My ex husband hasn't paid me any child support in months. I live in Kentucky and he lives in Ohio. There is a warrant for him in Kentucky for non-support. He has visitation every other weekend. Can I deny him visitation due to this outstanding warrant or because he has not paid his support? Please email me your responses to
[email protected]
NO...NO...NO!!! Visitation and Child Support are SEPERATE!!!!
You withhold visistation and he can get YOU on contempt of court for VIOLATING the visitation agreement.
Now on the other hand, YOU CAN get him on contempt of court for failure to pay support....some questions:
1. Is the order through Child Support Enforcement?
2. If not...WHY?
3. Do you know the circumstances behind the failure to pay? There was a time where my DD's father couldn't pay because he had lost his job. Is there a pending downward modification for this kind of circumstance? Was his wages garnished? Has he had a cut in pay? Is the support amount TOO much?
4. How far in arrears is he? My DD's father is almost $12K in arrears and I know of other's who's arrears are much larger sums (in the $50-100K range...ouch).
Visitation and child support are two separate issues. If you withhold visitation, you can be held in contempt of court. Don't go there.
You want clean hands for your contempt motion agianst your ex for his failure to comply with a court order.
File a contempt motion asking that he pays all arrears and that the child support is automatically garnished from his wages.
The circumstances behind why he isn't paying is irrelevant. What is relevant is that he isn't paying what is court ordered.
Quote from: Giggles on Sep 21, 2009, 11:14:52 AM
3. Do you know the circumstances behind the failure to pay? There was a time where my DD's father couldn't pay because he had lost his job. Is there a pending downward modification for this kind of circumstance? Was his wages garnished? Has he had a cut in pay? Is the support amount TOO much?
I would venture to guess that the NCP thinks the support amount is too much.
BTW, circumstances are irrelevant. If there was a change of circumstances on the NCP's part, the onus is on the NCP to file for a downward mod. And the NCP is still obligated to pay the court ordered amount, even if there is a pending mod.
1. it IS set up through child support enforcement.
2. He will not get/keep a job.
3. He will not file to have the amount decreased.......because it makes him feel like less of a man, i guess. Last time we went to court, they raised his support. When the judge asked him if he was comfortable with the increase and if he thought he could afford it, he replied "Oh, I could afford way more than that!" (He's a complete moron people).
4. Child Support Enforcement can not advance my case until he is arrested. He has an outstanding warrant, and that's as far as they can take it until he is arrested.
He picks our daughter up every other weekend. I COULD call the sheriff's department and have him arrested when he picks her up, or drops her off. I was trying to avoid that because I did not want our daughter to have to see him get arrested......
Call the sheriff and see if they will come to the next pick-up. Have your child stay with someone else so they don't see it.
Do you know where he lives or hangs out that you can tell them so it is not done at your house?
I agree -- don't deny time.
BUT -- if you're truly frustrated, I'd call the sheriff.
But I also believe you'll have problems if he needs to be transported OVER a state line to the county with jurisdiction.
Quote from: ocean on Sep 21, 2009, 04:53:37 PM
Call the sheriff and see if they will come to the next pick-up. Have your child stay with someone else so they don't see it.
I would actually wait until "drop-off" that way they can nab him on his way out of town and the child is none the wiser and there are less questions as to why Daddy isn't there that weekend???
I also disagree with Mom42 the circumstances are quite relevant. I'm of the opinion that I would rather try and figure out a way of dealing with the issues (non-payment) and try to get SOME $$ versus throwing the guy in jail thereby guaranteeing NO MONEY!!
Quote from: Giggles on Sep 22, 2009, 06:17:35 AM
Quote from: ocean on Sep 21, 2009, 04:53:37 PM
Call the sheriff and see if they will come to the next pick-up. Have your child stay with someone else so they don't see it.
I would actually wait until "drop-off" that way they can nab him on his way out of town and the child is none the wiser and there are less questions as to why Daddy isn't there that weekend???
I also disagree with Mom42 the circumstances are quite relevant. I'm of the opinion that I would rather try and figure out a way of dealing with the issues (non-payment) and try to get SOME $$ versus throwing the guy in jail thereby guaranteeing NO MONEY!!
As opposed to him being out of jail and not paying?
Sorry that argument doesn't hold water. For the simple reason that if he was paying his child support, he wouldn't have ended up in jail.
It isn't up to the original poster to figure out his issues. If he has a problem with the amount or lost a job, the onus is on HIM to file for a modification. Not her.
Which, according the original poster, this guy is choosing not to do.
BTW, there are ncp's who only pay some of their child support but not all of the court ordered child support. This guy isn't paying anything. At all. His circumstances are irrelevant, his actions are. And one of them is not filing for a modification.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Sep 22, 2009, 03:12:16 PM
Quote from: Giggles on Sep 22, 2009, 06:17:35 AM
Quote from: ocean on Sep 21, 2009, 04:53:37 PM
Call the sheriff and see if they will come to the next pick-up. Have your child stay with someone else so they don't see it.
I would actually wait until "drop-off" that way they can nab him on his way out of town and the child is none the wiser and there are less questions as to why Daddy isn't there that weekend???
I also disagree with Mom42 the circumstances are quite relevant. I'm of the opinion that I would rather try and figure out a way of dealing with the issues (non-payment) and try to get SOME $$ versus throwing the guy in jail thereby guaranteeing NO MONEY!!
As opposed to him being out of jail and not paying?
Sorry that argument doesn't hold water. For the simple reason that if he was paying his child support, he wouldn't have ended up in jail.
It isn't up to the original poster to figure out his issues. If he has a problem with the amount or lost a job, the onus is on HIM to file for a modification. Not her.
Which, according the original poster, this guy is choosing not to do.
BTW, there are ncp's who only pay some of their child support but not all of the court ordered child support. This guy isn't paying anything. At all. His circumstances are irrelevant, his actions are. And one of them is not filing for a modification.
You are quite correct that the onus is on HIM...and I know quite well there are NCP's who only pay part of their Court Ordered CS...I have one of those!! I could have had my DD's father thrown in jail for not paying...he was up to nearly $20K in arrears, they suspended his DL and had a warrent out for his arrest as well. I told him flat out, if you don't start paying SOMETHING they WILL throw you in jail. He realized that was true and now I do get a bit here and a bit there, sometimes the whole amount but most times about 1/2 of what he should be paying. My consolation is that CS arrears never go away...so eventually it will get paid. I've gotten a few surprises where the state seized some of his assets...I once received a check for $7600!!
Not mom's problem that he has a warrant out for his arrest. At this point IF there is an active warrant out, he should not be driving the child anywhere. If he gets pulled over, he will be arrested and child will be taken from him anyway. Call the local sheriff and make sure they can do something about it, then let dad deal with it. By putting him in jail, may wake him up to start paying. Not mom's responsibility to deal with dad and find a way to get him to pay.
You know -- when folks are in jail or in prison, they can participate in work-release programs and then the CS will get paid.
I'm on the side of not sending a parent to jail for any infraction....even contempt for missed time, there are other ways to make them feel their mistakes.
I guess you have to ask yourself what's more important-Your child having a relationship with their father or a monthly check.
Not really...the warrant was made from the state for non-payment. It will catch up to him sooner or later. I would rather make sure the child was not with him when it happens (not deny visitation, but let him deal with the arrest, next times he comes to pick up child, child goes...). Is it better for mom to send child and wonder if the sheriff office will call her to come get child because dad was arrested?
I also think that the laws need to change and work out a better system of dealing with non-payment BUT this is what this mother is dealing with now...
Quote from: eagleeyefam on Sep 23, 2009, 04:55:41 PM
I guess you have to ask yourself what's more important-Your child having a relationship with their father or a monthly check.
The flip side for the NCP:
Which one is more important, the kid or the money? Because everytime the NCP chooses not to pay child support especially if they are paying none), they are choosing money over their kids.
Sorry, but BOTH are equally important. The kid needs a place to live. The kid needs heat and light, the kid needs food, the kid needs clothes.
Quote from: ocean on Sep 23, 2009, 04:59:45 PM
I also think that the laws need to change and work out a better system of dealing with non-payment BUT this is what this mother is dealing with now...
I think that if every single court were to actually enforce the existing laws, there would be payment. In states that are extremely strict with enforcement, there is very little non-payment of child support compared to other states that are lax in their collection. The problem is that most states don't enforce non-payment as strictly as they should.
Yeah, as ugly as it sounds, I am going to have no choice but to set up a pick up or drop off time and have the sheriff meet instead of myself. I am certain that he is avoiding legitimate employment in order to skirt the payment of his child support. He finds work here and there that pays under the table instead of obtaining steady employment.
If I don't do something, this will go on forever. I am not putting money over DD's relationship with her father. But the fact of the matter is, we are struggling as well. I have spoken with him on multiple occaisions regarding this issue and have expressed understanding to him that the economy is poor and I know he's having trouble. But it's been over 6 months since he made any attempt at paying his child support and enough is enough. His home is a poor environment for her and I rather she weren't exposed to it. He's an alcoholic and I'm pretty sure drugs are involved (or so I am hearing).
What I have decided to do is just to tell him that he is welcome to pick her up for visitation, but that I am calling the sheriff to enforce the outstanding warrant. If he chooses not to come get her, then that is on him. I won't deny visitation. But I will clearly state my intentions. He will avoid seeing her himself just to get out of this situation. He won't man up and take care of the problem. I'll be interested to see how long he'll be willing to let this go unresolved before he takes care of it just to see her.
You dont know where he lives? Cant you call the sheriff and send them there? Otherwise you will be waiting every weekend with her waiting to see if he shows up and then she will be there to witness it.
I think it is a huge mistake for you to be the driving force behind arresting the other parent. Moreover, you're using and manipulating the access to the child to effect an arrest.
No doubt both you and law enforcement know where this hardened criminal can be found and apprehended (probably 24 x 7) and you simply do not need the drama of the child's presence. LE may not go along with your gamesmanship with the child nearby.
Otherwise, there are other alternatives that would benefit your child in both the short anf long run.
This is clearly a LE issue and you are NOT LE.
She is not the driving force, he did it to himself. Once she found out about the warrant it is up to her to protect their child from witnessing it. He needs to deal with this. I do agree with you about HOW she wants to tell him. She can just say that she knows there is an active warrant out for his arrest and he needs to clear it up so the child is not involved in it. This is different then him owing her money and keeping child from him. He has an arrest warrant out from the state, not her.
Did you call the sheriff to see if they will do anything and to make sure it is an active warrant that they have jurisdiction over?
Quote from: Davy on Sep 25, 2009, 05:21:12 PM
I think it is a huge mistake for you to be the driving force behind arresting the other parent. Moreover, you're using and manipulating the access to the child to effect an arrest.
Uh, he's the driving force of why he's being arrested.
And the child doesn't even have to be there when he gets arrested for his failure to comply with a court order.
Quote from: lwyphan on Sep 25, 2009, 03:13:06 PM
What I have decided to do is just to tell him that he is welcome to pick her up for visitation, but that I am calling the sheriff to enforce the outstanding warrant. If he chooses not to come get her, then that is on him. I won't deny visitation. But I will clearly state my intentions. He will avoid seeing her himself just to get out of this situation. He won't man up and take care of the problem. I'll be interested to see how long he'll be willing to let this go unresolved before he takes care of it just to see her.
Don't tell him anything. He will just not show so that he isn't arrested for his actions. Instead, make arrangements for the child to be somewhere else and notify the police of exactly where he will be.
Getting arrested and going to jail may be the wake up call that he needs to finally comply with the court order.
Let him face the consequences of his actions.
I was CLEAR. This is a LE issue and the arrest can be effected at any time.
WHY wait until the 1st or 3rd weekend when the child might be most impacted. Please justify for a change.
Quote from: Davy on Sep 25, 2009, 06:44:30 PM
I was CLEAR. This is a LE issue and the arrest can be effected at any time.
WHY wait until the 1st or 3rd weekend when the child might be most impacted. Please justify for a change.
No, you justify why it is okay for this person to avoid being arrested for his actions. As for the arrest being done at anytime, kind of hard to do when he's HIDING.
Absolutely not .. I was crystal CLEAR that this is a LE issue and the arrest can be effected at any time so the OP does not be the driving force to effect the arrest when he arrives to access his child. In other words LEAVE THE CHILD OUT OF THIS adult issue.
In addition the perpetrator is not in HIDING. OP clearly posted she didn't like the child going to the non payers' home.
I am right and you are very wrong so prove up your words.
I'm a long time advocate for children to be supported by both parents in all ways and have coached others likewise. Unfortunately my children only received support when I was the payer. Please explain, in your infinite wisdom, why the other payer did not have to support the children. The system would still be laughing if anyone even thought about criminalizing a "mom of three".
More to the point, there was a friend Big Joe ... another advocate of children like myself. Joe's ex wanted to move his two children many states away and he was always denied visitation. Joe always timely paid the full amount of child support. The problem, AS USUAL, the court never enforced the court order and worst the court would increase the child support amount "mom of two" was to receive each time a contempt motion was filed. Eventually, this mom of two award for visitation denials went up $1600 per month and the first month Big Joe couldn't pay the full amount he was arrested and incarcaerated in debtors prison and mom of two relocated the children out of state. Joe could only get out of jail when he started paying current and the arrears that were accumulating.
The jailers did not keep Joe's cell locked and he was able to roam and got other prisoners to flood the court with motions while 6 child advocates worked for Joe's prose' action in Federal Court. Of course, Joe could not support his children since he was in jail so he had received a life term in jail. Joe was jailed for more than 6 months before he was ordered released by the Federal Ct. Joe was to appear on the TV show 60 minutes but a female exec. canceled after he arrived.
I lost contact with Joe when I had to go out of state to retrieve my children. Talked to Joe about 5 years ago. His children were raised fatherless and he had not seen or heard from them for 23 years.
Can this mom of two please explain her desired system to Joe's children and my children.
Quote from: Davy on Sep 25, 2009, 11:39:36 PM
Absolutely not .. I was crystal CLEAR that this is a LE issue and the arrest can be effected at any time so the OP does not be the driving force to effect the arrest when he arrives to access his child. In other words LEAVE THE CHILD OUT OF THIS adult issue.
You are absolutely right, this is a law enforcement issue. Which is why it would be the right thing for a law abiding citizen to let law enforcement know where the person who is hiding (and he is hiding, even the court does not know his address) will be so that they execute an arrest warrent.
And it is better to have the person with the arrest warrent arrested at a time when he doesn't have the child with him. Hence, having it done (with the child somewhere else) at a time you know the child won't be around. The child isn't going to witness the arrest this way and is being left out of the adult issue. Whereas, if the father gets arrested while he is with the child, the child is in the middle of it. The father is a jerk for putting the child in that position. Because the arrest warrent wouldn't have been issued if the father wasn't in contempt of court via his actions.
One thing you aren't is an advocate for children.
I find I have to agree with Davy on this one. It is a law enforcement issue, and they are more than capable of finding someone if they want to. I don't buy the statement that he is hiding. He shows up for visitation 2 times a month. How hard is it to find someone when you know exactly when and where they are 4 times a month? C'mon people.
I understand that the mom is upset, and her life would be easier if she had some extra money coming in, care of dad. However... I would wager that a man who refuses to get/keep a job was doing the same thing when she decided to procreate with him. I am thinking that this person paid all the bills then too. Putting him in jail won't get her any more money. It will just give her some personal satisfaction, to the detriment of the kids.
Work release programs aren't known for paying enough to cover child support obligations, especially when there are arrearages.
In my opinion, jails are for people who are a threat to society, and who will cause harm to other human beings unless they are behind bars. Not paying your child support doesn't exacltly jive with that. Not that I agree with him not supporting his kids - I think that you should. But I don't think LE and jails should be tools for vindictive ex's either.
Quote from: gemini3 on Sep 27, 2009, 08:47:48 AM
I find I have to agree with Davy on this one. It is a law enforcement issue, and they are more than capable of finding someone if they want to. I don't buy the statement that he is hiding. He shows up for visitation 2 times a month. How hard is it to find someone when you know exactly when and where they are 4 times a month? C'mon people.
Uh, what happens to the child if he gets pulled over for speeding and gets arrested?
C'mon, get serious. Arranging for the arrest to happen at a time when the child is somewhere else PROTECTS the child from being put in the above situation.
The father is a vindictive jerk for doing what he is doing. And should go to jail. What he is doing is wrong. And he's putting his child at risk because of his behavior. The mother needs to do what she can to protect her child from being in a position that she is with the father (and I use this term loosely in this vindictive jerk's case) when he gets arrested because of his actions.
This father knows exactly what he's doing and as long as he's allowed to keep skirting the system he's going to. I think if the arrest does happen it should not be anywhere around the presence of the child and with an outstanding warrant, he does stand the chance of getting caught while with his daughter. Mom is owning up to her responsibilities of being a parent by making sure her daughter is cared for without the financial support of father - during these struggling economic times. Why should father be allowed not to support his daughter financially and not own up to his responsibilities. Father should swallow his pride, file for a modification if he can't find employment and own up to his responsibilites.
I'm dealing with my son's father who tries to push the limits of everything too while I do everything financially. I don't complain, I don't deny visitation - but it's unfair and after while, hard to paste a smile on your face and pretend everything is great.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Sep 27, 2009, 08:56:02 AM
Uh, what happens to the child if he gets pulled over for speeding and gets arrested?
C'mon, get serious. Arranging for the arrest to happen at a time when the child is somewhere else PROTECTS the child from being put in the above situation.
The father is a vindictive jerk for doing what he is doing. And should go to jail. What he is doing is wrong. And he's putting his child at risk because of his behavior. The mother needs to do what she can to protect her child from being in a position that she is with the father (and I use this term loosely in this vindictive jerk's case) when he gets arrested because of his actions.
Those are some strong words from someone who isn't involved in the situation. What-if's don't amount to a hill of beans. We could all make up hypothetical situations.
There's nothing in any of the posts that give any indication that he's a bad father, or that the child needs protection from him. In fact - he shows up every other week for his visitation. If I had to put my money on something I would say that there are issues between the mother and father, not between the child and the father.
Quote from: CuriousMom on Sep 27, 2009, 09:43:41 AM
Father should swallow his pride, file for a modification if he can't find employment and own up to his responsibilites.
There are thousands of fathers out there who have lost jobs and income in this economy. What they are finding is that, when you file for a modification, you could wait months before you get into court. Meanwhile the arrearages are piling up, and the fathers stand the chance of facing jail time if they can't pay. Then when you get to court many judges will deem the situation "temporary" and not change the order.
It's not as black and white as you think. And when the CP doesn't have money to pay the bills they can get food stamps and other types of public assistance. There's no public assistance for men who lose their jobs and have to find a way to feed themselves and put a roof over their heads while maintaining CS payments that are more than they bring home in a month.
Again, I would bet that the CP in this case made the NCP out to be a less fit parent in the eyes of the court so that she had custody and he was relegated to 4 days a month with his child. I feel that, if you're going to make a case like that, then you should be willing to accept the additional responsibility (financial and otherwise) that comes with it. I'm sure the father in this case would love to have 50/50 custody, and in that case no money would need to change hands. I bet the child would like to have more time with her dad. But it's not really about that is it? It's about the money. No matter what you try to coat it with.
OH Gemini ... where have you been all my life. Your husband is a very lucky man !!!
First, the OP never said this jerk is in hiding. In fact just the oposite is true, he appears in court and for visitation pick-ups and drop-offs. In addition, the OP said she did not like the child going to the father's house because she did not like the environment. This yada yada yada (including "jerk" ) comes from the theatrics of another poster trying to justify and sway this tread away from the financial support of a child to the arrest of a parent.
I've been in many FR "experience sharing" meetings. It is safe to say that out of a group of 50 fathers MOST paid child support NO MATTER WHAT in HOPES of the child (ren) actually received and benefitted from the support. Afterall we had supported our children IN ALL WAYS ALL THEIR LIFE. MOST believed the mother was doing the right thing ... and MOST did.
Many among these child support paying believers were constantly denied court ordered access to their children and their children to them. Many had to endure false arrests based on false accusations when they went to VISIT (for heaven's sake) their children and HOPE their hidden microcassets recorders did not get damaged in the take-downs. Still others didn't even know where their children were located and the state cashed and hoarded their child support payments when they were returned undeliverable. Of course, they still were required to pay.
Back to the 50 or so fathers in the FR experience sharing meetings. A very small handful of fathers were outspoken and adamantly against paying CS. They disrupted every meeting and at times came to near blows ... nobody here would have wanted to be there .... yada, yada yada. The rest of us functioned from a child advocate theme and coached/supported others likewise. Personally, I purposed, promoted and encouraged female participation which spread to other FR (TFER)organizations in Tx in the 80's...
There are many many other problems in these corrupt systems and particularly CSE and there have been for a long time. The bottom line ...
there are other rational encouragements available (or could be) to get a parent to support a child in all ways. The arrest/incarceration of a parent is simply a feminist power and control mechanism that has very little to do with the financial support of a child.
I really don't think I let the cat out of the bag. Please just everybody just focus on children. Let's stop the brokeness before all we know is gone.
I would think if this father wanted 50/50, he would be filing for that arrangement, fighting for more time with his child. I didn't hear that in the original post or subsequent posts from this person. It was all about the money for the father, whether he could pay or not.
There are always 2 sides to every story - that includes everyone in this site. All we hear is the side being posted and how awful the other parent is etc. I personally think instead of those parents taking out what they feel is unjust of the system on the other parent, focus their frustration and advocate to those who run the family courts/CS. Obviously with all of us in here, we're not alone.
I still feel it's not right to neglect your child support, but let someone be denied visitation it's a huge ordeal. Both parents have been ordered to follow a standard, who is either parent to alter these standards on their own? This type of parent is the one who ruins it for everyone - impacting those who as Davy said pay their child support, or at least make the attempt in good faith, and want to be involved.
Yhanks Curious.
The OP was the sole-custody mother so 50/50 has not been an issue in this thread where arresting the father or jerk became the emphasis rather than non-payment or collecting CS.
Please be mindful the OP says "visitation but no CS". Beautiful ! What does that really mean ?
Many fathers do not like the goverment interference in their relationship with their children and won't "ask" or "beg" especially after they have already been burnt by the bias and prejudice of the system which they consider a waste of time.
I never fought with the mother. I went after the system as much as I could and won .... not really everybody looses when the government is involved. If this keeps up this child may end up fatherless, motherless or both.
Hopefully, resolutions can be considered rather than bashing fathers on a child focused forum seeking equality for both parents.
Children need protection !!
This is truly a no win situation.
If the father is in jail your not gonna be getting support paid nor will the child spend time with the father.
I recall hearing that if you had a warrent and were pulled over with a child that they could not take you in... I could be wrong but I heard that somewhere... I don't know if it's true or not.
Quote from: gemini3 on Sep 27, 2009, 11:33:00 AM
Those are some strong words from someone who isn't involved in the situation. What-if's don't amount to a hill of beans. We could all make up hypothetical situations.
There's nothing in any of the posts that give any indication that he's a bad father, or that the child needs protection from him. In fact - he shows up every other week for his visitation. If I had to put my money on something I would say that there are issues between the mother and father, not between the child and the father.
But part of being a good parent is FINANCIALLY supporting your child. And not putting them at risk of seeing you arrested while they are with you.
Saying that there are issues between the mother and father is an understatement. He isn't paying his child support. He isn't going to court to modify the child support. He isn't letting the CP know his address so that she will know where the child is (btw, this is something that a court can order the ncp to provide to the cp. And has in other cases). The ncp isn't letting the courts know his address.
The mother needs to make sure that the child isn't with the NCP when he is arrested. And the only way she can do that is to make arrangements for the child to be elsewhere when the NCP, who has an arrest warrent out on him for contempt because of his actions, comes to pick the child up. And let the cops know where he will be.
Someone who is out of work or struggling and is not being vindictive about child support STILL pays something. They pay what they can, they do what they can to help support THEIR children even if it is not the ordered amount. Nowhere did it say he lost his job or was struggling financially. Jeez, I teach my kids every day "you make choices and for every choice you make, there are consequences - sometimes good, sometimes bad." It is his CHOICE not to support his child and for that choice, he should face whatever comes his way. A guy who isn't paying child support and has a warrant out for his arrest hasn't paid in quite some time. Putting him in jail because of it --- he wasn't paying before so putting him in jail is not a loss. Every person knows the consequences of not supporting your children. He knows what could happen, he is an adult and should face the consequences. He CHOSE that.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Sep 28, 2009, 06:13:59 AM
But part of being a good parent is FINANCIALLY supporting your child. And not putting them at risk of seeing you arrested while they are with you.
By that logic any person who is in a two parent family and suddenly loses their income (either to lay-off's or for medical reasons, etc.), and has to rely on the other person's income to support the family, is a bad parent.
Also by that logic any person who chooses to stay at home with their children, instead of work and provide financial support, is a bad parent.
I don't buy that. There is
way more to being a parent than money. Unfortunately in the system we have right now, that's all that NCP's are worth. The money.
And we have NO idea what the actual employment status of the NCP is, except for what we're being told by the CP. He may be unemployed or being paid so little that he barely has enough to take care of himself. I don't agree with the statement that all who are CO'd to pay CS will pay even a little if they are unemployed. I don't see how, if they don't have ANY money coming in.
I'm sorry, but there are a lot of gaping holes in this situation. The first red flag for me was in the original post when the CP insinuated that their main objective was to get the NCP arrested. Yep, there is a tremendous amount of animosity, at least for the CP against the NCP. And that's the second red flag.
Regardless, unless the NCP is wealthy and obviously hiding money to avoid paying CS, there is absolutely no reason to put someone in jail for non-payment. Soc was adamantly against it, I remember, because he saw it as an equivalent to debtor's prison. It's the only way to guarantee there won't be any CS payments made, which defeats the purpose altogether.
As for law enforcement, you can't change the fact that a warrant has already been issued. But I would give them more credit in the fact that they don't want the child present if they arrest the guy anymore than anyone else does.
This whole debate just proves that the current CS system is fundementally FLAWED!!
But...how to fix it?
Some of my thoughts....The whole premis on "maintaining the lifestyle" in which the CS is based needs to be tossed! I'm sorry, you cannot keep status quo support of 2 households on what was once one household!
All Custody orders should be 50/50...and NO CS Ordered....but for move aways and or other situations....
A CS order should only be "increased" if 1...both parties agree, 2....if a medical situation occurs or 3...the needs of the CHILD warrent the increase.
A CS order should only be "decreased" if 1. Both parties agree, 2....if the NCP loses their job or has a significant PROVABLE income reduction.
ALL CS order should end at the age of 18....PERIOD
College should NOT be court ordered!
Instead of putting those who don't pay in jail, what about making them do community service?
Oh and MOST OF ALL...make it EQUAL!!
My DH just received paperwork stating BM is going for an UPWARD mod of CS. WHY?? Because she's divorcing her current husband and needs all the $$ she can get her hands on...no problem. Since SS is 17, she'll get 1 years worth and then DONE! What's going to happen to her once the CS ends?? Not my problem!
Giggles it is totally flawed! As in your case exactly, BM is financially greedy and is yet another parent who makes others look bad and pay the consequences.
I have to disagree however on the immediate awarding of 50/50.... and I know I'll catch all kinds of flack for that statement - but just from my personal experience over the past 6 months that would have been the absolute worst thing for my son. Not saying down the road it would be terrible.
My son's father has left him sit during his weekend with a double-ear infection numerous times, has neglected to feed him for 8+ hours .... and this was at age 3 1/2 months to present. Sometimes I think these cases have to be examined a little more.
Kitty and Giggles....great posts.
OP said she didn't want to deny visitation ... she just want him arrested when he showed up.
That's classic. It used to be "She cried and the judge wiped her tears with my checkbook".
* How about holding the receiver of CS accountable for the money received. CS was never an issued because I never made it such. Turns out her boyfreind used my CS to pay his CS and the rest went to their beer budget ... a case a day. Kids tell me she would be visibility pissed when the CS arrived...she only wanted to use non-payment to have me arrested. She never paid a dime when she became ncp.
No accountability is by far one of the biggest issues in the CS arena. Many know the CS is not really used for the support of children (at least in some cases).
Note the daughter lives in a different state than the father. uhmmm...
Here's a brief of an ONE arrest (Class B felony for "interference" with more physical abuse accusations) :
*) plain cothed detective approaches at garage upon arrival from work and we're chatting.
*) boys came out of the garage with a glass of ice tea and a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and politely asked me to take them to the library to meet some girls ... they thought I was talking to a neighbor
*) both boys (15 & 13) are bigger than me and dressed in muscle shirts
*) detective exclaimed "doesn't look like these boys are in any danger". (No chit)
*) detective asked to go inside...looked like Mother Theresa lived there
*) detective said he was sorry he was going have to put be in cuffs and asked I had $1000 for bail .. I ask him to check cause it was suppose to be $100 ... he said he HOPE he didn't come here for $100 and wandered how I knew. He called to check and was frustrated and even more so as he put on the cuffs discovered I was a disabled veteran (Nam).
*) he asked if the older son could drive to come and pick me up ... I let him know he useta steal cars when he was with his mom...was 15 and did not have a license. HE said OK .. come out and get your dad. Neither boy flinched ... hell yal we'll do that.
*) it was kinda of a good ole boy moment as we all looked at each other before I tossed him the keys and said "no partying". Boys are thinking ... dad's in jail ... we have the keys and the house and we're cruising around with a bunch of girls and then partying. LIFE couldn't be better. When the cat's away the mice do play.
The reason I post this is to let ya know this Divorce/Custody/CS is all a BIG FARCE WITH A LOT OF PAIN.
Some will not be happy until they are arresting the kids because they want to go with Dad. That is what happened to that 15 yr old and his older sister when he was 13. LE said it was for their own protection.
I AM VERY SERIOUS ... good people and parents HAVE to come together to STOP all this BS that has been going on for a very long time.
Totally agree on the receiver being held accountable for using the money appropriately. Children shouldn't be someone else's paycheck.
Here's a CS horror story for you that just recently happened to my DH. We moved from up north down to FL. DH did the right thing and immediately registered his CS order...blah...blah...blah.
Well a mix up happened and they were taking DOUBLE CS out of him. Got that fixed and miracle of miracles...he got a refund check back!! WOW...I know!!
Ok...things are going along seemingly fine until he gets a summons for failure to pay CS....WTF??? So the date comes up, DH armed with all his pay stubs showing the CS deduction....gets in front of the Judge. The judge looks at the record and gets a puzzled look. Says "OK...you're here for failure to pay but....you've been paying and you have no arrears....do you have anything to say?" then immediately says "don't say anything you won...case dismissed". OK well and fine right...WRONG! My DH still had to PAY the court costs!! grrrr
Now CuriousMom...in instances where child neglect is present...then 50/50 is NOT an option. Right now MOST New CO's have a CP and NCP getting weekend visits. THis should NOT BE!!! 50/50 should be set up first...then if an issue comes along, it can be revisited.
I too agree that CS should be "accountable". I have no problem stating where and how much I spend on my DS and DD...because I know every dime and then some of CS I get goes to them. I typically get $500 a month for 2 kids (I say typically because some months I get less...but never more...sigh). I think that is sufficient to see that their needs are met.
Now DH is going to have to shell out about $750 for ONE child?? Just simply because he got an increase in pay?? That to me is just not right! Especially since we KNOW that the BM does NOT spend that amount on SS!! SS came to visit this summer and one day I was doing laundry. I go to fold the clothes and I pull out a pair of boxers that I didn't recognize as being my DS's...so I realized they were SS's. Now my SS is nearly 17 y/o about 5'10 and weighs about 145-150 lbs. This pair of boxers were BOYS size 10!! Not even my DS who is 12 y/o could fit in them!!! So DH and I took SS shopping for clothes, socks and most of all UNDERWARE!!
BT DT, too, Giggles!
About 8 years ago (when BM was still a genuine PBFH), I was helping SS sort his clothes out when I found a pair of underwear with '50' written in sharpie on the tag. Come to find out, BM bought ALL of the clothes that SS came to us in from a second-hand store! From the skin out! When I showed it to DH, he blew a gasket!
Now, I have no problem whatsoever with second-hand stores, but I draw the line at underwear! When DH took SS home that weekend, he had it out with BM, telling her he pays her enough CS (almost twice what I got for DS) that she can at least afford NEW underwear. And if she couldn't, then he would look into getting custody changed, because she obviously couldn't take care of even his basic needs.
She NEVER did it again...........
The parent receiving CS can forgive past amounts. It takes picking up the phone and calling the CS office to find out what to do. Most times they send you a packet to fill out and have notorized. YOu mail it back or drop it off in person. No court hearings. It's very easy.
If the situation truly is about the child then the OP wouold have looked into this option.
I understand when budgets are tight. I know it's very nice to have the extra income each month. But CS is NEVER a guarantee.
eagle...I agree 100%...and I'm a CP!
There was a time I could have relied heavely on CS...but...at that time I didn't get any and now that I do get CS...I don't need it?? hehehe Well lets just say I don't rely on it. When/if it comes in...I may take the kids out to do something fun.
I have to laugh because I know DH's X is going to be relying heavely on the "new" CS amount she's going to get from him....but that will end probably June-July next year....then what is she going to do??? I know I will be laughing all the way to the bank!! hehehe
Oh good grief, Giggles.........the same here!
When DH and BM divorced, the court ordered ONE DOLLAR in alimony, which is included in the CS. I know, sounds weird, but it was because BM is hearing-impaired and it was based on if she is ever unemployed and unable to find a job. Well, she's been at the same place for practically 20 years, so I don't think there's any threat of that. But my question is......once SS turns 18 and DH no longer has to pay CS, will she pitch a fit if she doesn't get her DOLLAR every year?? (http://www.deltabravo.net/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
In terms of ideas on how to make things more "fair", IMHO all attempts at making old situations "fair" result in new situations that are "unfair".
As I am sure most of us have realized, the justice system is not about fairness. That is why it isn't called the Fairness System. The reason society has dictated that child support must be paid, is that it prevents the state (or others) from being financially responsible for your child. That's it! That's why states will NEVER get rid of child support. If they did, the welfare ranks would go up exponentially.
If you think that taxes are bad now, and stop requiring child support, stop enforcing child support.
This is why you go to jail! I guess that's the only stick that makes so many comply with the orders. But it is much more about stopping the food stamp reliance that was mentioned as an viable resort for those caring for children.
So, if you ask me, motivation aside, when a CO enforces child support, one could see it as a attempt to avoid going on welfare and having to rely on state services. Lets call it: motivation for one not caring for children full-time to get a job. And if the NCP has the money to pay, and is just not paying, everyone seems to agree that person should go to jail. In either case, one can at least understand why they end up in jail.
And I absolutely disagree that one should "justify" how child support is spent. Who would judge which of those pennies where justified and which were not? The new wife? The new husband?
Quote from: gemini3 on Sep 28, 2009, 08:18:14 AM
By that logic any person who is in a two parent family and suddenly loses their income (either to lay-off's or for medical reasons, etc.), and has to rely on the other person's income to support the family, is a bad parent.
This isn't a two parent family so your statement above is full of holes. This is a divorced family with a child support order. One that the NCP is REFUSING to follow.
From what the original poster wrote, the NCP is refusing to get/keep a job. That's voluntary. If I had a husband that did that without my agreement, I would file for divorce. A lay off and for medical reasons is different. It's not willful.
And if the NCP is not working for these reasons (which I doubt given what the OP wrote), then the NCP needs to file for a modification. The NCP in this case is REFUSING to do that. And that is not the CP's fault. The NCP is totally in the wrong here and should be arrested. And the arrest should be done at a time when it can be gauranteed that the child won't be with him. Which means making arrangements for the child to be elsewhere and informing LE where he will be so that they can do their job.
And before someone points out that they can arrest the NCP at anytime, he lives in a different state than where the order is. Until ALL states cooperate with each other, it's not easy to arrest a person in a different state.
Quote from: eagleeyefam on Sep 30, 2009, 10:38:34 AM
The parent receiving CS can forgive past amounts. It takes picking up the phone and calling the CS office to find out what to do. Most times they send you a packet to fill out and have notorized. YOu mail it back or drop it off in person. No court hearings. It's very easy.
If the situation truly is about the child then the OP wouold have looked into this option.
But the CP is under no obligation at all to let the other parent off the hook for financially supporting a child that both parents created.
BTW, that last sentence of yours is complete BS.
If you receive SS benefits for your child you have to justify the money each year so child support could be the same way. The form they send is very general but you have to write down how much money you spent on the child (not itemized) but total amount for raising them AND how much you saved in a bank account (you need to put if it is in child's name, saving, checking)
You need to have a consequence for not paying and right now jail is the LAST resort. The warn you first, then take away your driving license, most times give you every opportunity to make a payment plan with the courts to get back your license, take away any other professional license, take your tax money to pay it, take money from bank accounts. IF the person still is not paying THEN they threaten jail. No, it wont get them to pay BUT it is a punishment for not paying. Why should only the CP fund raising their child? (now the child support formulas is a whole other battle to make it fair but both parents should be raising the child)
Quote from: mdegol on Sep 30, 2009, 06:57:59 PM
So, if you ask me, motivation aside, when a CO enforces child support, one could see it as a attempt to avoid going on welfare and having to rely on state services. Lets call it: motivation for one not caring for children full-time to get a job. And if the NCP has the money to pay, and is just not paying, everyone seems to agree that person should go to jail. In either case, one can at least understand why they end up in jail.
You're correct that the original reason for child support orders was to reduce the burden on welfare. HOWEVER, CS orders are now being applied and enforced regardless of whether or not there is a burden on the state welfare $'s. A CP could be making $100,000 a year and the NCP be jailed for non-payment of CS. Why has this happened? Because the states saw an opportunity to collect additional $'s from the federal government in the form of incentives for collecting CS. These were originally established to incent the states to collect CS (because it's a state issue) so there was less burden on welfare (which comes from the federal budget). It was never intended to apply to
all cases. So I don't think that taxes would be drastically increased were there no CS orders, because the percentage of CS cases where one party would be on welfare is relatively small.
I think it's wrong to assume that any person who doesn't get CS would automatically go on welfare. Most CP's are just as able to find gainful employment as the NCP. Being a CP does not preclude you from having to work. Most intact families are two income families, why should divorcing your husband give you the go ahead to quit your job and rely solely on his income? I think, if that's what you want to do, you should stay married.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Oct 01, 2009, 04:26:17 AM
This isn't a two parent family so your statement above is full of holes. This is a divorced family with a child support order. One that the NCP is REFUSING to follow.
Actually, it is a two parent family. There are still two parents, and still a child who they are BOTH responsible for.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Oct 01, 2009, 04:26:17 AM
And if the NCP is not working for these reasons (which I doubt given what the OP wrote), then the NCP needs to file for a modification. The NCP in this case is REFUSING to do that. And that is not the CP's fault.
So, you're saying that you think that the CP wouldn't be gunning to have the NCP arrested if he would just go to court and ask for a modification? I doubt it. Someone who is vindictive enough to stage a set up so that the other party ends up in jail, and their child doesn't have to go to the other persons house anymore, is very unlikely to do that.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Oct 01, 2009, 04:26:17 AM
The NCP is totally in the wrong here and should be arrested.
You're entitled to your opinion. My opinion differs. I don't think that anyone should be jailed for non-payment of a debt. You don't go to jail if you don't pay your credit cards, or your mortgage, or your car payment. There is no due process when you are jailed for non-payment of CS, which violates the 14th amendment. We did away with debtors prisons back in the 1800's. Two states constitutions prohibit incarceration for non-payment of a civil debt.
I don't think much thought is being given to what being thrown in jail does to a persons life. While you're sitting in jail you can't work, and therefore are unable to pay any of your debts. You stand to lose your job (if you have one), lose your residence, and possibly your means of transportation and posessions. Even a short term in jail can have significant negative affect on a person. It is a viscous cycle that is extremely difficult to detach from. There is also
significant impact on the child, who won't see her father who has been
consistently involved in her life. Sheltering her from seeing her father arrested will not shelter her from the impact of everything else that follows.
Do I think that he should be helping to support the child? Yes. But I don't think that setting him up to be thrown in jail is the answer. You don't seek to destroy someone's life and a child's relationship with one of their parents because that parent isn't conforming to what you want them to do. I think most parents would gladly take on additional financial burden it meant that their children would grow up happy, healthy and emotionally stable. Children who are deprived of a relationship with one of their parents are at risk for severe social problems - teenage pregnancy, drug use, delinquency, domestic violence. The list goes on. Studies have shown that even a parent that is less than ideal is better than no parent at all. Yet there are people who would put money before their child's psychological health. That's what I think this poster is doing and I do not agree with it.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Oct 01, 2009, 04:28:56 AM
Quote from: eagleeyefam on Sep 30, 2009, 10:38:34 AM
The parent receiving CS can forgive past amounts. It takes picking up the phone and calling the CS office to find out what to do. Most times they send you a packet to fill out and have notorized. YOu mail it back or drop it off in person. No court hearings. It's very easy.
If the situation truly is about the child then the OP wouold have looked into this option.
But the CP is under no obligation at all to let the other parent off the hook for financially supporting a child that both parents created.
BTW, that last sentence of yours is complete BS.
It's BS? Why? I personally (and maybe I'm flawed for this) I would rather my children spend time with their father than receive a letter from jail. I'd rather forgive the past dept on CS than know dad will forever be paying what he can just to make up that back CS amount. I'd rather my kids know that mom is a good hearted woman and DIDN'T try to throw dad in jail, or financially bankrupt him.
I have forgiven past due CS. I did it becasue I knew dad was working 2 jobs and trying to survive. The CS was hindering him being able to meet halfway for our son, and he wasn't able to meet his household obligations. I'd rather let go of a few thousand dollars. But hey, that's just me. I'm flawed. I'm one of the moms fostering a positive relationship with my son and his father. Wait I think it's called co-parenting, or adulthood, or decent human being. Something along those lines.
On a side note I just asked my son what he would think if I had his father arrested for failure to pay child support. His answer "that would be messd up mom. I don't think I could forgive something like that" out of the mouth of a 16 year old.
You are able to support the child on your own....not everyone is like you. Some people rely on the money to help pay for the bills that it was meant to help with. Children should be supported by both parents (maybe not equally but it is both responsibilities.)
Quote from: gemini3 on Oct 01, 2009, 06:40:49 AM
Quote from: Momfortwo on Oct 01, 2009, 04:26:17 AM
This isn't a two parent family (substitute HOUSEHOLD, btw, you really are being deliberately obtuse) so your statement above is full of holes. This is a divorced family with a child support order. One that the NCP is REFUSING to follow.
Actually, it is a two parent family. There are still two parents, and still a child who they are BOTH responsible for.
BOTH being the operative word here. BTW, they aren't a family anymore. My kids have 2 families. One with me, one with their dad. I am not a part of my ex's family anymore nor is he a part of mine. That's what divorce is.
Quote from: eagleeyefam on Oct 01, 2009, 01:47:51 PM
It's BS? Why? I personally (and maybe I'm flawed for this) I would rather my children spend time with their father than receive a letter from jail. I'd rather forgive the past dept on CS than know dad will forever be paying what he can just to make up that back CS amount. I'd rather my kids know that mom is a good hearted woman and DIDN'T try to throw dad in jail, or financially bankrupt him.
And that is your right to do. Just because you make a choice doesn't mean that it is the only choice that puts the child first.
Quote from: eagleeyefam on Oct 01, 2009, 01:47:51 PM
I have forgiven past due CS. I did it becasue I knew dad was working 2 jobs and trying to survive. The CS was hindering him being able to meet halfway for our son, and he wasn't able to meet his household obligations. I'd rather let go of a few thousand dollars. But hey, that's just me. I'm flawed. I'm one of the moms fostering a positive relationship with my son and his father. Wait I think it's called co-parenting, or adulthood, or decent human being. Something along those lines.
Again, that is your choice. Doesn't make the choice to go after and not forgive past due CS wrong or not in the best interest of the child.
Quote from: eagleeyefam on Oct 01, 2009, 01:47:51 PM
On a side note I just asked my son what he would think if I had his father arrested for failure to pay child support. His answer "that would be messd up mom. I don't think I could forgive something like that" out of the mouth of a 16 year old.
And I wish that they had thrown my father in jail for not paying his child support. His refusal to pay made it hard on all of us. My brothers and sisters feel the same way, btw.
It's called dealing with the consequences of not following a court order. Just like I am teaching my kids that they have to live with the consequences of their actions (such as grounding them from their bike for a week because they rode it without their helmet, as required by the law and me). The NCP in this case should face the consequences of his actions.
Quote from: gemini3 on Oct 01, 2009, 06:40:49 AM
You're entitled to your opinion. My opinion differs. I don't think that anyone should be jailed for non-payment of a debt. You don't go to jail if you don't pay your credit cards, or your mortgage, or your car payment. There is no due process when you are jailed for non-payment of CS, which violates the 14th amendment. We did away with debtors prisons back in the 1800's. Two states constitutions prohibit incarceration for non-payment of a civil debt.
It is not a 14th amendment violation to jail a person for CONTEMPT OF COURT, and the NCP typically goes to court SEVERAL times before this happens. Which is why the NCP is being jailed.
Not following a court order can lead to a contempt charge. And that is a jailable offense.
"I don't think much thought is being given to what being thrown in jail does to a persons life. While you're sitting in jail you can't work, and therefore are unable to pay any of your debts. "
So we should just not put people who don't follow the law into jail because of what it will do to their lives?
What about how their refusal to follow the law does to other people's lives? Doesn't that count?
BTW, the reason why jail is an option (and is for all contempt of court cases) is because of NCP's refusing to pay their child support. At all. Granted, this was probably not the majority. The ones who are paying their child support typically don't have to worry about facing the consequences of contempt of court.
Quote from: gemini3 on Sep 27, 2009, 11:42:02 AM
There are thousands of fathers out there who have lost jobs and income in this economy. What they are finding is that, when you file for a modification, you could wait months before you get into court. Meanwhile the arrearages are piling up, and the fathers stand the chance of facing jail time if they can't pay. Then when you get to court many judges will deem the situation "temporary" and not change the order.
But this NCP has never (according the OP) been unemployed or not keeping a job. His arrears are such that he is going to go to jail because of his refusal to follow a court order.
I doubt that he will get a modification downwards given that his track record can be read as being voluntary (and when it is a voluntary reduction or unemployment, it shouldn't have an impact on the amount of child support).
But the courts being backlogged isn't a good excuse to put off filing a modification. Because one thing for sure is that you won't get it if you don't ask for it. And I really don't think that is why this particular NCP is refusing to file for a modification. Sorry, that excuse just doesn't cut it.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Oct 01, 2009, 08:55:18 PM
The ones who are paying their child support typically don't have to worry about facing the consequences of contempt of court.
This is NOT always the case. My DH faced a Contempt of Court charge even though he WAS paying and had NO arrears. So why did he get a contempt of court charge?
There are CP's out there that do whatever they can to make the NCP's lives as miserable as possible. It seems to me that the OP is willing to do just that to punish the NCP for not paying and therefore punishes the child as well.
Instead of throwing them in jail, what about making them do community service at the "minimum wage" level and then taking the CS out of that? I know of many NCP's who have lost their jobs, tried for downward mods and been told no...get a job. In this economy that is hard to do.
Quote from: Momfortwo on Oct 01, 2009, 08:35:35 PM
BTW, they aren't a family anymore. My kids have 2 families. One with me, one with their dad. I am not a part of my ex's family anymore nor is he a part of mine. That's what divorce is.
I bet if you asked your kids they would say they only have one family, and it includes all of the people from both sides.
You may not think you're a part of your ex's family, but you really are. You might be able to legally sever the contract of your marriage, but you can never seperate the blood that runs in your children's veins. You are, and always will be, intristically linked.
Oh, momfortwo, I already said you're entitled to your opinion. I'm not changing mine. For the final time - I don't agree with him not supporting his child. I think both parents are responsible for the support. What I don't agree with is the CP getting involved in when and how the NCP goes to jail. That crosses a line that should not be crossed.
Going to jail without due process is a violation of the 14th amendment. Whether or not there is contempt of court has nothing to do with it. There was no jury involved in the original judgement, therefore incarceration for contempt failing to obey said judgement is incarceration without due process.
I am sorry for you that your mom made you aware of the fact that your father wasn't paying CS. Life is hard for everyone - unfortunately it seems she gave you some ammo to blame your father for your hardships. That's sad. Children should never be privy to CS arrangements. This situation is obviously very personal for you, and I can understand why you would get so upset over it.
Children are not entirely stupid. And someday, much like Momfortwo, they are going to adults. Well, at least hopefully. Anyway, the point is that it is not fair to blame Momfortwo's mother for her and her siblings knowledge. All you have to do is overhear one conversation when you think kids are sleeping and they know. And once the cat is out of the bag, that' it.
An excellent single father I know, he pays for his child support (which has made him struggle) but he also bought his child a cell phone and pays the bill and other extras. Well, this guy is a saint for what he does (if you knew the whole story), but I really think that parenthood is going beyond the bare minimum required for a child to survive, which is admittedly, not a lot of money. And I don't think it is enough to just give the child "love". It reminds of that saying when you are inviting to an event that you would typically bring a gift for and it says "Your presence is present enough". Well, maybe in some cases, but this can be a cope out as well.
In terms of the due process argument: I don't really understand this. Not all require a jury, particularly contempt of court. Maybe that would be nice, but contempt is meant to be a nasty tool to make you do things. I knew someone jailed for many months because he refused answer a question on the stand. I mean, they left him in there and transfered him around to some of the toughest prisons in US. For contempt. Until he answered the question, they weren't going to let him out. It is way too useful for courts to abolish. Anyway, I understand the debtor's jail argument though. I mean the community service idea isn't bad, in terms of a punishment, but in terms of a way of paying child support-not so great I think. Also, there is a lot of stubborn people who might feel it is better to pay it to the community through service than to their ex-spouse.
And my NCP is the one always trying to file contempts and making my life difficult. So that is a two way street that is not only walked by CPs.
I think in fairness to everyone, everyone is going to have a difference of opinion based on whatever experience they have been through.
The poster is not wrong for being angry and upset at her ex for not helping support THEIR children. We can all argue semantics, but the bottom line is, no one is wrong for their feelings. It's their reality. You don't know what impact his refusal to pay has had on the children. My ex doesn't pay his support, he doesn't call his chldren, his family has not called or acknowledged their grandchildren, my children, in over four years. Before you go there, I make my children call them, but what can they say to adults who every other day of the year never acknowledge their existence.
My older son walked in my room one night not so long ago while I was trying to pay bills and I was upset because it was the beginning of the school year and they needed clothes, dr visits, sports equpment...an overwhelming number of things and I was crying. He asked me if their Dad ever helped with anything for them, then he told me not to answer he already knew.. For the record, my ex has a great job but chooses not to pay any support. He doesn't buy them anything and he owes 40k in child support I have never sought. Once a year the state has caught up to him, made him pay $500 and then he goes on and doesn't pay anything till the next time. Am I angry ? Your damn right I am and I have every right to be. This is their father who CHOOSES to ignore court orders and not help in any way support his children. He also chooses to ignore his children. Doesn't call them, doesn't bother with visitation and he asked during the divorce to terminate his parental rights in exchange for not supporting them. My only point to any of this is none of us know the entire background of each other and what has brought us here. None of us knows what we have been through and shouldn't case judgment on posters.
My opinion regarding jail time for a non paying parent --- there are many chances before jail time is ever considered. If someone gets to that point, there has to be some type of consequence. It's not debtors jail, it's a consequence of ignoring a court order and they certainly did have due process before it got to that point. Jail time isn't used for someone making partial payments or paying what they can in this bad economy, it is used for people who willingly avoid the order.
And about two families vs one and what children think...I can only tell you what my son said the other night....We were discussing Christmas planning and I said maybe their Dad would want to spend time with them at their grandparents...My 14 old replied "I dont' want to go see them for the holidays, I want to spend Christmas with my family, my REAL family." He meant he wanted to spend the holidays with my side of the family. Don't forget his father's side of the family hasn't called or bothered with the kids in four years....so you see, it's all based on what you have gone through. I would never tell him he was wrong for feeling that way but I may if I didn't know the whole story.
Hit the nail on the head MomofTwo.....or at least that's how I feel about it (http://www.deltabravo.net/forum/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
The percentage of people with the ability to pay and willfully do not is a very, very small percentage of the overall picture in this country, despite the experiences of a few individuals here. Many don't have the ability to pay through circumstances beyond their control, and they are brutalized by the system just the same.
It's government sanctioned civil rights violations in pursuit of the almighty dollar and most people just sit idly by and let it happen.
amen