Messages

In VA they list the "most wanted child support evaders" on the DCSE website.  A quick check shows there are 17 people on the list.  Of those 17 people there are 2 retail stockers, 2 waiters, 2 "restaurant workers", 3 construction laborers, 1 mover, and one security guard.  

Of those 17 people, 11 would probably qualify as low income in our area - where the cost of living is 106% of the national average.  That's 65%.  Granted, this is a small sample - but it certainly speaks to the theory that most people considered "deadbeat dads" don't fit the perception of high income wage earners who refuse to pay when they have ample resources.  More likely, these are people who live from paycheck to paycheck, and one bump in the road can throw them into a financial tailspin.  Couple that with the fact that these guys are more than likely not educated, and probably have no idea how to manuever through the court system.  

These are the people the state of Virginia deems "most wanted"?  A waiter, a cook, a stockboy?

Just something to consider before hastening to condemn someone as a "deadbeat dad".  

Yes, you're right, most states will reduce your child support if you cannot pay legitimately.  The problem is that it can take months for that to happen, and by then you're in arrears.  The system isn't perfect, which is why safegaurds ARE necessary.  

There are plenty of government programs out there for people who find themselves in a tough spot and can't put food on the table.  You can go to the food bank, you can get food stamps.  No one gives you "child support stamps".  You either pay or be labeled as a deadbeat and face criminal prosecution.  If the NCP and CP were still married and someone lost their income, what would they do?  Why should it be any different when there's a divorce?  Why are we dehumaizing NCP's?  No one seems to care what a NCP's situation is - they're regarded as wallets and nothing else in many cases.

I am lucky enough to never have been in a position like this, and hopefully I never will.  But I can see how easily things like this can happen.  I agree that there's no excuse for not supporting your children.  I disagree with the pizza boxes.  

$1.00 a month does count, by your previous definition, because they are paying "something".  Unless you're going to define what "something" is, it counts.  

There are a lot of reasons why a person may not be paying "something" enough to stay out of trouble, as the previous poster tried to say.  Imagine if you were an NCP, paying a third of your pre-tax income in child support, then you're probably paying more than that to exercise your visitation.  You're probably left with just enough to get by.  Something disaterous happens - say you lose your job, you're in a horrific accident, etc.  Suddenly, you have no income.  You also have no savings.  You have to make a choice between child support and feeding yourself, or putting a roof over your head.  So, you pay what you can, but less than the order.  That, in our current system, makes you a deadbeat, and qualifies you to be on the pizza box.  That's a problem.

The problem in many of these cases isn't knowing where the people are.  Even if they knew where they were they couldn't get the money from them if the just didn't have it.  Hiding doesn't keep these people from paying - it keeps them out of jail.  Which, btw, would only compound the issue.  How can you earn enough to support your kids if you're sitting in jail?

I agree with wanted posters for suspects of violent crime.  They are a danger to society, and it's in everyone's best interest to keep them off the street.  That's not the case here.  Now you're classifying fathers who can't pay child support in the same group as rapists and murders.  Is that really fair?

There's a huge difference between "forcing" your child to talk, and encouraging them to have a relationship with their parent or teaching them good phone manners.  I agree that sometimes people just don't want to talk, and that's fine.  However, out of respect and courtesy they should at least get on the phone and say that they don't really feel like talking today, and set up another time to talk.  When a child does thie, both parents should respect it.

I'm getting a lot of "us vs. him" vibes from your posts.  I don't know what your situation is, or why you might feel the way you do.  But if I am picking up on it from your posts on a message board, your kids are probably picking up on it as well.

removed

What about the kid who see's their parent's face on a pizza box, or who's friends see it.  Imagine the shame they might feel, the teasing they might have to endure.  I think they're might be a better way of doing this.  

Ah, Jade.  Seems like I can always count on you to turn an open discussion into an attack.  I don't think I said anything in my post to appear that I don't understand that there are some kids who don't want to talk when their parents call.  I was pointing out the areas that can become problems - and they CAN become problems.

Maybe you should explore why you seemed to think that my post was directed at you.  I don't know you, or anything about your behavior when your kid's father calls them.  I was talking about my personal situation and how I felt about it.  Why did your hackles go up so quickly?  I wasn't talking about you.  

It would be nice to see you offer input an support without having to get ugly about it.

I have learned a very expensive lesson on just how important it is to have a comprehensive parenting plan.

Another problem is enforcing it.  It's one thing to say that your ex is in contempt, it's another one completely to try and get a judge to do anything about it - and she knows it.

The problem I see here is when young children pick up on their CP's (spoken or unspoken) messages that they don't like it when they talk to the NCP.  This might cause the child to say that the don't want to talk because they think it's what their CP wants to hear, but in truth they really want to talk.  Kids are very, very perceptive.

This is a touchy subject for me too.  I went for months without being able to talk to my youngest daughter on the phone.  I could hear her saying that she didn't want to talk when her mom asked her, but that didn't make me feel any better.  I knew why she was saying it.  When she did want to talk her mom would start playing a game with my other daughter, or turn on the tv, or something of that nature.  This would effectively distract her and get her off the phone with me.  Now my oldest has a cell phone (that I provided), and my youngest calls me on it all the time when her mom isn't watching.  So, I know it's not that she didn't want to talk - it's that she didn't want to talk in front of her mom.  

Children shouldn't be put in this position.  They should be allowed unrestricted phone access to their parents.  This means the parent who the child is with shouldn't send messages to the child by saying things like "You don't want to talk to your dad, do you?".  They should be encouraged to talk, this way the child knows they wouldn't be going against one parents wishes if they talk to the other parent.  This is especially true for young children who sometimes feel "wierd" about talking on the phone in general.  The CP shouldn' hover around the child when he/she is trying to talk to the other parent.

If your STBX is threatening you with a fals allegation, you need to do something about it NOW.  Don't wait - because once she does it your life will never be the same.  It's one of those things that will always make people question things - even if you can manager to prove that it never happened.  If you don't have a lawyer, get one now.  Trust me, you don't want to be playing defense against this.