Another Man Down in the War Against Fathers

FatherMag.com ^ | August 22, 2002 | Roger F. Gay

[RogerFGay]

Speaking of freaked out creepy liars, I'm listening to a program in NPR available on the internet with guests Irwin Garfinkel and Sherri Heller. Irwin Garfinkel is the guy who is more responsible for the current child support system than anyone else. He imported the Wisconsin Model from Soviet Russia. According to him, Wisconsin is like heaven for fathers. The percent of income formula and all the trimmings is the fairest thing humans ever invented. Sherri Heller from OCSE says it's great that the federal government is arresting and prosecuting wealthy fathers as a display of government power. The purpose is to intimidate everyone, and that's a good thing -- for the children.

[Don Joe]

"He could start a business and build it, become wealthy through hard work."

Can I have some of what you're smoking? I'd like to plant it on one of the more obnoxious child support agents. :)

You're surely living in a happytime dreamworld if you think an ex-father could get away with "an obvious attempt to evade his responsibility" by starting a business.

Exactly how is he supposed to "start a business", when every "free" dollar -- which would be necessary for startup costs, inventory, expenses, and so forth -- the type things that every business has to wrestle with when starting up -- is claimed by the Child Support gestappo as unpaid tribute to his ex?

It is obvious that you've never had any direct contact with "the system", and are getting your "facts" from the feminist propaganda mills.

[RogerFGay]

So this is predictable and therefore partially justified?

So, did you read the whole article, or are you going to try to understand it from one sentence and asking me a lot of irritating questions?

[Don Joe]

What you describe is the exact opposite of what we have now, yet, you defend what we have now, and attack anyone who doesn't defend it.

You need to think things through before weighing in with your basket of solutions.

[amused]

Allow me to sum up the collective argument of all the left wing feminist "conservative" "men" who pollute these threads:

Thanks for the advance generalization.

Actually I would like to hear your story of woe since the amount of venom you put out about this issue should make it a doozy.

You have tried to justify the actions of a guy who held hostages by his treatment at the hands of child support collectors. Mr. K would be a much better case to promote though I doubt he wants the job. I am sure there are many like him otherwise why have a fathers movement in the first place.

It's the extolling of the extreme via armed conflict that seems to be a theme in these CPS battles. Not many want to defend CPS but fewer want to defend child abusers and armed hostage takers. I hate to say it but some of you guys sound like suicide by cop candidates. And that is frightening.

[Don Joe]

"Have a copy of the divorce decree and child custody papers handy, call the police, have them meet you at the ex's house and pick up your children for your visit. At the end of your visit, ask the police officer to be present when you return your child(ren) to their mother. That's what we do here in Missouri. It seems to work real well."

Cute.

Except that it doesn't work very well in Michigan.

Cop shows up. Cop knocks on door. Cop stands there waiting for a minute or so. Cop knocks on door again. Cop waits another minute. Cop knocks on door again. Cop waits another minute.

Cop turns to you, shrugs his shoulders, tells you, "Well, she won't open the door," then says goodbye, and leaves.

Enforcement, right.

I have it straight from the mouth of the former head of the Friend of the Court agency that there is intentionally zero enforcement for anything the woman does, "because we believe that women care about their children."

The entire superstructure of the divorce/"child" support industry is driven by hard core doctrinaire radical feminist agenda.

[amused]

So, did you read the whole article, or are you going to try to understand it from one sentence and asking me a lot of irritating questions?

I did read the article. It was your followups that got my attention.

I just think there are much better cases to be stated. My father could be an example. But a guy who decides to take on armed conflict because he owes child support and takes a family hostage is not exactly a great banner carrier. To then use rage at the injustice of the system as an implied justification of what was done was ridiculous. To say this is predictable with the system and its circumstances and slyly condone this father rage, it seems that armed conflict is what is the goal. It is extolled as the fathers working in the system are villified.

[Don Joe]

"Would you really feel, as an officer of a court of law, that placing a child with someone who lives in a car, or by the seat of his pants with regard to a job and home, is in that child's best interests? I couldn't."

Oh, beautiful! Hegelianism on crack!

Knock him down, step on him, piss on him, and then say "you really expect us to let The Children get anywhere near some bum on the ground who stinks of urine?"

[amused]

Gotta go, but I will check this tomorrow. I am interested in discussing this as I am curious why Morales was chosen beyond the basic jack booted thugs deal.

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

Mr. Gay has been writing such drivel (dare I say dribel? ;->) at custodial parents' and mothers' boards for many years. He's screaming copyright infringement elsewhere as I post this. His crossing over to Free Republic was just too funny as my hubby is a poster here, while I post most frequently regarding divorce related issues...our paths have crossed. Mr. Gay is one of the fanaticals who want to bully their way across the web with their own brand of justice. He's the perpetual victim.

I know that had I, as a custodial parent (who Mr. Gay would tell you is a money grubbing bitch) gone on a shooting rampage because the system and my ex were both IMHO unfair to me, Mr. Gay would undoubtedly say I got what I deserved. Well Mr. Gay, Morales got what he deserved. But you already knew that. I think you simply like seeing your name behind articles that are best left in the waste basket.

[Don Joe]

"I let him move in to the home I bought on my own after the divorce 9 months ago so he could keep body and soul together AND MAKE HIS SUPPORT PAYMENTS to our son. Our son is what's important here. I got another mouth to feed in him and another in his adorable 65-lb. Irish Setter."

Congratulations!

You're today's winner of the Josef Stalin Resource Management Award!

Please, do remember to properly dispose of the livestock when it is no longer able to deliver an appropriate return on investment.

[Don Joe]

"My divorce was not endless days in court, it was one. I worked full time and managed to read over the documents and decide when something was fair, or not. Guys can't just go bury their heads in the sand. Why were you paying for her attorney's fees? That's ridiculous!"

Ah, the Marie Antoinette gambit!

"What are those men complaining about? If they're hungry, let them eat cake! Divorce is not 'difficult' or 'expensive' -- just ask any divorced woman and she'll tell you!"

[Drumbo]

"He's screaming copyright infringement elsewhere as I post this. His crossing over to Free Republic was just too funny as my hubby is a poster here . . ."

ROTFL! I would think that with as many boards as Roger has already posted this to (including FR) that this "article" is public Domain by now.

Welcome to FR MrsDrumbo.

[Poohbah]

Thanks for posting this. My brother pays $300 per month for the rest of his life for kids that are over 20. This is a lifetime interest payment made to the state of California. Not one penny goes to past due child support. He lives in his car in order to keep the payments up. I guess they would call him a dead beat dad.

Having to pay $300 per month forces him to live in a car? Sounds like your brother isn't trying very hard to pay up.

Just how long did your brother not pay support? A $300 monthly interest payment translates to $3,600 a year. At 10% (I checked--that's the CA interest rate on overdue support), that's $36,000 in arrears.

Finally, why didn't he pay?

[Don Joe]

"Why should only one parent be resonsible for your little night of fun and games?"

Don't be silly. The answer is, "Because he's a man, of course."

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

Gee, my ex's CS was just increased to $470/mo. and he's not living in his car....but he will be. LOLOL

[Don Joe]

"What I am saying--basically--is that the writer who tries to gin up sympathy for men who take children hostage so that they 'now understand how it feels,' is no different from the liberals who want us to 'understand' that child molesters and terrorists do what they do because someone else has driven them to do it."

No, what you are saying -- basically -- is that if there is "something" about working conditions at the Post Office that results in a dramatic series of "going postal" incidents, the proper path to take is to continue shooting the miscreants, and ridicule anyone who suggests that it might be prudent to examine what that "something" at the Post Office might be.

[Don Joe]

"I might want to understand, but I certainly wouldn't have any SYMPATHY for a postal worker who holds four people hostage for four hours."

OK, fair enough.

How about one who instead of holding four people hostage for four hours, spends his last five bucks on a bottle of cheap whiskey which he takes "home" (his 25 year old Chevy Impala rustbucket) and drinks it before starting up his engine, flooring the accelerator, and aiming the car at the biggest tree he can find once the speedometer has reached 95 MPH?

Would you have any "SYMPATHY" for that postal worker? How about ten of them? Or fifty? Or a thousand?

How many would it take before you had "SYMPATHY" for people who were driven over the edge?

Or would you simply say good riddance to bad rubbish and leave the status quo alone?

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

Face it, some ppl can't handle stress. So they instead like to feel victimized and justified in using it as an excuse for being destructive and dangerous. And liberals would just love to spend more money on a study of this and a study of that to find out why. They'll never be satisfied with the fact that some minds are simply warped.