Fox's 'Bad Dads' Campaign Update
May 13th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & FamiliesTwo weeks ago we launched a campaign against Fox's proposed reality show Bad Dads. Bad Dads unfairly depicts divorced fathers as uncaring and selfish, and publicly humiliates children of broken families by depicting their fathers as not loving or caring for them.
Fox has received over 5,000 calls, letters, and faxes from our supporters, and our protest garnered coverage in over 300 newspapers. Nearly a hundred educators, mental health experts, and family law professionals publicly condemned Fox's Bad Dads and endorsed our campaign. We also drew support from advocates for low income families.
As Kathleen Parker noted in her syndicated column, this campaign was an early, preemptive strike. The pilot has not been made yet, and all that has been contracted is a 10 minute promo for a pilot. We now have good reason to believe that we will never see Bad Dads aired.
Given the large response and media coverage, we have made our point to Fox, and have decided to suspend the campaign against Bad Dads. We will continue to monitor the situation, and if in the future we have good reason to believe that Fox will be going ahead with the show, we will renew our efforts. The campaign web page will remain up, as will all relevant information concerning the campaign.
Thanks to all of you who participated in what we believe has been a successful campaign.
Sincerely,
Dr. Ned Holstein, president of Fathers & Families
Dr. Linda Nielsen, president of the American Coalition for Fathers & Children
Glenn Sacks, newspaper columnist/radio host, www.GlennSacks.com
"));
19 queries. 0.366 seconds.
May 13th, 2008 at 4:49 am
Alas, my campaign for Fox to have a show on Deadbeat Moms is not going so well.
I suggested that the winner could get a lifetime of lavish welfare checks.
But the producers are not interested. Sheesh. You try and offer people a good idea, and they slam the door in your face!
May 13th, 2008 at 7:04 am
What a momentous event!
The Battle of Gettysburg marked the turning point of the Civil War. Maybe in 100 years we'll look back and say that the Battle of Fox marked a similar turning point in the struggle for Father's Rights using the power of the internet instead of cannons.
May 13th, 2008 at 7:20 am
Time to reward Rupert Murdoch's apparently excellent decision by subscribing to the WSJ.
You can do so at www.wsj.com
May 13th, 2008 at 7:58 am
Mr. Sacks, Dr. Holstein, and Dr. Nielsen,
CONGRATULATIONS!
As a regular reader of Glenn Sacks, I thank all of you for taking the lead against Fox. Please stay vigilent and continue to keep us informed. Thousands of us are ready to continue to speak out on behalf of fathers and their children.
Thank you,
Hank O.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:03 am
This was a great effort. My compliments to everyone involved.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Its good to see that there still people out there that don't believe such unfair assumptions about divorced dads.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Glenn,
Thanks for starting this grass roots movement to stop this horror. They should have entitled this show "Title IVd in action".
As a board member and who runs the website for our organization, I proudly put on our site on our homepage all the relative links to your site in regards to this proposed garbage to possibly be aired. We get 2000 to 3000 unique visitors a month - so hopefully this will spread like wildfire in our community here in Philly. And the talk around here is to start to possible picket outside the FOX-29 in Philly if it goes thru with other Fathers and Family organizations. And I am so happy to read this morning that over 5000 petitions - including mine - we already sent out. But please, I think you shoudn't stop the pressure until FOX says NO! When the pressure stops - they will pick up steam!
Keep up the wonderfull work you do - may God bless the work you do and the cause you take up!
May 13th, 2008 at 9:21 am
www.paface.org
May 13th, 2008 at 10:48 am
This is an example of what can be accomplished when everyone stands up and pulls together.
My thanks to everyone who participated.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:54 am
re: The pilot has not been made yet,
...Not enough rich "deadbeats" to serve as subjects, maybe? Wouldn't these guys just fend off Fox with lawyers anyway?...Perhaps all they could dig up were manual laborers who just didn't televise well driving around in 20-year-old cars and eating luxuriously at McDonalds?....
May 13th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Awesome job organizing. Demonstrated leadership for a just cause.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Excellent work- yet much more work to be done. A good start and a hearty congrats to all!!
May 13th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Avalanches are nothing more than a bunch of individual snowflakes, and a little momentum.
GOOD JOB!
BTW, it's probably good to suspend the campaign at this point in order to avoid generating further publicity for the show.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Nick said:
"Alas, my campaign for Fox to have a show on Deadbeat Moms is not going so well.
I suggested that the winner could get a lifetime of lavish welfare checks.
But the producers are not interested. Sheesh. You try and offer people a good idea, and they slam the door in your face!"
I guess you need a catchy term that rhymes with "moms." How about "Tsunami Mommies." lol.
MXY
May 13th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
FOX has a lot to lose by association with the private child support collection industry. These firms enter into contracts with the custodial parent for approximately 30% of the amount the custodial parent receives. The collection firm does not work with the court, but applies pressure on the non-custodial parent to pay court-ordered child support. The custodial parent becomes the second obligor in this arrangement: to the independent child support collection firm. The contracts are often difficult for the
FOX's proposed series would inevitably focus attention on firms engaged in this practice--firms that may not wish to have their business practices exposed on national television. The decision to work with such firms would establish for the public the FOX network's understanding of the term "Family Values." At least one prominent child support collection firm was associated, through a link displayed on its web site, with an organization that called itself "MAFIA" for "Mothers Against Fathers in Arrears." ( See http://www.mafiaboard.net/index.php ) The apparent intention behind the acronym was more than mere cleverness: the intention appears to have been to evoke fear among targeted obligors that the firm would employ collection practices associated with organized crime.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
I have been the step-father of two boys for 10 years now. They are soon the be 13 and 14. They are growing up to be responsible young men with normal lives and admirable values. I wonder where they would be today without their mother and I. For most of their lives, their father has shown up just often enough to prevent them from really bonding with me as father and sons. His once a year visits, and twice a year phone calls keep their hopes for a relationship with him alive, only for those hopes to be dashed as he abandons them again every time. He lives within 100 miles of us, and works until the DA catches up with his employer, then he quits his job and hides out. In 10 years I think we've gotten something approaching $500 total in child support checks. It's not like we care about the money. We really wish he'd just go away. We get along just fine without the child support he doesn't provide. Now if he'd just make himself that scarce. He knows he's always welcome to visit and we do not discourage contact or badmouth him to the kids. It's just that most of the time he has more exciting things to do. That's always been his problem. It's basically why he went to jail in the first place for robbing a bank to get drug money.
Bad dads? Yep, we have living proof...when we can find him. So, you see, it's not all one way. Sorry, I just can't feel sorry for the sperm donor when I'm paying the bills, going to music lessons, soccer games, little league, and Boy Scouts, patching up cuts and bruises, and generally being "Dad" because he only wants the title and none of the responsibility.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Dear other dad..
Its nice that you became a father figure to someone who didn't have it. But wishing that the paternal father would just go away only compounds the issue at hand. What does that say to your stepsons that you don't want them to try to be with their father - or visa versa. By your statement of that - you just fuel the fire of what we are trying to stop.
Fathers who are seperated or divorced are treated like criminals by the courts system from the outset. In PA, where I live, you are automatically wage garnished from the start - no exceptions. Your drivers license is subject to be taken away, your passport as well. You get limited time and it dimishes if your kids are young. Courts side with the mother because of nesting issues. But Fathers , and studies have proven, that they have their own unique nesting capabilites that children need. But the courts look the other way. Also - they try to keep the dad from 140 nights or less per year so they cant have an arguement to reduce child support. They will do what they can to keep payments high. D/R doesnt realize that when parents split - there are two homes, two electric bills, two food bills, two of everything. But D/R still belives in their guidelines that there are 1 intact family. If a father wants equal time - he is generally shut down. Why? Title 4d of the social security act. States trump up their child support guidelines to get more free incentive pay from the Federal Government. In 2006 - PA received 26 million from Washington in free money just for collecting support from overinflated child support figures. The state lives off of this money and are driven by it. PA State Rep. Kathy Manderino told me to my face in May 2007 in her office in Harrisburgh that "Fathers only want their kids equal in their life in order to eliminate child support". Fathers face that bias from their State representatives and courts every day! So what does a father do when he has been beaten up in D/R, his representatives who refuse to hear the arguements, and the courts - he stops paying. Thats how they think they beat the system. And thats wrong too. Good fathers pay because we oue it to our children - and we take pride in that.
Before you toot your own horn on what a wonderfull stepdad you are by slamming your child's natural father - consider what that father has gone thru no fault of his own. The system treats all dads like criminals for a failed marriage from the start.
I invite you to goto my organizations web site - www.paface.org and select "Domestic Relations" link and read the 3 part piece on life in Domestic Relations from the Delaware County Times (PA). It highlights everything that happens in D/R. Even how a judge is forcing a male lawyer - who has sole custody of his child - to still pay child support to the ex wife. He was told by the judge "You are a lawyer - you can afford it!". Please read and then maybe you can see the other side - the lies and money driven manipulation by the system.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
It's because of horror stories like those Bill Gibbons brings up, not to mention the antics of "official" child support bounty hunting interlopers, that I decided never to have kids. That probably isn't insurance enough, but not being married and not having kids reduces the odds of encounters with parasites.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:19 am
Masculist,
I guess you are right. I need a more catchy title. What about Moochin' Mommas? LOL.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:54 am
In reply to 'The Other Dad Says'
You could solve the problem of dad moving when the DA catches up with him by paying the child support yourself. Then the DA wouldn't chase him away. After all, you said the money didn't matter to you. Also, given the way you described it, it can't be much money. My friend C does this so that the government won't chase away their child's father. Which is more important? The father for the child, the money, or that you get to prove a point and look like the righteous man in public forums? We can't always force people to think the way we want them to. Of course if we could, they would be extensions of ourselves instead of their own person.
Child support: money I give my ex so she can afford to keep the kids from me
Child support: money that gives my ex incentive to keep the kids from me (as my God, she doesn't want to pay it)
Child support: money that lets my ex's boyfriend complain and brag about being the responsible step dad
If children spent half time with each parent, there would be no need for child support. It is symptomatic of unfair custody arrangements.
July 29th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I HAVE BEEN ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CHILD SUPPORT ISSUE. MY HUSBAND HAS TWO CHILDREN FROM HIS FIRST MARRIAGE. MY HUSBAND PAID HIS SUPPORT EVERY SINGLE WEEK, HE ALSO PAID FOR THEIR MEDICAL COVERAGE AND THE SOMETIMES MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. MY HUSBAND'S CHILD SUPPORT CAME OUT OF HIS CHECK, AND WHEN HE SWITCHED JOBS AND THE SUPPORT WAS NO LONGER BEING TAKEN OUT OF HIS CHECK, EVERY FRIDAY I WOULD WRITE A CHECK TO PAY HIS SUPPORT. HIS EX WAS THE GREEDY MOM, SHE WAS TAKING HIM BACK TO COURT EVERY CHANCE SHE COULD, THE KIDS WOULD COME DOWN FROM GEORGIA AND WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BUY THEM CLOTHES BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING DECENT TO WEAR. SHE SPENT THE MONEY ON HERSELF AND NOTHING WAS EVER ENOUGH FOR HER. WE GOT THE KIDS EVERY CHANCE WE COULD AND MY HUSBAND'S OLDEST EVEN MOVED TO FLORIDA TO LIVE WITH US.
THEY ARE BOTH GROWN NOW AND KNOW THAT THEIR DAD LOVES THEM AND WAS THERE TO PROVIDE BOTH FINANCIAL AND EMOTIONAL SUPPORT FOR THEM WHEN THEY WERE YOUNGER.
BUT OUR CASE IS THE TYPICAL CASE REGARDING THE CHILD SUPPORT ISSUE.
MY HUSBAND IS THE DAD THAT PAID HIS SUPPORT AND LOVED HIS KIDS AND THE MOM THAT TOOK THE SUPPORT AND SPENT IT ON HERSELF, KEPT WANTING MORE AND MORE AND USED THE KIDS AGAINST HIM.
AS FOR MYSELF, I'M THE MOM THAT SUPPORTS MY KIDS, HAVE NEVER KEPT THEM AWAY FROM THEIR DAD, NEVER ASKED FOR ANYTHING MORE THAN THE SUPPORT THAT HE WAS ORDERED TO PAY ME, I PAID FOR THE LONG DISTANCE PHONE CALLS, ONLY WANTED HIM TO PAY HIS SUPPORT AND BE A PART OF OUR BOYS' LIVES AND MY EX IS THE DAD THAT DOESN'T PAY HIS SUPPORT, WENT OUT AND HAD 4 MORE KIDS, KNOWING HE COULDN'T TAKE CARE OF THE 2 HE ALREADY HAD. BROKE PROMISES HE MADE, LIED ABOUT MONEY BEING PAID, THINKS I SHOULD HAVE HAD TO PAY FOR THE AIRLINE TICKETS FOR THE KIDS TO VISIT HIM, EVEN THOUGH HE HADN'T MADE A CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT ON 6 MONTHS, BUT HE'S ENTITLED. FEELS HE DOESN'T HAVE TO SUPPORT OUR BOYS BECAUSE THEY LIVE WITH ME IN FLORIDA, EVEN THOUGH HE HAS A DAUGHTER IN INDIANA THAT HE DOESN'T SUPPORT EITHER, BUT WANTS TO HOLLER CONTEMPT OF COURT WHEN HE THINKS HE IS ENTITLED.
HE'S PAID NONE OF THE $10,000 SPENT ON BRACES FOR BOTH OF OUR BOYS, HE HASN'T PAID ONE MEDICAL BILL, HE DOESN'T HAVE MEDICAL COVERAGE ON THEM EVEN THOUGH HE HAS BEEN COURT ORDERED TO DO SO AND GETS A $15.00 A WEEK REDUCTION IN HIS SUPPORT. HE PAYS HIS SUPPORT TO HIS EX-WIFE FOR TWO OF THEIR THREE CHILDREN EVEN THOUGH HE HAS CUSTODY OF ONE AND ON TOP OF THAT HE GIVES HER EXTRA MONEY BUT HE DOESN'T GIVE ME OR HIS OTHER BABY MAMA A DAM PENNY.
ANY ONE KNOW HOW MUCH AND WHAT $41.00 A WEEK BUYS?
July 29th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
HEY BILL, MOVE TO INDIANA THEY ARE A DAD FRIENDLY STATE AND TREAT THE MOTHERS LIKE GARBAGE.
July 29th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
THE "IDIOT WOMAN" THAT IS HIS "GIRLFRIEND" TOLD ME THAT SHE WOULD GO PICK UP HIS CHECK AND THEN PURCHASE MONEY ORDERS TO PAY THE SUPPORT TO ME AND HIS OTHER BABY MAMA, AFTER PURCHASING THE MONEY ORDERS, SHE WOULD GIVE THEM TO HIM TO COMPLETE AND MAIL TO THE COURT FOR HIS SUPPORT, WELL GUESS WHAT, SHE LATER FOUND OUT THAT INSTEAD OF SENDING IN THE MONEY ORDERS FOR HIS SUPPORT, HE WAS TAKING THEM AND CASHING THEM IN AND TAKING THE MONEY AND KEEPING IT. ALL THE WHILE SH'E'S THINKING HE'S PAYING HIS SUPPORT.
WHAT WOULD BE A GREAT THING IS IF THE DADS THAT PAY THEIR SUPPORT AND LOVE THEIR CHILDREN AND THE MOTHERS THAT SUPPORT AND LOVE THEIR CHILDREN COULD COME TOGETHER AND GO AFTER THE DEADBEAT MOMS AND DADS. LETTING THEM ALL KNOW THAT WE ARE TIRED OF PAYING THE PRICE FOR THEIR SELFISHNESS AND REFUSAL TO SUPPORT THEIR CHILDREN. WE ARE ALL BEING PENALIZED FOR THEIR BEHAVIORS AND THEY JUST RIDE OFF INTO THE SUNSET WITHOUT A SECOND THOUGHT OF THE DAMAGE THEY DO BY GIVING US ALL A BAD NAME.
MY SISTER'S BOYFRIEND JUST GOT LAID OFF FROM HIS JOB AND HE GOT $300.00 BEHIND IN HIS SUPPORT, HE WENT TO THE COURTS AND TOLD THEM HE HAD BEEN LAID OFF, MY SISTER TOLD ME THEY TOLD HIM HE WAS THE NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT AND BASICALLY THEY DIDN'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT HIS SITUATION. A COUPLE DAYS LATER HE GOT A NOTICE IN THE MAIL THEY WERE GOING TO SUSPEND HIS LICENSE. THIS IS A DAD THAT LOVES HIS SON AND HAS HIM AS MUCH IF NOT MORE THAN THE MOTHER AND GETS TREATED LIKE A DEADBEAT DAD EVEN THOUGH HE IS NOT. MY SISTER LIVES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA.
MY EX DOESN'T SUPPORT HIS KIDS AT ALL. HE JUST WENT TO COURT TO GET HIS CHILD SUPPORT MODIFIED, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE MODIFICATION OF ZERO IS. HE OWES ME ABOUT $25,000 IN BACK SUPPORT. OUR BOYS ARE NOW 18 AND 15, MY EX WANTED TO BE ALLOWED TO CLAIM ONE OF THEM ON HIS TAXES, HE DOESNT SUPPORT THEM BUT HE THINKS HE HAS A RIGHT TO CLAIM THEM? I DON'T THINK SO. HE THINKS I SHOULD HAVE TO PAY HALF OF THE PLANE TICKETS FOR THE BOYS TO VISIT HIM. NOW REMEMBER THIS MAN HASN'T PAID ANY SUPPORT IN OVER 6 MONTHS. FUNNY ISN'T IT. HE'S ENTITLED BUT I'M NOT.
THERE IS AN EPISODE OF JUDGE JUDY WHERE THE DAD IS SUING THE MOTHER OF HIS CHILDREN FOR BABYSITTING FEES FOR WHEN HE WATCHED THE CHILDREN FOR HER TO GO TO WORK, MIND YOU THIS MAN DOESN'T PAY HIS SUPPORT BUT HE THINKS SHE OWES HIM FOR BABYSITTING THEIR KIDS. FIRST OFF LET ME SAY THIS, WHEN YOU ARE A FATHER AND YOU TAKE CARE OF YOUR KIDS, YOU ARE NOT A BABYSITTER, YOU ARE A FATHER DOING WHAT HE IS SUPPOSE TO DO. HOW DO YOU BABYSIT YOUR OWN KIDS?
July 29th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
IN ONE OF THE OTHER BLOGGS A COMMENT WAS POSTED ABOUT HOW A DEADBEAT DAD'S LICENSE CAN BE SUSPENDED AND/OR HE COULD BE SENT TO JAIL. HE WANTED TO HOW A DEAD BEAT DAD CAN'T MAKE MONEY EITHER IN JAIL OR WITH NO MEANS TO GET THERE AND I WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER HIS QUESTION. UP TO THIS POINT YOU'VE BEEN MAKING MONEY AND NOT PAYING YOUR SUPPORT.
AT LEAST IF THE DEAD BEAT DAD IS SITTING IN JAIL HE MIGHT HAVE A VALID REASON AS TO WHY HE ISN'T PAYING HIS SUPPORT, BUT IF THE DEAD BEAT DAD IS WORKING AND MAKING MONEY AND NOT PAYING HIS SUPPORT WHAT ELSE IS THERE TO SAY?
IF YOU ARE A DEAD BEAT DAD AND YOU ARE FACING THE POSSIBILITY OF GOING TO JAIL/AND OR HAVING YOUR LICENSE SUSPENDED WHY SHOULD THAT BE MY PROBLEM. I MEAN UP TO THIS POINT YOU HAVEN'T BEEN IN JAIL AND/OR HAD YOUR LICENSE SUSPENDED SO WHAT IS THE REASON FOR YOU NOT PAYING YOUR SUPPORT? I'M NOT GETTING MY SUPPORT EITHER WAY, SO WHY DO I CARE WHERE YOU SPEND YOUR DAYS? ITS FUNNY HOW IF THE DEAD BEAT DAD IS SITTING IN JAIL AND/OR HAVING HIS LICENSE SUSPENDED ITS MY FAULT. ITS NOT MY FAULT, IT IS YOUR FAULT, YOU ARE THE ONE NOT DOING WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN ORDERED TO DO. IF OUT OF JAIL = NO SUPPORT AND IN JAIL - NO SUPPORT, WHAT DOES BEING IN JAIL HAVE TO DO WITH YOU NOT PAYING YOUR SUPPORT, I MEAN YOU AREN'T PAYING YOUR SUPPORT ANYWAY. WTF.
July 29th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Sorry, Caps are off.
LET ME ASK YOU LOW LIFE, SCUMBAG, DEAD BEAT DADs A QUESTION, EVER TRIED TO SUPPORT A 15 YEAR OLD KID ON $41.00 A WEEK?
WHEN YOU HAVE DONE THIS PLEASE GIVE ME A CALL. WHY ARE YOU SO SCARED OF THIS SHOW? IF YOU AREN'T A DEADBEAT DAD THEN YOU HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT DO YOU.
HOW DOES BEING DIVORCED RELEASE A FATHER'S OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR HIS CHILD/CHILDREN?
AS WITH EVERY SITUATION THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY. LET ME TELL YOU THIS, THERE ARE MORE MOTHERS GETTING SCREWED BY DEADBEAT DADS THEN THERE ARE DADS BEING SCREWED. JUST LIKE DADS THAT ARE SCREWED THERE ARE MOMS THAT ARE BEING SCREWED.
THE DADS THAT LOVE THEIR CHILDREN AND DO THE BEST THEY CAN TO SUPPORT AND PROVIDE FOR THEM AND MAKE IT A POINT TO BE A PART OF THEIR LIVES ARE STEROTYPED BY THE BASTARDS THAT WON'T SUPPORT THEIR KIDS. THE MOTHERS (LIKE MYSELF) THAT SPENDS THE CHILD SUPPORT (WHEN I GET IT) TO SUPPORT MY KIDS, I DON'T SPEND IT ON MYSELF, I HAVE NEVER KEPT MY BOYS AWAY FROM THEIR DEADBEAT DAD, I HAVE DRIVEN MY KIDS FROM FLORIDA TO INDIANA SO THEY COULD SPEND TIME WITH HIM AND HIS FAMILY, ARE STEROTYPED BY THE GREEDY, SELFISH MOM'S THAT DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE CHILDREN AND ONLY WANT THE MONEY. DON'T ACT LIKE DADS ARE THE ONLY ONES BEING STEROTYPED BY THE BAD APPLES IN THE BUNCH, WE THE MOMS ARE ALSO JUDGED AND STEROTYPED BY THE BAD APPLES IN THE BUNCH.
MY EX HAS A TOTAL OF SIX (6) CHILDREN, WITH THREE DIFFERENT MOTHERS AND THREE DIFFERENT CHILD SUPPORT CASES IN THREE DIFFERENT COUNTIES IN THE STATE OF INDIANA. HE HAS A BOAT, HE GOES TO KENTUCKY ALMOST EVERY WEEKEND IN THE SUMMER, HE DRIVES A DODGE DURANGO, HE LIVES WITH HIS MOMMY, SO HE DOESN'T HAVE A MORTGAGE, A LIGHT BILL, A FOOD BILL, A CLOTHING BILL, A PHONE BILL, A HEALTH INSURANCE BILL, A DOCTOR'S VISIT BILL, A MEDICATION BILL. HE HAS A CELL PHONE, HE WEARS NAME BRAND CLOTHES, AND SHOES. THE LAST TIME I RECEIVED ANY CHILD SUPPORT FROM HIM WAS IN NOVEMBER OF 2007. WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT. AM I STILL THE BAD ONE?
July 29th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Nick S, I think you are a hypocrit. Wanna talk about sterotyping? Your welfare comment proves sterotyping goes both ways.
July 29th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
All Dads aren't Dead Beats and all Moms aren't welfare queens.
July 29th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Dead Beat Dads go to court to get his child support lowered, but the cost of raising children keeps going up.
July 29th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Sorry about the all caps fellas.
July 29th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Hey Ronda,
Want me to move to Indiana? Then pay for it. Sounds like you are a ticked off woman here.
No state is father friendly. Define how Indiana is more father friendly than any other state? Give me details and not blanket basic statements. Please compare Indiana to PA.
So you want me to move away from my kids? Got news for you, PA wont let me take them away because of title 4d. Check out the Grueber laws you idiot! I am a paycheck to the state first. That is how every father in every state is treated. The state would fear me moving then establishing custody in another state - thus taking money out of the current state I live. No state will let that happen. I am a paycheck to the state. Think that isn't so. See what Illinois is doing to a soldier in IRAQ! I dare you to view this and comment further.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=6283610
Before you slam me - get all the facts and evaulate hard. In my case I make $70000 a year and 62% goes towards support. I cant pay for their school, save for college for my kids, save for retirement, live in a nice place. While the ex lives with her new husband, doesn't work because of a new child, and recently she placed illegially 26k on my insurance for her child that is not mine - 2 weeks after the divorce was final. She as of this date is being reviewed for insurance fraud by the insurance company by violating the financial agreement.
Bottom line Ronda - shove it!
July 29th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Dads getting support lowered. Gee, I met a man 3 weeks ago who was homeless because of support issues and lost his job. How come men, in your eyes, aren't allowed to live to support themselves.
I think you suffer from cranial rectal inversion. I dont think you see that when an intact family is fractured, there are now 2 of everything, mortgage payments, bills, etc..
Why do you see the father as an ATM and the mother simply entitled to everything without stepping up to the plate and being equal.
Michigan and PA have bills in legislature to create "prosumptive joint physical custody". Wont the mothers' just *Bleep* themselves when this passes. This means the mom has to go out an earn a paycheck instead of holding out their hands. Over 80% of divorces are started by moms because they figure they have a financial out. That day is starting to come to an end. If the courts and legislature work to make this custody bills happen nationwide, then maybe the women who would normally pull the divorce card realize that saving and working on a marriage might just be better in the long run.
Ronda, wake up!
July 29th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
For 2008, the Federal Government has allocated $485 million for Title 4d subsidy for all states to collect their share for enforment of child support collection.
PA is one of the most successfull states because they treat me like criminals - especially with overinflated child cost guidelines and wage garnishments. The wage garnishments brings PA to over 75% collection efficiency. Between the 2 factors of the amount of money they collect and the percentage of effectiveness, then run only behind California for Title 4d money.
Just today, the Delaware County Daily Times on Page 6 placed a full page ad showing 20+ dads wanted for back child support. Do they show every week who they are looking for in areas such as murders, drug dealers, people wanted for other reasons. NO - because it doesnt' bring in the money for them. Where are the women who owe support as well? Not one women shown, but women do owe in that county - just check their D/R site for warrents issued. I proudly support my kids more than my ex and will continue to do so.
In 2006 - they collected $26 million in free money. In 2008 it is estmated to be close to 30 million of free money.
I stepped into a new job when the garnishment was levied - never a day behind in support - and work wanted to know why this was levied. People in HR hasnt looked at me the same in over 2 years since. People feel like I am a bad dad for no unjustified reason.
Every state wants this free money so they treat us like a check first, father second. Please read in detail what 4d is all about. Indiana wants this money just like any other state. Mention 4d in a custody hearing or a financial hearing and you get the look like they want to shoot you.
Very Simple, its the system who creates Bad Dads.