Police Arrest Man Owing $500 in Child Support; They Arrest the Child Too
September 3rd, 2009 by Robert Franklin, Esq.Here's an article with three videos that say a lot about the child support system and its ever-closer cousin, the criminal justice system (Examiner, 9/1/09).
It seems a man in York, Pennsylvania had paid support for his children for something like 14 years. They're all close to adult age and two of his daughters were living with him. Still, he owed his ex-wife $500 per month. But he lost his job and before he could get another one, he had fallen one month behind on his payments. Not to worry though; his ex sent a letter to the child support authorities saying she understood the situation and would gladly wait until he found work and was able to catch up.
That apparently didn't deter the police in their quest to lock up "deadbeat" dads - and anyone else who got in their way.
So "six or eight" police showed up at the man's house and woke up his daughter, Lindsay, who's 18. She told them her dad wasn't home because he was at his new job. It turned out he was in the basement, but she didn't know that. She invited them in to look around and when they discovered her father, they beat him up and arrested him wearing nothing but a shirt. They also arrested Lindsay for obstructing a police investigation, after slamming her on top of her desk.
All that for $500 that the mother was willing to wait for.
Your tax dollars at work.
"));
19 queries. 0.307 seconds.
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:29 pm
I don't have 20 min. to watch a video, sorry... The write up tells an excellent story that leaves little grey area. Sounds like the authorities f'ed up big time and acted like real thugs.
But it is just a story without independent verification. Can we get some? News story anywhere?
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:30 pm
This is a heart warming story... Wonderful how these "dead beats" are really being taken care of. I think we need even more arrests, perhaps even arrests before they fall behind just so they know what it can be like. What do you think?
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:34 pm
How many more straws will it take to break the camels back?.
I hope I am still around to see the complete collapse of the Illegal, Immoral, un-ethical, un-constitutional, tyrannical, corrupt, and un-lawful Judical system.
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Quick scramble a verification! - apparently in the media that loves to ignore such tyrannical actions especially when its victims are male.
Otherwise its just a story, no need to panic - its JUST A STORY.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:22 pm
im curious as to how the structure of child support was decided upon as it seems at least one of the kids were with him , HOWEVER massive props to the mom who was willing to wait for this understanding he wants to support his kids and didnt have the ability to pay its not often we hear of women that are .. reasonable so props to her,
September 4th, 2009 at 1:04 am
Duncan - I understand what you're saying, but I have to say, it's not often you hear of mothers who are reasonable for the same reason it's not often you hear about fathers who are reasonable. When divorced couples get along and do what's best for their children, nobody hears about it. There are many mothers out there who are trying their best to do what's right and they get a bad rap the same way the decent fathers do. The reasonable ones don't make a good story...
September 4th, 2009 at 1:20 am
Barbara I agree was just a passing view on it , i am jaded as are most here its nice to see couples who seem to be getting on ( still unsure on the whole child support issue with the way the living arrangements are worded ) this is a horrible story and shows just how far out of line the police get but its just .,....... nice to see that for once there is a story that shows the misery inflicted upon him over this is not related to his ex ( maybe im weird for seeing a positive here lol )
September 4th, 2009 at 6:02 am
GG Says:
"I'll offer you my suggestions for a fee."
Sorry, but I don't think that they do fiction on this site.
September 4th, 2009 at 6:44 am
I lived in York for 4 months, and I still live close. Close enough to pick up York radio stations. Every day, at least one person drops dead of severe lead poisoning, if you catch my meaning. I would think the YPD would have better things to do than chase this guy. I don't mean to give the impression that York is a seething den of scum and villany, but it's not anywhere close to the size of other cities nearby, like Philidelphia. Deadbeat dads are just easier targets than AK47 wielding gang bangers, I guess.
September 4th, 2009 at 7:08 am
GG, were trying to save a generation that has been consumed by an irresponsible / violent / drug addicted matriarchy.
Are you the beast incarnate, that wants to stop us??
September 4th, 2009 at 8:21 am
Wow, the ex contacted them and they still went after him? And only after a month....talk about Jonny-on-the-spot, huh? I think what's interesting here, above just being appalling, is that it appears NO ONE has control of this out of control system. Even though I believe women(ex-wives and mothers) certainly benefit from it in many ways, they obviously don't control it, and certainly not down to an individual. Let it be another grim and daunting lesson to all that the "machine" has become self aware. There's money to be made, and lots of it. Reason, fairness, etc. is a thing of the past. I'm sure this woman, the ex-wife and mother of the girl is beside herself. Sadly though, if she is asking herself "why?" or "how could this happen?", particularly because she was one of the fair ones who played things straight, the reality is the answer is only as far as the closest mirror.....
September 4th, 2009 at 8:26 am
"GG, were trying to save a generation that has been consumed by an irresponsible / violent / drug addicted matriarchy.
Are you the beast incarnate, that wants to stop us??"
I don't think GG cares to comprehend that concept menscollegeactivist.org! That is the kind of people that greed and selfishness breeds. In her mind she believes what she is doing is good. The fact that the system put two decent human beings behind bars over $500 means little to her! Even when a bailiff shows up at you door to take away your car or what ever, you have a chance to pay them on the spot. As much as I despise bailiffs they are more human than those in the business of collecting child and spousal support!
Attila
September 4th, 2009 at 8:31 am
"deadbeat dads are just easier targets than AK47 wielding gang bangers, I guess."
seems 18 year old girls are easier targets too. Big bad police officers showing the world what heroes they are. These thugs, members of the big blue gang, are utterly out of control and regard themselves as being above the law.
September 4th, 2009 at 8:52 am
Duncan - I only speculate, but given the living arrangements of the children, how do you give "major props" to a women who probably sold her parenting responsibility to the children for his continued ransom payments of $500/month?
My guess is that she was so agreeable because, under the circumstances, it was rather likely that she would be the one having to pay if Dad decided to bring to bear the full force of the Family Court Cartel.
Yeah, "props."
September 4th, 2009 at 9:06 am
Hey Robert,
Did you hear this?
"I like seeing him play that paternal role, Father in Chief, not just for his own daughters, but for all of our children. " (Yes, I am quoting from Joan Walsh from Salon)
First they took care of mommy, then the paycheck, now they are going to provide a father as well, but not a common father, but a Father in chief (has a ring to it, doesn't it?).
September 4th, 2009 at 9:09 am
here's the argument:
Men by the boatloads are being tossed into prison for child support debts they simply can't pay
...but
Most CEOs and congressmen are men...
Therefore, men are privileged and have it better than women.
Is this all clear?
September 4th, 2009 at 9:23 am
One thing that strikes me as a little bit strange about this story: Around here, someone has to be 60 days behind on child support before CSE will even look at the case. At that point, any "good faith" payment will get them off your back and start the timer over. I have a friend who gets roughly $20 every two months from her ex (for three children) because that's all it takes to keep CSE from hounding him. Her order is for $550/month but in the 3.5 years they've been divorced, he's never paid more than that $20-50 every 59 days. CSE shrugs their shoulders and tells her there's nothing they can do. Her children are on Medicaid (she works but her income is low and she doesn't have insurance) and the state doesn't even go after him for that...as long as he makes a good faith payment every 59 days. I'm not sure how far behind you have to be before they suspend your driver's license but it's more than one month and arrest warrants are very rare.
When you look at all the stories about fathers being arrested with tens of thousands of dollars of arrears, it seems a little bit odd that this man would be arrested for only being $500 and one month behind. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but something seems a little fishy. If police routinely arrested people who were one month behind, I don't know, it just seems like there's something conveniently missing from the story.
I agree that the system is horribly broken, but I can't get over the feeling that there's more to this story.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Now these are the kind of PUNK COPS I just LOVE to hear about in the news that get clipped in the line of duty! Loser PUNK cops!
RT
www.anonymous-web.be.tc
September 4th, 2009 at 9:32 am
# Mashed Says:
September 4th, 2009 at 8:31 am
"deadbeat dads are just easier targets than AK47 wielding gang bangers, I guess."
seems 18 year old girls are easier targets too. Big bad police officers showing the world what heroes they are. These thugs, members of the big blue gang, are utterly out of control and regard themselves as being above the law.
---
One of my friends told a cop that he was just "a glorified tax collector" and the cop took a swing at him (and missed). Then arrested my friend.
But, strangely the car's dash-cam was turned off, so my friend couldn't prove anything.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Barbara Says:
September 4th, 2009 at 1:04 am
There are many mothers out there who are trying their best to do what's right and they get a bad rap the same way the decent fathers do.
----
Agreed, but this statement seems to imply there is some symmetry where none exists.
Custodial mothers are almost never put into jail for "a bad rap". Also, the level of shaming is demonstrably higher. Is there even a similar term for a bad custodial mom equivalent to the dig of "deadbeat dad" which can be applied (and is) to the dad by authority figures even though the finances of the NCP dad is through no fault of his own (and authority figures are supposed to remain impartial).
September 4th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Barbara:
Regarding the fishyness of the story: I agree.
Maybe somebody who doesn't like the guy called in to social services pretending to be the wife complaining that the father had the money but refused to pay?
I know that in many urban slum neighborhoods anonymous tip-offs to social services (that so-and-so house is filthy and kids are in danger) or anonymous drugs-in-the-house tip-offs are used as a system of vengeance (as are the 800-litter numbers). It wouldn't surprise me if some people were starting to use child support in such a manner.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Barbara,
IMO, Its not the governments job to take care of your friend's kids or your friend.
She chose to have kids (apparently with a self centered jerk - which is the rule not the exception) now she needs to take care of them.
I hope you aren"t implying that government should continue to put its heal on my throat because some women make bad decisions.
I don"t see the goverment EVER put its heal on the womans throat no matter what.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:06 am
It's the system most of us have an issue with. THere are plenty of men/women who are reasonable and fair. The problem is, it's more often then not that when you have something easy to abuse or easy money you take it. Bravo to this woman who tried to take the high road. My wife does the same. We have her little girl half the time and her lawyer tried to bully her into taking money from her X who makes a fair amount more then her. She told her "I'm not taking a dime. I will look after her when I have her and visa versa."
September 4th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Barbara - is the guy paying that little because that is all he has? Are you getting the other side of the story? I routinly hear that kind of stuff from Custodial parents and when I dig into it a bit, it turns out to be very false. Not saying it isn't true, but I'd get the other side of things too if I were u.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:25 am
[...] GlennSacks.com [...]
September 4th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Burke, where do i find women like that?
September 4th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
I hope more men are thrown in jail, maybe that will light some fires.
Side note:We met with the local police on Wednesday to get their perspective about Child Support and Restraining Orders. Black & White, the officer even said that after they would leave the premises after a male complain of abuse by a women they would laugh to about it, in order words suck it up and be a man.
Our next step is go to the State Justice department where they train the police about DV. Anyone interested in joining us in Mass please let me know.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Reedited
I hope more men are thrown in jail, maybe that will light some fires.
Side note:We met with the local police on Wednesday to get their perspective about Child Support and Restraining Orders. Black & White, the officer even said that after they would leave the premises after a male complain of abuse by a women they would laugh to each other about it, in other words "suck it up and be a man".
Our next step is go to the State Justice department where they train the police about DV. Anyone interested in joining us in Mass please let me know.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Miles - I agree with you. I've said numerous times on this board that while I do believe both parents (when both chose to have the children) have a responsibility to take care of them, the state garnishing wages or forcefully taking money from one or the other is not the way to accomplish that. My ex and I were married at the time that both of our boys were born, it was actually his choice for me to come off birth control. I do believe that he has a responsibility to our children but I refuse to register the income deduction order with the state. I want him to be a part of his children's lives and I want him to help take care of them because it's the right thing to do, not because the state took money from him.
The only reason I mentioned my friend was to demonstrate that CSE around here doesn't work the way this article makes it out and something about the story seems fishy.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Burke - I do know both the father and the mother. He openly brags about working CSE to his advantage. Neither of these individuals are wealthy by any means. I don't know what his monthly budget looks like but I know that he and his new wife and her children are living a much higher lifestyle than his ex-wife and their children. If I had to guess, I would guess that he and his new wife live on credit...the new truck and minivan, the honeymoon cruise, the big screen TV, the PS3 and Wii, the DS for each of her kids (not his of course), the dinners out, the frequent flyer miles at the liquor store...I would assume that all of it is on credit and they can't afford any of it. I don't know too many people who can afford all that. And if they are living on credit, I would guess that their monthly debt payments are eating up most of their income. It doesn't negate the fact that he chooses to do the absolute minimum he possibly can for his children while not getting in trouble for it.
At the same time, he uses visitation with the kids to control, manipulate and play games with the kids' mom and has called DFCS and the police on her numerous times. One that stands out in my mind was when he called her and told her he wasn't going to see the kids that weekend. He's not the brightest and he left her a voice mail. When it came time for him to pick the kids up, she wasn't at the designated location so the police came knocking on her door. Thankfully, she played the voice mail message for them and they left...of course, they didn't do anything to him either...just wrote it up as a misunderstanding. To rub a little salt in the wound, they "strongly encouraged" her to take the kids to the meeting spot then and let him have them for the weekend.
One thing I "love" about this guy (which is the same reason I'm suspicious of many second wives who bemoan the injustices their husbands/boyfriends are facing) is that he happily accepts child support from his new wife's ex. In fact, he was arrested for going to the ex-husband's house and beating him up when he fell behind on child support.
My problem with "the system" (well, one of my problems with it anyway) is that guys like this slide through under the radar while the ones who are trying and coming up short get punished. The system is broken, period. It doesn't work for anyone. I still say there's something missing from the story in the original post.
September 4th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Barbara - you're right. Why would the police have any reason to go to the man's house? If all the ex-wife did was contact the support agency to say "it's only $500, he's not working, I can wait", how did the cops get involved?
September 4th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Barbara, you do sound like a reasonable person. It is refreshing to see. I think we all pretty much agree that they system is broken. Someone refered to it as the "machine". I have to agree with that statement. I had one of my elected officials tell me, "The law may be written gender neutral, but it is not applied that way". I have to say I appreciated his honesty even though I knew he would not try to do anything. He wants to get re elected and has to be pollitically correct. He also told me that taxes, health care and such were safe topics, but child custody is not. Let's be honest. The states get federal dollars based on how much child support is collected. My ex and I make enough money on our own to care for our child, and she even makes more. She gets my support, I pay the insurance, and she gets a nice tax write off every year. I have been falsely accused of child abuse, being a pedafile, and had my child kept from seeing me more times than I can remember. Not once has she even been slapped on the hand. The child support payments are kept up with (and yes I am current) but when I have been denied seeing my child, I am told that I need to hire an attorney. Our system considers my money more important than my love and time. If I did not pay, the attorney generals office would get involved and I would be charged interest the first time I did not pay. The 'machine feeds itself". If it were really about the best interest of the child, each case would be looked at individually instead of rubber stamping a standard order and flat rate for support. Yes, a different amount of support and visitation can be agreed upon, but when the rubber stamp "default" is the best deal then that is more times than not how it is going to be. If the person who made any false allegations was held liable the first time they did so, just like I would be the first time I did not pay my money, it might change. Senators, the house, and judges are elected. Lawyers like the conflict. They get fat off of others pain. The states get federal dollars because of the demise of the family. The other poster had it right. THE MACHINE.......
September 4th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Wayne said "Black & White, the officer even said that after they would leave the premises after a male complain of abuse by a women they would laugh to each other about it, in other words "suck it up and be a man"."
My neighbor is a law enforcement officer. Many of the men in his department are fed up with gender feminism, fed up with being passed over for promotion while a junior female officer is promoted. They're fed up being given the crummy shifts and crummy beats, pushing a cruiser and making tough busts on tough customers year after year while the female officers pull light duties. Next time one of them complains about being passed over, tell him to suck it up.
September 4th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Scott - The only first-hand experience I have is in GA and it's really quite limited. My ex and I resolved our divorce in mediation, although if I had it to do over again, that mediation day would have gone quite differently.
I find it very hard to believe that GA is more progressive than most states in these matters, but in my experience, GA gets it right in a lot of ways. Joint custody is assumed here (although that doesn't necessarily mean 50/50) and all of the fathers I know of who have gone to court for custody have wound up with at least 50/50 or more. Child support here is based on an income shares model and the awards are pretty reasonable. In our case, if we had gone with the guideline child support amount, my ex would have been left with nothing to live on but that's because he insisted on less parenting time, he refused to contribute to child care or medical expenses, etc., and he insisted on claiming one of the deductions for the children. With a "normal" setup, he would have contributed a reasonable amount to child care and medical care, had a respectable amount of time with his children, and almost no child support. I have never heard (from mothers or fathers) of the thousand dollar a month child support awards that I hear about on this board. I know they happen, but not often around here apparently.
As for enforcing parenting time, there is not nearly as much enforcement as there is for child support, but around here, it does seem that fathers are given the benefit of the doubt more often than not. I have several male cousins who have been able to have the police/courts enforce their visitation agreements, at least on a case by case basis. When my ex accused me of keeping the boys from him (the farthest thing from the truth...he was playing games and tried to pick the kids up on my weekend when he knew they were sleeping over at my sister's house), he called the police and they gave me no end of crap. They finally left it with "Well, we can't make you let him take the kids because they're not here." So if they had been here, they would have made me give them to him even though I showed them evidence that it was my weekend and played tapes of phone conversations where he said he was going to set me up?
When my friend's ex left her a message saying that he didn't want to use his weekend then called the police, the police didn't handcuff her and take the kids to him, but I was there that afternoon and believe me, she had no choice but to take the kids to him even after she played the voice mail for the police.
When my mother was doing home-based childcare, she had a couple of parents going through a divorce. The father showed up to pick up the children at a time when he was not authorized to based on the temporary custody agreement. Mom called the mother, the dad called the sheriff. Even when the mother got on the phone with the deputies and offered to fax a copy of the custody agreement to Mom's house, the deputies still made Mom turn the kids over to their father. He took off with them and it took the mother nearly a month to find them and get them back.
The officers that came to my apartment that morning actually berated me for allowing the children to spend the night at my sister's house on "my" weekend. I showed them a calendar of all of Ex's visits with them (all 15...a total of about 80 hours) over the last year and a half and explained that she had taken the boys to the laser show the night before to celebrate their birthdays and didn't want to bring them home at 1 a.m. Still, I was a bad mom for not spending time with the kids on my weekend. I didn't hear what they said to Ex about the amount of time he's spent with the kids, but they did tell me that he claims I don't let him see the kids. I offered to play them the tapes and show them the e-mails where he says that it's too much trouble to take them, but after all, it's a civil matter and they don't want to get involved. But they were perfectly willing to lecture me.
I agree that the system is broken and for whatever reason, it seems to favor the irresponsible party in most cases.
September 4th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
By the way, I'll look for the link, but I know I sent Glenn an article a while back that never made it to the blog (that's fine, I'm sure he gets tons of articles and it's his board so he can choose what to write about). If I remember right, it was a smaller midwestern paper. Basically, the article writer said that they (don't remember if it was male or female) were tired of hearing women claim that family courts discriminate against mothers and fathers claim that they discriminate against men. So this writer spent a good bit of time analyzing family court records from their locale over the last...whatever period of time. What they found was that fathers were ordered to pay child support more often than mothers (not more often than noncustodial mothers, but more often overall. No news there.) but that enforcement was exactly equal between genders. Mothers who fell X amount behind were penalized exactly the same as fathers who fell the same amount behind. Suspended driver's licenses, arrest warrants, wage garnishments...it was all exactly the same for both genders with equal amounts of arrears. I believe the article even pointed out that mothers were more likely to fall behind but it's been a while so I don't remember for sure. The conclusion was that while the system has a lot of flaws, child support enforcement, at least in that locale, was gender-blind.
I'll look through my sent mail to find the link. I'd like to see more analysis like that on a wider scale because horror stories (from either side) are nothing but anecdotes.
September 4th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
So apparently the custodial mother was willing to wait for the money, but the state wanted theirs and they wanted it NOW! (matching federal money for child support collection)
September 4th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
What is funny about this case is that if the wife had never reported the non-payment, it would have taken them months to even detect the non-payment.
September 5th, 2009 at 2:02 am
Pankaj: I thought the same thing. Don't tell, even if the intentions are good when it comes to government.
From the actions of the police department. It's apparent there was a severe abuse of authority. that took place. Talk about kicking a guy when he's down, literally. I believe excessive force did take place, due to the reaction of the other officer in the video clip. His reaction was as if their department is knowledgeable regarding how this officer oversteps his boundaries.
I'd been in corporate management for many years. I can't figure out our government. Where is the managerial oversight? What is wrong with saying, "Here's the constitution, here's your rule book, follow them or get out?" Terminating someone's position is not the easiest, but to uphold integrity and policy it's part of the job some of us choose to do. I feel quite often these upper administrative tasks are ignored. There is enough candidates on their hiring roster that a few wanna be tough guys can get weeded out so the positions can be filled by those with temperaments that qualify for their positions too.
September 5th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Rev Richard.,
You think the officers should be terminated? I do too. But there is a fundamental reason why these people behave the way they do - because they cannot go out of business for bad product/service!
Will they be terminated? No! I can bet money on that. The entire department stands up to justify even homicides on behalf of the accused policeman - even homicides on camera! It is next to impossible that the officers in this case will be terminated. And when someone is aware of this situation - as most police officers are - they are not afraid to take it up a few notches.
Your experience is in corporate management, which is sometimes very sluggish and inefficient. Move to tax funded bureaucracy and you will find that the dynamics are completely different. Failure gets rewards and success is punished there. Besides, a man was victimized by taxfeeding thugs, its no big deal. If it were a woman... well things would be a tiny bit more serious, but only a tiny bit - unless she cried "Rape!".
September 5th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Pankaj: I understand that completely. Or if they are too violent for the street, the give a promotion and a detective position to keep them off the streets.
I completed a small survey. It was small cause it was done with my son and about 20 of his friends. I asked the how they feel about cops. We can all assume the variety of words and remarks they used to describe how they felt about them. Then I asked them, what if they acted within the boundaries of their position, and assumed the role of protect and serve without being over cocky, and walking all over citizens and their rights. Their view changed, and a majority said they would have respect for cops and their positions.
My comment was not about the actual conduct of government as much as it is about how the accountability, and oversight would benefit government. What works, works no matter if it's applied in business, or government. It's always been my belief that if you want strength in anything from family through the largest government find what works and repeat. Not complex, but rarely followed.
September 5th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Rev. Richards,
Agreed that oversight and accountability will help.
However it is logically impossible to get oversight or accountability that can work for any reasonable period of time - within this system.
And if history is evidence, the system as it works, despite multiple efforts to gain oversight and accountability has resulted in more and more dysfunctional system.
It is VERY GOOD that your son and his friends do not have implicit trust in a man wearing a uniform. Trust, authority and respect must be earned and susceptible to loss all depending on actions of the man, not the uniform he wears.
September 5th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Sonja Says:
September 4th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Barbara - you're right. Why would the police have any reason to go to the man's house?
There is an outstanding warrant... Police execute warrants it is their JOB or at least one of several police functions.
September 5th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
All I know is when I moved to another state because I couldn't afford to live where I was, because my child support was so high it only took one month before ALL my accounts were seized. I didn't have anything in them to take because I was paying so much child support and living with my Mother because of lack of funds. Duh!!! Like I was hiding something from them or something. It's a good thing I found a job shortly after moving after child support I only brought home $200 a month and I had my ex's students loans to pay which they wanted $550 a month so they seized my accounts too and wanted me to liquidate my all my assets which I had nothing to sell. This is a true story I'm not kidding! They are ruthless. My ex never got one bad thing on her credit report. Infact her credit rating has never been better.
September 5th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
You call this equality???
September 9th, 2009 at 2:32 am
My mom had several affairs, divorced my dad, got almost everything including a huge child support order. He had to live with his sister to be able to afford to pay it. Then when I was 14 she put me to work doing dishes in a restaurant & getting paid under the table. My first husband left me while I was pregnant and we never got a dime though he was making good money thanks to the help of several females. My second husband has worked since his teen years. Joined the military at his wife's insistence and after 9 yrs. she found a lover while he was overseas, divorced him, got custody & support awarded. All the boys' childhood after that he rarely made more than minimum wage. So often there was no money to send, 3 times we were homeless, numerous times put on food stamps and welfare because so little was left afterwards. Yet CSEA told us my daughter & our son didn't matter. She even told me if I'd move to their state they could get my daughter's back arrears & use it for my husband's son's back arrears. We've begged for lawyers, sent numerous letters by certified mail and even their own records said in January 2000 nothing was owed. But as soon as my husband found a job in August of that year they suddenly claimed he owed over $11,000. Ohio has garnisheed wages, taken the EIC he wouldn't even get if not for our disabled son and continue to threaten him though his boys are in their 30s and haven't lived in Ohio since the early 90s. He's not given any legal representation, they ignore all proof of payments including their own audit and is talked to like a dog. His ex refused all contact despite visitation rights and yet Ohio said it was up to my husband to hire an attorney to file contempt charges though the garnishee papers clearly stated if she didn't she was in contempt of the court and would be charged. Everytime she wanted something & my husband wouldn't give it to her (including changing the boys' surname) she'd sick the CSEA on him for an increase and any back arrears. Even on the CSEA's website it says; "We don't represent the mother or father or even the children. We represent the public interest". If that's the case since when was it in public interest to give welfare & food stamps or make another child homeless to collect support.
If I sound bitter it's because I am. Though I'm female I'm thoroughly disgusted with the behavior of most of my gender. When I was young & foolish I thought it was mostly the men that were a@@es. Now I know better. If I had to choose which one to trust w/o knowing it'd be the male everytime. Women get a little power & it goes to their heads. I have met a few good women divorced with kids but very few. As for attorneys forget it. Legal Aid won't take it and you only get a court appointed lawyer if you rob or murder someone. At least this woman was one of the few who deserve a crown for compassion and understanding. Those cops should be fired, fined & prosecuted.
September 9th, 2009 at 2:54 am
I'm a father of 3. Two seperate marriages. Total child support $1200 a month. Since the second divorce i couldnt afford to live on my own. I needed my drivers lisence for my job but when work slowed down so did my money. I couldnt afford child support anymore. I told the child support worker and she said "I dont care if your living in a box under the overpass your going to pay that child support" She suspended my lisence. I lost my job. Borrowed money to get my lisence back and tried to get another job that would pay good money but the companies insurance company wouldnt insure me because i was suspended. Now I sit at home applying for jobs on the internet. Cant afford gas to go hunting a job so i do it from home. Being that there are so many people without a job they give a test when filling out applications now. Thats not the part that bothers me because i do well on the tests. But being i dont have a job i cant pay child support i have a hard time getting a job because chile support keeps messing with me. They told me they would modify my child support but i have to have a job and i have to pay $100 per case to do it..I dont know but the system is really messed up..you try to pay, the economy fails you either lose your job or your work goes down, then child support tryes to keep you from paying again. Now if i get a job i have to worry about losing that job because they will put me in jail for 90 days. So the guys that are trying to pay get shafted because of the guys that arent even trying..i think they need to rethink this entire child support deal. my sister is a single mother of 3. she is struggleing. her exhusband dont pay child support..the most he has sent in was $25. but usually it is like $2.34. she complains to child support and they say "well there is nothing we can do he is trying" He is trying what? why are they picking on someone that is trying harder and not the ones that dont care..Its all crazy. So soon i will be in jail with all the burglers, drunks, rapests, and murderers because child support hinders my ability to get a job. mean while my exwives had flat panel tvs, boats, harleys, their own houses, and food on their plates. I was a sub contractor. which means no unemployment. I dont have my children which means no food stamps or medical assistance. my gull bladder is bad, my teeth are bad, my health is going down hill. the doctors wont do anything because of no insurance. I think im going not going to make it until the child support runs out and then what? i'm only 36 and my youngest is 6. so there is a long fight ahead..but good luck to all.
September 9th, 2009 at 10:42 am
After reading the story about the poor guy owing some cash to his ex and the cops arresting him and his daughter after assaulting her thats just wrong thats cop brutality as well as (foc) fiend of court they really need to be put out of buisness they are tottally tyranical they dont care if some of us poor smucks have lost our jobs. I did in 2006 and now have been reduced to a live in aide that makes chicken scratch i lost my home because of foc and they dont care they act like they can do no wrong its sad that the system has become so corruppt . And yet our seators and congress people wont do anything about it.
September 9th, 2009 at 11:01 am
The legal System sure is -worthless-, to say the least !
especially the District Court in Great Bend, KS. / Judge Svaty.
innocent until proven guilty beyond a resonable doubt / in the best interest of the child,
what a joke !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 9th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Ohio loves to remove fathers from their children Judge Thomas Capper is all about the federal incentive dollars. Fathers and Children are being used for State profit. FAMILY LAW REFORM NEEDS TO HAPPEN SOON. EQUALLY RIGHTS FOR FATHERS!!!!
September 9th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
what are the names and addresses of the cops who arrested him.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
interesting. Usually the "State" doesn't get involved unless the mother is on Welfare or the mother files a complaint. I smell a fish.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
I like the way you think kenny