Unable to pay child support, poor parents land behind bars

MSNBC ^ | 9/12/2011 | Mike Brunker

[PieterCasparzen]

It may not be a crime to be poor, but it can land you behind bars if you also are behind on your child-support payments.

1. Only on msnbc.com 1. Updated 67 minutes ago 9/12/2011 12:10:41 PM +00:00 A day in the life of Iran’s president 2. Updated 70 minutes ago 9/12/2011 12:07:45 PM +00:00 Obama: We’re not where we need to be 3. Unable to pay child support, poor parents jailed 4. Getty Images Stock No promotion yet? Maybe you're not the boss' favorite 5. How 9/11 changed Pakistan 6. Image:Banff National Park UGC It's A Snap! Vote for your favorite travel photo 7. Image: Survivor 23 cast CBS Best Bets: 'Survivor,' 'Top Model' return to TV

Thousands of so-called “deadbeat” parents are jailed each year in the U.S. after failing to pay court-ordered child support — the vast majority of them for withholding or hiding money out of spite or a feeling that they’ve been unfairly gouged by the courts.

But in what might seem like an un-American plot twist from a Charles Dickens’ novel, advocates for the poor say, some parents are wrongly being locked away without any regard for their ability to pay — sometimes without the benefit of legal representation.

Randy Miller, a 39-year-old Iraqi war vet, found himself in that situation in November, when a judge in Floyd County, Ga., sent him to jail for violating a court order to pay child support.

He said he was stunned when the judge rebuffed his argument that he had made regular payments for more than a decade before losing his job in July 2009 and had recently resumed working.

...

[cuban leaf]

—Men can make a lot more money than women.—

Yes they can. And until the last few decades women killed the golden goose at their peril. Now they just dump the poor guy and abscond with all the eggs. Their lives are usually worse, but they don't think about that when they decide it would be easier to live alone than have the stress of living with someone that doesn't acquiesce to their every wish.

[org.whodat]

Like I said what in the hell does the vet part have to do with it, and I am a vet, are you one.

[yldstrk]

We badly need divorce reform in this country, no doubt. Divorce without cause is WRONG. Divorce is wrong. And kids do the majority of suffering.

That being said, mid life crisis causes males to act like idiots. The statistics about women wanting most of the divorces don’t reflect how many marriages are destroyed because of rutting by aging males. The males may not file for the divorce because they want their cake and eat it too, bu the women want the pain to end. Still, divorce is NEVER the answer and divorce lawyers are akin to abortionists.

[Hodar]

I think everyone knows circumstances like you’ve mentioned. I know of several - including an ex-wife with a past drug conviction, and a recent stint in the hospital for drug over-dose - who kept custody of her kids - despite legal challenges and a substancial amount of money spent on documentation and lawyers.

I’ve seen a man lose his job, and sell everything he had (tv, CD, DVD, games, bed, living room and clothes) trying to keep current. His current wife and kids are going without - so he can pay child support to a wife who is re-married and in a household that earns 5+x what he is raising his family on. Yep, when he was working he was raising his family on less than $50K, and his ex-wife is remarried and earning $300+K/yr.

Men have no rights - we are basically slaves. Many men are paying child support for children that they have not fathered - they just happened to be one of the people who had sex with the woman. The judges are looking for “the good of the child” without regard to justice, or any other considerations.

[wbill]

I was there gave every woman before her everything they wanted from her

I have a number of friends that are divorced.

In every instance *not* involving children, all of them received the same advice from their (different) attorneys: "Just give her what she asks for. She'll wind up getting it anyway, and all you'll do is run up my legal fees."

Now when kids were involved, it was a little different. But, I thought it interesting that a half-dozen or so lawyers all provided the same advice to my friends. Truly, the deck is stacked against men.

[cuban leaf]

—You want your kid growing up poor?—

That is what divorce tends to do. That is why it is a thing to be avoided.

Way too many women just don’t like living with another adult that may have needs or wants like they do and discovers she can get all the financial perks but still be “free” of the yoke of marriage, so she pulls the trigger on the divorce. She then discovers it does not turn out the way she had hoped.

People are not machines. Sometimes divorce can impact a man’s earning power or job satisfaction when it is all going to a family of children that have been legally removed from his home without cause. He does not make a conscious effor to stop making money, but he may be “less employable”.

[PieterCasparzen]

How many of our laws, policies, and “social programs” actually promote divorce instead of providing incentive for parents to stay married?

How about a legal system that works like this:

A man and woman get married and have kids. At at moment, the wife can pick up the phone and start the process of ruining her husbands life for decades. Police immediately come to the house, take the husband away in handcuffs, never to return. She no longer has to listen to anything he has to say - she can do as she pleases in complete disgregard of anything he might think or say. If she wants a "girl's night out", fine. If she wants to start having new boyfriends, fine. However she wants to raise the kids, fine. However much she wants to spend, fine. The list goes on.

Now, add to that, the husband will be forced to pay her money until her last child is over 18 - by payroll deduction. There is no place the man can hide in America and avoid that system. Every employer in the nation will honor the court order and deduct whatever the court orders from his pay. Oh, it's AFTER TAX money - ouch, sorry.

The man now must take what's left of his paycheck and rent or purchase - wow - A SECOND HOME ! Woo-hoo, I bet he thought he could not afford two homes while he was married. But now, with child support, guess what - he can. Right.

The disgruntled wife gets to have the entire U.S. law enforcement work on her behalf to extract a chunk of her husband's paycheck for herself. Oh, I mean the kids, sorry.

The judge - the sole aribiter of truth in family court - does not require proof of anything any more in most states. In NJ, for example, for every case that does not fit into one of three real reasons for divorce, the plaintiff simply has to come up with some story which then is categorized as "mental cruelty". This is merely a catch-all which - in reality - allows for divorce for absolutely any reason on God's green earth. Divorce on a whim. Don't worry, the plaintiff's attorney will "guide them through" the process and make sure the motions are filed such that there will be no issues when it comes before the judge. "He always scowls at me. I feel afraid. I had a hangnail and he did not show me any sympathy. I couldn't sleep for days." How about this one - "he is a workaholic". THAT'S FUNNY ! /sarc

I was once - seriously - offered a large amount of cash by a friend to move in with his ex-wife so he could get his payments to stop. Nooooo thank you. (there is a trifle of sanity left in the laws to make them pass as legitimate. The woman can't move in with a new boyfriend and keep getting the full amount). I guess the new boyfriend can stay over three nights a week, he just can't have his own closet. He has to keep a mailing address at his mother's house.

What a great system for promoting MARRIAGE and married couples STAYING TOGETHER.

[Tulane]

I realize circumstances change. But I also realize that many people give up on marriage way too soon...and refuse to pay for their kids.

Hey...I say give ‘em a trial by jury (which is the basic point of the article)...but for god’s sake, quit whining and pay for your kids.

[PieterCasparzen]

That is what divorce tends to do. That is why it is a thing to be avoided.

Any ethical professional investment advisor, insurance agent, attorney or accountant will certainly agree - and regale the listener with epic tales of tragedy - that only the wealthy can even truly afford divorce, that it is astoundingly financially devastating to the poor and middle class.

[jerseyrocks]

Michael Jackson agrees:

If You Cant Feed Your Baby (Yeah, Yeah)
Then Don’t Have A Baby (Yeah, Yeah)

[yldstrk]

“All the financial perks” don’t make me laugh

[cuban leaf]

—Pay up meathead, the military taught you personal responsibility—

You are in so far over your head here I’m surprised you didn’t drown a week ago. Just sayin’.

[cuban leaf]

—But as we know... Liberals and big government democrats DO NOT WANT a stable secure family. Only when the Welfare Check is the head of the household is when total control of the plantaion is secured.—

This.

Actually, rescinding “no-fault divorce” would be a huge help too.

[Tulane]

Michael Jackson agrees:

If You Cant Feed Your Baby (Yeah, Yeah)
Then Don’t Have A Baby (Yeah, Yeah)
_______________________________________

I have a confession — I am not dead. I am, Michael Jackson.

[PieterCasparzen]

A family law court judge can do things, like imprison you without legal representation, that can’t be done by any other type of judge. Something should be done to rein in their power.

Any man who has gone through the process who is honest and not clueless will (after enough years have gone by for healing) quite humorously joke about how the process works in court: Buddy, you sit over there and shut up or I'll toss your butt in jail. I'll let you know when this is over.

[MrB]

Biblical wisdom can be found in 2 Cor 6:14
Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?

Notice it says “unbelievers”. This includes those who go to church, call themselves “Christian”, yet don’t place authority in the Word of God.

Still, it’s not a guarantee, but it IS “better odds”.

Nobody give me “the divorce rate among Christians is the same as for the general population”. See my careful definition of “unbeliever” above. Among “believers”, the rate is MUCH LOWER.

[bbernard]

“Oh yeah, it’s a picnic for the women. sarc They get to care for the children, 24/7 while the men are out sowing their wild oats, not showing up for visits, trying to control the women by withholding what little child support does get awarded. Look buster, do you not realize that when the dad cuts out the women’s lifestyle goes to the dogs?”

You paint a broad picture with just one stroke.

The women don’t always get custody. As a matter of fact myself and two other friends have custody. We don’t get child support. I speak fro myself when I say I am thinking about my son when I choose not to fight it out in court with his mother. How is placing her behind bars helpful to his upbringing?

[babygene]

“Oh, so then the men get the bright idea, “I’ll just take the children from her, then I won’t have to pay child support.” And the children then have no mother.”

If the wife cant independently support the children, she shouldn’t have them in the first place. The spouse who can best support them should be the one that has custody.

[cuban leaf]

—The judge refused saying that it was the child’s money not hers.—

There is an easy work-around: Do some simple tax computations to make up the income tax difference (since he gets the deduction and she has to claim it as income), then he can pay her and she pays him back accordingly. 8->

[yldstrk]

Tell him to man up and give life to his wife and children instead of whining and complaining like a girl.