Another Man Down in the War Against Fathers

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

[Drumbo]

"By the way, Mz. "almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo signed up 2002-08-22," did you formerly troll these environs under a different handle, or are you New Meat sent over from DU?

Please see my post 174. AH signed up tonight for her first ever post on FR because the constant troll from her forums came to FR (my forum) with his defense of a hostage taking nut job that shoots at cops.

She is not from DU, are you? She doesn't even know what Democratic Undergroud is. She's my wife; had you read the topic you would know that. I welcomed her as a conservative - and I support her veiws are child support.

Her Ex has never lived up to his obligations in the last 16 years that he's been ordered by the court to support his child, I doubt seriously that the recent "adjustment" will change his ways. He abandoned his wife and daughter when the child was a month old. For 17 years he has been on the run, marrying four other women and fathering at least two other children, all the while ignoring his first child and the court's order to pay $100 per month support.

He recently surfaced - owns a home and has a good job. He thought that once his daughter turned 18 he would be off the hook - he even tried to persuade her to file for emancipation at 17! He only owes close to $10,000 in back payments and the court was not amused with his Houdini act. He's been ordered to fulfill his obligations through his daughters 20th birthday due to his own flagrent disregard. The payments went up because the court decided he owes it. The money, if any, will go directly to his daughter, my stepdaughter to help pay for her education.

If you want to mimic Mr. Gay, and support a lawbreaker, rather than the prople who have a child's best interest at heart, I'm sure you are welcome to join him in trolling the Custodial Parents forums which Roger haunts. If you want to come on FreeRepublic and defend lawbreakers and deadbeats; pretend that requiring parents to bear the responsibility of their children is abuse . . . well, that's your right too, but don't expect to do it without sensable people challenging you - even if they just registered tonight. She knows more about deadbeat dads then you do, unless of course you would like to confess something?

[Brytani]

Since I'm becoming known on FR for being pro-fathers rights and debate child support/fathers issues quite a bit, I have to respond to this article.

I can not condone in anyway violent acts made by even the most desperate men. Though I have seen men stripped of their homes, their possessions, 60%+ of their earnings, their tax returns, their credit standing, their children and their freedom, using violence as a means to an end does nothing to further the cause of fathers rights. It does however give the fathers rights movement a black eye when such behavior takes place.

Aside from being pro-fathers, I am also pro-life. My pro-life position follows the same as my pro-fathers, I can not condone in anyway bombing of abortion clinics or the murder of abortion doctors. While I realize those incidents are actually rare compared to the number of clinics and doctors performing abortions, it does and has happend. In the end all it does is give ammunition to those who look for any reason to call pro-life people/groups nutcases and violent people. The same for fathers who use violence to protest the current unjust, unconstitutional and highly biased family court/child support system.

[DNA Rules]

Abandonment constitutes a willful disavowal of the right to joint custody.

And rather than address every possible failing that joint custody situations could have, I would simply note that the current situation, essentially default maternal custody, has a laundry list of problems as well.

Given that, joint custody is better for the kids and more fair to the parents. Would many situations be flawed? Sure.

Like now.

[Home By Dark]

=>Unemployed females get all the breaks from the system and that's one of them.
Spoken as a true generalism. Since that statement can be proven false in certain instances, the whole statement becomes false.

Childless women who are unemployed are not eligible for many of the charities and government programs. I assume the same is true for single men who are childless, but I am not sure.

[Constitutions Grandchild]

How sick are you? I'm sorry, how would you know?

[DNA Rules]

I agree completely with all of that.

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

Aside from being pro-fathers, I am also pro-life. My pro-life position follows the same as my pro-fathers, I can not condone in anyway bombing of abortion clinics or the murder of abortion doctors. While I realize those incidents are actually rare compared to the number of clinics and doctors performing abortions, it does and has happend. In the end all it does is give ammunition to those who look for any reason to call pro-life people/groups nutcases and violent people. The same for fathers who use violence to protest the current unjust, unconstitutional and highly biased family court/child support system.

AMEN!

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

Default maternal custody is not the law however. I see nothing written anywhere that such is the case. Therefore, it would point to being an individual's problem of perception...namely one singular biased judge. By failing to address every possible occurence, we replace one laundry list with another, eh?

[DNA Rules]

Default maternal custody is not the law however. I see nothing written anywhere that such is the case.

Case law. Hardly one singular judge. The custody-to-the-mother bias is deeply entrenched.

I'm not sure that there was ever a law which said "Blacks are slaves in the South", but for centuries, it was the practice.

And the govt. had to step in to reverse that, in writing.

[DNA Rules]

Don't have a single solitary judge making the ruling, but more like a jury or panel to hear divorce cases. You stand a better chance of a fair ruling when you have an equally matched panel of jurors than one possibly biased individual.

You would still need formal, written guidelines as to who would get what parenting time and why. What would such guidelines say if you wrote them?

I have no faith in anyone deciding what should be what based purely upon their own biases. There must be set, public standards and accountability for being held thereto.

[shaggy eel]

I am interested in exposing the heartless ideologue's wacky ideology. I am also interested in guarding the reputation of this forum from both the cop-haters and the women-haters.

,,, quite a torch to carry. Let opinions flow and common sense will shine thru, I'm certain. In time, may I call you to other threads where the reputation of this forum needs defending? I don't hate cops and I don't hate women. I can see Mr Gay has highlighted a very real problem. Questions have to be asked. Not all people react the same way to situations, of course. This is an extreme case and people should look at the root cause carefully. In suggesting this, I'm not giving you a "it's society's fault" line.

[DNA Rules]

What would you consider to be a fair system, in regards both to custody and financial issues?

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

There are really no guidelines on custody division now. Guidelines deal with "support" after custody is decided upon. I have yet to find any state which lays out guidelines on who custody should be awarded to. Some of them list things that should be considered in determining custody. But the custody determination is still left up to the judge.

That is where the system falls short as far as I can tell...it's that too much discretion is left solely to one individual. Even for a father who does get hit with an unfairly high order, it often falls back to a judge who knows the guy was laid off and thinks he should be able to immediately jump back into a new job earning the exact same rate of pay. That is an individual decision...that is not guideline.

[DNA Rules]

I agree that custody guidelines, state to state, are murky, and leave to much to whatever a given judge wants. So, were there binding custody/support guidelines, written by you, what would they say?

[BJungNan]

The absolute worst situation I have heard about is where a man is shown through DNA to NOT be the father but because a court order was handed down the man has to keep paying child support - for kids that are not his.

They are considering changing this situation. Only considering it mind you, and on a very limited basis.

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

This is an extreme case and people should look at the root cause carefully.

Which poses a serious problem. If you will review many of Mr. Gay's articles, you will see that he generally takes an extreme case and draws attention to just such a case, thereby insuring that ppl will look at the root cause. Were he to write about more reasonable cases, he would not pit himself against the masses. He looks for the discord.

[Home By Dark]

=>What would you consider to be a fair system, in regards both to custody and financial issues?

I asked the question first.

I have never given any thought to an actual system, since I took great care to never have children even while I was married. I've observed the inequities on both sides, however.

[DNA Rules]

Mandated joint residential custody, which precludes the need for child support, save medical and other large expenses, to be apportioned between parents proportionately according to their income.

[almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo]

There wouldn't be many at all. If I were to write guidelines, they'd be fairly bare. They would consist of a proposed chart to follow in setting CS (much like now). They would possibly have a clause to have the participants counseled prior to granting a divorce, whenever applicable. Meaning if their is obvious abuse or abandonment, such that counseling would be incomprehensible, that it would not be ordered. Either party would have a right to request the now defunct fault-based divorce and show their evidence and that custody/asset split would be based upon such fault when shown.

It would take a lot of effort to write a comprehensive guideline, but what I would write would be fairly sparse with the judgement hinging on a fairly mixed panel (some divorced, some married, some men, some women, some CP, some NCP) making the fairest decision possible.

I would never want a guideline that says something must always be followed, because we can never foresee future possibilities. And I would never leave it open to the interpretation of one individual because there exists a large possibility that they are prejudiced...almost everyone has that capacity.