woman lied or deliberately got pregnant is bullshit. If a man doesn't want to pay child support for an out-of-wedlock child - HE can avoid that just as readily as a woman! But the child cannot be punished for their stupidity or deception or any other circumstances by which the child came into existence. You don't want to be supporting a child yet especially one born of out wedlock (which is an INCREDIBLY selfish thing to do a child since it is a known fact to be a significantly more harmful situation for the child to be reared) -in this day and age there is NO excuse for not taking the necessary precautions to insure you don't bring about the creation of an out-of-wedlock pregnancy then. The responsibility of a man is not lesser NOR greater than that of a woman and in order to for a woman to get pregnant with a child the father did not want to create -requires he abandon HIS responsibility to avoid that situation. HE pays for it -not the child.

As for the person who said they have no sympathy with the amounts non-custodial parents are told to pay that go above their ability to pay in the first place -get real.

My nephew and his wife have 2 kids 5 and 2. His wife started spending hours talking to a total stranger in Canada while he was working. She decided she was head-over-heels in love with this total stranger, refused family counseling and said what she thought would lead to her own greater happiness was far more important than the personal happiness of the other 3 people in the family. So she broke up the family and is now his ex-wife.

My nephew, who spent every non-working hour with his family has been told he may NOT spend any more than 3 hours with his children a week and that must only be on EITHER Saturday or Sunday but not both. The judge ruled it was because they are just too young at the ages of 5 and 2. They weren't too young to be in his care or spend the night under his roof before -but SUDDENLY the fact his wife wanted to go on a search for a more exciting life than she perceived hers to be the judge seems to think that somehow reflects poorly on his parenting abilities with his daughters NOW? The ex admitted he was a wonderful father and his kids adore him and she did not request such a ridiculous visitation schedule but it made zero difference. The judge is concerned about their FATHER in spite of testimony he has been a wonderful, loving and caring parent -BUT the judge didn't have a damn thing to say about the FACT the mother leaves her two kids for many times more hours with the dude living next door to her or with her brother when she goes bar hopping a couple of times a week. My nephew was told by his lawyer that this judge -a WOMAN of course and clearly one who sees a father as pretty irrelevant in the life of a child except as a paycheck -also made it nearly impossible for other noncustodial fathers to maintain a close relationship and play an active role in raising their children as well but made gave fathers the least amount of time with their daughters. Obviously SHE has a real hangup, significant mental issues and unreasonable prejudices -and she makes every father, especially fathers of little girls, pay for it. And his lawyer wants another $3000 to try and get that order modified so he he can see his children on a regular enough basis to actually BE a father to them.

That entire thing is bad enough -the guy who wanted to keep his family intact sees it destroyed instead along with getting a judge who did her best to insure he can't maintain a normal, parental relationship with his own children.

But it gets worse. My nephew was ordered to pay $500 PER child -$1000 a month in child support. For the person who said she has no sympathy with noncustodial parents being ordered to pay $500 a month -there really are people who aren't all making big bucks but were fully able to support their children on their income when married. His children were well dressed, well fed and well cared for. Maybe you really didn't know this but fathers aren't given a "group" rate when they have more than one child either -the amount is PER CHILD even though what it costs to support two children is NOT double what it takes to support one and what it takes to support three is NOT triple what it takes to support one. But there is no lump sum or group rate -child support is determined for one child and then multiplied by that same amount for any additional children.

So my nephew was ordered to pay $500 per child. But my nephew who earned just slightly more than his ex - only makes $9.50 an hour with zero reasonable expectations of changing that anytime soon in this economy. About $1650 a month. They had been comfortably albeit not extravagantly, providing for themselves and their children on two incomes -his is reduced to $1650 a month. But he was ordered to pay $1000 of it in child support now. You know anyone who can pay their rent, utilities, food, car payment and gas on $650 a month?

Let's get real here. This judge not only punished HIM for failing to make his ex-wife ecstatic every waking moment when she decided to yank the rug out from everyone else in that family for her own stupid fantasy of running off with some Canadian stranger -that judge -entirely due to her own personal hangups --deliberately destroyed his relationship with his children rendering him for all intents and purposes a non-existent person in the life of his kids.

And then deliberately set him up to be delinquent in his child support payments by setting it beyond his means insuring he would be unable to pay that amount and support himself at the same time. WTF kind of system is THAT where people are being deliberately set up like that? That judge knows good and well he is highly likely to fall behind. So I have to wonder about those who would still insist the proper response when he will inevitably fall behind is to....THROW HIM IN JAIL for it? Are you kidding? That benefits his children HOW? It not only won't create one additional dime he can pay, tossing him in jail for it will most likely cause him to lose his job entirely, making it impossible for him to pay ANYTHING at all. So what then? Throw him in jail LONGER? That will really teach him a lesson about what a truly unjust place the US has become, won't it? But it will NOT create more money for him to pay! It would only multiply the misery factor for this guy and guarantee he will regret for the rest of his life that ever met this woman, much less had children with her. Truly I wonder about the people acting so self-righteous that they would even suggest such a thing -much less support it. That mentality of jailing people for their failure to pay a debt belongs in the 15th century. Oh, or are we only going to imprison the ones someone else claims they could have paid but the ones saddled with amounts they can't pay on their salaries get sent home -but still ordered to pay amounts they still can't pay? Once you toss in the threat of jail with issues of failure to pay a debt no matter what that debt may be -justice is out the window. It becomes a means of one class to deprive others of their liberty and use it as their own personal weapon.

BTW -as soon as she told the Canadian online stranger she left her husband and wanted to move to Canada with her two kids to be with him -he told her to get lost. HER life is also turned far worse. She looks for that more exciting life in the neighborhood bars now and dumps her kids off with total strangers -male and female - so she can pretend she is a carefree single again with few responsibilities. Her life is actually even less exciting than ever -but she deserves it for her self-centered choices. Its her kids and ex-husband who didn't deserve it but do and will pay dearly for it.

 

[Si modo]

I have always been against criminalizing debt. We successfully brought back debtors prisons with this and that is borderline nauseating to me - very unprogressive and backwards.

 

[strollingbones]

i said i have no sympathy for non custodial parents and the issue of child support. on the flip side of the pancake...is another story from the ex wife i am sure....you are getting one side but that does not matter....he has to pay for the family he had...simple as that...if he got custody i would feel the same about the ex wife...

how many times have you seen a man go underground to avoid child support?
most men are behind in child support due to not wanting to pay....its normally not a question of being able to pay...i have never know anyone to go to court to have their payments adjusted upwards when they are making more money....but seems most will run to the court the minute they think they can get payments lowered...

 

[shintao]

i said i have no sympathy for non custodial parents and the issue of child support. on the flip side of the pancake...is another story from the ex wife i am sure....you are getting one side but that does not matter....he has to pay for the family he had...simple as that...if he got custody i would feel the same about the ex wife...

how many times have you seen a man go underground to avoid child support?
most men are behind in child support due to not wanting to pay....its normally not a question of being able to pay...i have never know anyone to go to court to have their payments adjusted upwards when they are making more money....but seems most will run to the court the minute they think they can get payments lowered...

And women run to the court every chance they can get CS raised! How many times have you seen a women split with the kids & the DA send her the CS money but refuses to tell the father where his children are.

 

[strollingbones]

i dont know shinteo ..do you?

 

[Anachronism]

And women run to the court every chance they can get CS raised! How many times have you seen a women split with the kids & the DA send her the CS money but refuses to tell the father where his children are.

Many of these fathers do not deserve to know where their children are, or have any contact with them. Many of them are a threat to their ex-wives/girlfriends and/or their children.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is jail the best way to go? I'm conflicted on this, as I imagine many ex's are as well. They can't make money in jail, but if they're not supporting their kids anyway, then eff em. What say you?

Having dealt with the problem for almost 20 years, I’ve come to two conclusions:

1. The custodial parent often will not allow the absent parent to see the child(ern), clearly a disincentive for the latter to pay support.

2. The custodial parent is re-married or in a ‘live-in’ relationship. The absent parent is unsure as to the distribution of his child support payment.

‘Is my child support going to pay for her boyfriend’s new car?’

Again, clearly a disincentive for the absent parent to pay.

One solution to this problem may be to establish an escrow account in a financial institution administered by the court. The custodial parent may access this account only via point of sale debit card (no cash withdraws) so there will be a record of what the child support was used for. If the absent parent is provided evidence his support is gong to pay for school clothes and supplies only, for example, he’ll be much more likely to pay.

As for absent parents who refuse to pay by remaining unemployed, loss of driver’s license or jail may be the only solution. The court may try to review factors that might contribute to unemployment other than avoiding payment, such as criminal record, lack of education, or economic conditions, but those can be problematic to say the least.

I believe that child support laws should only apply to divorced parents not those with children born out of wedlock.

Never going to happen.

actually we're all about liberty.

Actually, you’re all about selective liberty.

 

[Vel]

Wow. So a girl that gets knocked up outside of marriage is on her own? Interesting...

I have to leave for work but I'll explain my reasoning this evening when I get back.

I believe that in a nation where abortion is legal and available upon demand and a woman's choice, that women need to take full responsibility for their own reproduction. Men aren't given a choice in whether or not an unplanned pregnancy is brought to term or whether it's terminated.
I'm sure that many feel that if the guy wants to play, he should be prepared to pay but shouldn't a woman be prepared to pay as well? How does anyone think it fair that two people can participate in the same act and then only one of them is allowed to decide the outcome?
I think that out of wedlock birthrates would plummet if we were to return the responsibility for the children she bore outside of marriage to the woman.
We are beyond the days when it was difficult for a young woman to acquire birth control. I taught my daughters and my son that sex and responsibility go hand in hand. So far, they all seem to have learned.
Of course, while I believe that the law should not be able to compel a man to pay child support outside of wedlock, I also believe that a man that doesn't support a child he knows to be his is a lowlife scumbag. The law is one thing, basic morality and decency is something altogether different.

 

[Si modo]

i said i have no sympathy for non custodial parents and the issue of child support. on the flip side of the pancake...is another story from the ex wife i am sure....you are getting one side but that does not matter....he has to pay for the family he had...simple as that...if he got custody i would feel the same about the ex wife...

how many times have you seen a man go underground to avoid child support?
most men are behind in child support due to not wanting to pay....its normally not a question of being able to pay...i have never know anyone to go to court to have their payments adjusted upwards when they are making more money....but seems most will run to the court the minute they think they can get payments lowered...

And, what about the father who pays his support for months even years on end and his ex incessantly interferes with his visitation with his kids?

 

[Stashman]

You have to look at how the courts award child support. In my state they do it with no regard to the parents ability to pay.

I have a cousin that pays 500 a month for his one child. That was fine when he was making good money but since he got laid off he cant afford it. The courts refuse to lower the amount. Since he is poor he cant afford a good lawyer.

Since he cant get the amount lowered and cant pay it he lost his drivers lic. Now he cant get to work and lost his job. Now they are going to throw him in jail.

Did we not learn that debters prison does not work. The child support system is corrupt and wrong in some states.

PS: He was married to the mom for 5 years she left him for another man.

I so hear you man. I have a buddy who has 4 kids by two ex-wives. He was working as an assistant manager at a grocery store and they were garnishing his wages for back child support. After paying back support, current support, income tax, state tax. social security, he was left with 30 bucks a week. That's after working 45 hr week.

This left him unable to pay his rent or buy food and gas for himself. He quit and now has to deal weed to get by. What's a man supposed to do?

The real criminal thing in all this is how the state charges interest. This money in interest goes to the state only and not the kids.

 

[Stashman]

i said i have no sympathy for non custodial parents and the issue of child support. on the flip side of the pancake...is another story from the ex wife i am sure....you are getting one side but that does not matter....he has to pay for the family he had...simple as that...if he got custody i would feel the same about the ex wife...

how many times have you seen a man go underground to avoid child support?
most men are behind in child support due to not wanting to pay....its normally not a question of being able to pay...i have never know anyone to go to court to have their payments adjusted upwards when they are making more money....but seems most will run to the court the minute they think they can get payments lowered...

In my opinion if a woman has an affair on her husband and that leads to him getting a divorce, than the man should get custody of the kids. As it stands right now, the woman gets the kids 95 percent of the time regardless if her fault or not. That's not right. She should think about the future of her kids before she cheats on her husband.

Also, I think that if a man gets married to a woman who has kids than he should be willing to take on the responsibility of those kids especially if he makes a lot more money the biological father.

 

[whitehall]

New Jersey authorities have arrested hundreds of parents who collectively owe more than $18.7 million in child support.

The 1,074 arrests announced today by the Sheriff's Association of New Jersey were made by sheriff's officers and other law enforcement officials during a three-day statewide sweep conducted this week.

Officials say they've collected more than $211,000 in delinquent payments so far.
.

More than 1,000 arrested in N.J. sweep targeting parents who owe child support | NJ.com

Can someone do the math?

Is jail the best way to go? I'm conflicted on this, as I imagine many ex's are as well. They can't make money in jail, but if they're not supporting their kids anyway, then eff em. What say you?

Let's see, in the Peoples Republik of San Fran they have a bill that would protect felons and presumably deadbeats from being traced. No wonder Ca. is virtually broke in money and morality.

 

[Grace]

sounds like he was making poor choices and paying dearly for them....if he believe the mother unfit...he should have taken action to get his kids...i always hear people slamming the ex but not wanting to take custody

I took them. One was 3 years old..the other 9. But I sent them back when they said "you are not our mother. You will never be our mother" and I busted them with drugs in their bedrooms (2 boys). The drugs I could have tried to deal with, with alateen. The words they said to me...sober....was a knife in my heart. Fuck them and the skank who bore them. One is a father and is age 27. The other is a bum and won't work, and he is now 33. They both still live with their skanky mother. Probably all selling drugs.

 

[DiAnna]

Divorce, along with all its custody and money battles, sucks. And it's the children who suffer.

The non-custodial parent needs to contribute to the support of those children. They have to eat, be clothed, sheltered, educated, and both parents are responsible to assure these things are being done.

Yes, yes, I'm sure there are horror stories everywhere... custodial ex uses CS money to buy drugs while dirty urchin children starve. Tell me what kind of a non-custodial parent would know that, and not turn the ex in to child protective services, then haul butt to court to take care of his children? One who would rather watch the kids suffer than go through the trouble of raising them him/herself, that's who.

Ex interferes with court-ordered visitation, so there's no incentive to pay? WTF? No incentive to make certain your kids have food on their table, clothes on their back, just because you can't take them to the park every other weekend without a fight? It's court-ordered visitation for a reason. If the custodial ex is violating that order, you don't need a Johnnie-Cochran powerhouse to head straight to the courthouse and file a complaint.

Lost your job and are broke? Again, you don't need a high-priced lawyer to ask for a hearing on the matter. You can file the papers yourself.

Let's face it. The vast, vast majority of non-paying non-custodials is because they don't want the ex to have the money. They want the ex to scrimp and save, to struggle over every bill because heaven forbid he/she actually use any household income to buy a decent suit/dress for the office. It's vegeance 90% of the time, and it's BS.

Custodial parents have no right to deny court-ordered visitation. Children need both their parents. Non-custodial parents who don't bother to fight for those rights are telling their children volumes about themselves, and its something those poor kids don't need to hear.

I see a lot of posts in here about the poor, struggling custodial parent and the poor, destitude non-custodial parent... but I'm not seeing a lot of posts about the children trapped in the middle, being forced to live in an economically-deprived environment because their parents are using them as a club to wound each other.

Deadbeat parents are frankly the worst kind of parents, because they are telling their kids by their actions that they flat don't care about them. A good mom or dad who loses one job will scrub toilets if necessary to make certain that their children are well cared for, happy, and loved.