Posted on 04/30/2008 12:08:11 PM PDT by PercivalWalks
Los Angeles, CA--Several thousand protesters have written, faxed or called Fox News executives to protest its launch of a new reality show called Bad Dads. According to Reuters, in Bad Dads child support collector Jim Durham "functions as a sort of 'Dog the Bounty Hunter' for tracking deadbeats...It's ambush reality TV."
Fathers & Families, the American Coalition for Fathers & Children, and Los Angeles journalist/radio commentator Glenn Sacks have partnered in a campaign to ask Fox to cancel Bad Dads. Fox's Los Angeles-based producers have decided to launch this Los Angeles-based show on "deadbeat dads" despite the fact that the California Department of Child Support Services itself recently admitted that the overwhelming majority of "deadbeat dads" are the product of problems and abuses within the child support system. According to the California Judicial Council, 80% of California child support debtors earn poverty level wages.
Dr. Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S., Executive Director of Fathers & Families Holstein, says:
"According to US Census data, noncustodial mothers are 20% more likely to default on their child support obligations than noncustodial fathers. There is absolutely no reason to name the show Bad Dads when the average noncustodial father is more likely to pay his child support than the average noncustodial mother."
Sacks explains:
"The worst part about Bad Dads is the way it publicly humiliates children of divorce by depicting their fathers as not loving or caring for them. These children did not volunteer to be humiliated on national television."
ACFC President Dr. Linda Nielsen, a Professor of Women's Studies & Education at Wake Forest University, says:
"Most kids who are too young to realize that 80% of divorced dads pay their full child support. This show may lead them to have negative opinions of divorced fathers, and those opinions could damage their relationships with their own dads."
Another problem with Bad Dads is that studies show that the arrearages for which "deadbeat dads" are pursued are often erroneous. For example, a recent Massachusetts audit found that the arrearages were incorrect in 92% of that state's cases.
Missouri Child Support Auditor Susan Montee recently said that the way child support arrearages are calculated in Missouri is "extremely sloppy...a total inattention to making sure these numbers are right."
Moreover, Bad Dads glorifies the role of private child support collection agencies, even though these agencies often exploit and deceive custodial mothers. In fact, women's advocates, including the National Organization for Women, have repeatedly condemned these agencies for mistreating women. Durham, the central figure in Bad Dads, has often been singled out by women's groups as a perpetrator of these abusive tactics.
Holstein explains:
"In general, the Fox network has usually been fair to fathers. This show is an unfortunate exception, and we hope Fox will soon understand this."
Glenn Sacks, http://www.glennsacks.com/foxbaddads/ [Note: If you or someone you love is faced with a divorce or needs help with child custody, child support, false accusations, Parental Alienation, or other family law or criminal law matters, ask Glenn for help by clicking here.]
The assault on men continues.
The media will implode if they can’t ridicule and demonize males, the last group which can be made fun of with society’s okay. So this protest is going nowhere.
Perhaps it would be best if they would pay the child support for their children.
“Perhaps it would be best if they would pay the child support for their children.”
Didn’t the article say the states records were incorrect in 92% of the cases? There are many reasons that child support is a problem. Playing it out on reality TV solves none of them.
For example, a recent Massachusetts audit found that the arrearages were incorrect in 92% of that state's cases.
That does not mean that 92% of the dads on the list do not really owe child support but rather that in 92% of the cases the amount owed is not exactly what is indicated on the state's records.
Pay your child support and you won’t have to worry about such assaults.
Men have to pay even if:
They lose their jobs
The ex spends support on new clothes, car, beer for new boyfriend
The ex screws them on visitation (meaning he pays but she gives no visits)
etc
The majority of men do pay and of the ones that don't only a percentage are truly deadbeat dads. Thanks for buying into the feminist propaganda
God FORBID they demonize people who NEED demonizing (read: ISLAM WORSHIPPERS). Hell, the assault on MANkind (excluding "pseudo-men"--homosexuals, metros, death cult worshippers, euroweenies, ethnic minorities, etc) is so blatant that it is actually comical to imagine anyone denying it.
I hope next year there's a follow-up program exposing the plethora of women who use their ex's "child support" payments as a personal expense account to pick up all the stuff their live-in boyfriends don't buy them.
That would be fun.
“That does not mean that 92% of the dads on the list do not really owe child support but rather that in 92% of the cases the amount owed is not exactly what is indicated on the state’s records. “
So if they are wrong Fox gets sued for slander and or libel. Thats if someone doesn’t get shot.
I remember a campaign to put pictures of fathers behind on child support on pizza boxes. The theory is that these dads would order pizza, see themselves on the box and be ashamed.
But, I wondered, what if the man's KID saw his dad on the pizza box? Say the kid was at a friends house, the friend's parents order pizza, and "Hey, isn't that a picture of your dad on the pizza box?"
Children of separated parents have tenuous self-respect as it is, and a kid will always identify with its parent, regardless of that parent's issues. I would think a kid would be ashamed, indeed, if he were to come across something like that.
It was just a plain stupid idea.
Then it occurred to me, it has NEVER been about the kids. Like this show, this guy is drumming up business - he takes 34% of what he collects. It's about the money.
"Next to the last group," you mean. Southerners still (regrettably) hold the undisputed gold medal, in that particular competition.
Why be sexist here, Fox? Include people like my ex....SHE never paid a dime!
“I hope next year there’s a follow-up program exposing the plethora of women who use their ex’s “child support” payments as a personal expense account to pick up all the stuff their live-in boyfriends don’t buy them.”
Oh cmon we know women never do anything wrong, mistreat their kids or lie in order to screw their ex husbands. /sarc
A friend of mine got divorced. He got custody with visitation. She showed up about 10% of the time. The times she did show up she was either high or drunk. She didn’t pay her child support as her work (fortune telling) was cash based and didn’t get reported.
Perhaps these things should be worked out in court and not in front of a million viewers seeking a cheap thrill.
But hey with Fox they can generate divorces and then make money on the mess left behind.
You think these protests are bad?
CBS will soon air “Toxic Predatory Females”.
Then the poop is REALLY gonna hit the propeller!
...and I, for one, wouldn’t wanna be the guy water-skiing behind the boat when THAT happens!
“God FORBID they demonize people who NEED demonizing (read: ISLAM WORSHIPPERS).”
Fox’s new show : Bad Jihadis.
Yeah, we’ll see that one soon.
If a male is going to make the decisions to have a child with a woman, than he needs to also accept responsibility for that child.
If he loses his job, get another job. Your first priority is to feed your child and after your child is feed you can feed yourself.
I would have no problem with that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.