Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Another Man Down in the War Against Fathers
FatherMag.com ^ | August 22, 2002 | Roger F. Gay

Posted on 08/22/2002 6:45:01 AM PDT by RogerFGay


Another Man Down in the War Against Fathers

August 22, 2002
By Roger F. Gay

America's Most Wanted put it like this:

Catalino Morales is wanted for the attempted homicide of five deputy sheriff’s in Allentown, Pennsylvania and for failure to pay back child support.

On Saturday, morning, December 9, 2000, eight deputies in Lehigh county Pennsylvania broke into Catalino Morales' home to serve an arrest warrant charging him with failure to make child support payments. According to the deputies, Morales barricaded himself in a second-floor bedroom and fired two shots through a closed door. He then shot out a back window, jumped onto a flat roof, and onto the ground where it is alleged that he shot at a deputy. The deputy returned fire but no one was injured. Morales escaped the immediate area.

Police say Morales then entered a house in the neighborhood and held a family of four hostage for several hours. The standoff ended when one of the residents managed to wrestle the gun out of Morales’ hands and Morales fled the scene. A massive hunt ensued, including search dogs, helicopters, and Allentown police; to no avail.

On the night of June 20, 2001 a SWAT team in Hartford, Connecticut surrounded Morales in a housing complex and shots were fired. No policepersons were injured in the encounters. Morales was hit by three of 25 police bullets, permanently damaging his hand and his leg and endangering the lives of the nearby residents.

He is a father. He is a man. He is allegedly behind in making "child support" payments.

It is unlikely that the child support system will be put on trial in defense of Catalino Morales, but it should be. Under heavy influence from a profit-driven collection industry the process of determining the amount of child support ordered and enforcement practices have changed dramatically within the past fifteen years. Political corruption is rampant and obvious not only to those who have studied the system closely but to many fathers who have been forced into subjugation by it.

Millions of men are treated arbitrarily and unfairly to a degree that compromises or destroys their chance to maintain themselves, let alone get on with a normal life. Many cannot do what the system requires them to do. Add to that years of harassment and threats from a long list of strangers, including half-witted pimple-faced high school drop-outs trying to collect to make a commission and female bureaucrats, possibly former welfare mothers, who revel in the opportunity to emasculate men. There is no escape, no reason. Every politician says so. Men and women with more power than moral character constantly remind them that this is what fatherhood is all about.

Then other strangers arrive with guns and invade their homes with the intent of taking them prisoner. They are experiencing the horror of a dictatorial police state.

Catalino Morales is one of many canaries in the child support coal mines. Year after year we watch the canaries die yet the workers are not allowed to leave. Those among us who have the opportunity to communicate are morally obligated to pass the word. This system must be abandoned as quickly as possible whether the masters wish it or not.

In the early 1990s, millions of fathers first experienced the suspension of constitutional law in domestic relations courts and the transition to enforcement of arbitrary en masse central political decisions. The new system seems designed to ruin men's lives. Decisions are arbitrarily based on statistical projections that have no basis in reality. State governments are encouraged to take as much from fathers as possible in order to increase the amount of federal funds they receive. "Public-private partnerships" formed with private collection agencies that benefit from higher child support awards and greater debt. Industry representatives control much of the policy making process, including the design of most formulae used in setting child support amounts.

With so many people involved, there has been a predictable variation in reaction to the change. The early 1990s saw the rise of the fathers rights movement, class-action lawsuits, a surge in the number of appeals filed against child support orders, and new national conferences on fathers issues. State and federal politicians were lobbied constantly to fix or abandon the new laws. Members of the Washington State Legislature received thousands of pairs of baby shoes from fathers trying to make a point.

There were also reports of increases in suicide and violence. The early 1990s saw news reports of the first of the early morning raids on communities to round-up hundreds of dads to cart them off to jail. It saw shootings in courtrooms, lawyers and judges taken bloody to ambulances, and fathers barricaded in their homes surrounded by police.

In Dallas, a lawyer representing himself in a divorce case pulled a semi-automatic weapon from his briefcase and opened fire. While one father was barricaded in his home threatening suicide if police came too close, he was telephoned by a reporter who wanted to turn the conversation over to a police negotiator. Feminist groups protested, saying the government must not negotiate with terrorists. News coverage on such incidents ended. Billions of dollars were spent increasing security in courthouses.

Despite the best efforts of ordinary citizens, the system got worse. Fathers rights advocates were largely cut off from making their appeals through traditional media that continued an enormous propaganda effort against the so-called "deadbeat dads." By the mid-1990s politicians were confident that the public couldn't get enough. Child support was on the political agenda in every election year. Politicians in both parties continually promised to make life tougher for fathers and passed law after law to do so.

By the late 1990s life had become so desperate for a few divorced men (in more than one country) suffering psychologically from the loss of their children and constant harassment that they took guns into day-care centers and held children hostage. Do you now understand how it feels, they asked before being gunned down by police snipers.

Due to the enormous weight of one-sided reporting on the child support issue, many people are still quite unfamiliar with the problem. It is easy to find people who believe that errors can be corrected and orders adjusted to circumstances by a quick visit with a family court judge or through some simple administrative process. They have been brainwashed into believing that men generally avoid what are presumed to be fair and reasonable obligations to their children. It is difficult for them to understand that millions of ordinary citizens are fighting for their survival in the midst of a constitutional crisis.

The Constitution of the United States and the constitutions of the states define a system of checks and balances. Unreasonable orders are to be corrected on appeal. Unconstitutional laws are to be overturned by the judiciary. These are necessary safeguards against harmful, intrusive, and corrupt government behavior. But during the past twelve years the system has not functioned as designed. Everyone in government connected with child support, including judges, receive financial rewards for maintaining the centrally planned system and courts and prosecutors have cooperated to an amazing degree. This has created a situation in which no legal remedy for arbitrary and oppressive orders and overly zealous enforcement measures exists.

Some orders are so high as to be life threatening. They do not leave the person who is ordered to pay with sufficient income to support himself. Lives have been lost. But to create the order is not enough. Once bound, the system constantly threatens and harasses fathers who are unable to meet their arbitrarily assigned "obligations." Just give the situation more than two seconds thought. If you do not think that the system caused Catalino Morales to fire a gun and run for his life you do not pass elementary applied probability. You do not understand humans.

Unless the corruption in the system is dealt with and those abusing power and influence arrested and jailed, there will be more gunfights and more men brought down in the war against fathers. Some will no longer have the compassion for life that Catalino Morales displayed. Their instinct to fight when threatened will win out over flight. They will aim at police before firing and not relinquish their weapons to hostages. We will all be guilty if we do not hold those responsible for the child support system as we know it today guilty of conspiracy.

Copyright © 2002 Roger F. Gay


Roger F. Gay is a professional analyst and director of Project for the Improvement of Child Support Litigation Technology. He has also been an intensive political observer for many years culminating in a well-developed sense of honest cynicism. Other articles by Roger F. Gay can be found at Fathering Magazine and Men's News Daily.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: childsupport; constitution; fathers; policestate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 1,081-1,093 next last
To: Don Joe
I'm glad the moderator pulled my replies to you. I would have done so myself had I known how. I am ashamed you were able to provoke the response you did. You apparently are used to such reactions. It seems you have paid a terrible price for your children, but it is one I would have paid as well. I wish no one harm, nor did I threaten you in any way. I said you wouldn't be able to tell why you are in the condition you are in because you don't "get it" either. We serve no purpose here. I stand by my call on the wrongness of the violence in response to the situation posted in the article. I also see that sending in eight officers is a little over the top, unless the man's behavior in the past would have given the police a reason to seemingly overeact.

I apologize to the rest of the Free Republicans on the thread for my lapse. I have nothing else to say on the subject.

301 posted on 08/23/2002 3:01:44 AM PDT by Constitutions Grandchild
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
=>"A criminal act is a criminal act is a criminal act. The why of it only explains the failure of character; it does not excuse that failure."
If you refuse to address the travesty that pushes a percentage of people over the edge, then you have relinquished your right to bitch about them going over the edge. You can't on the one hand tolerate a cause, and on the other hand whine about the effect.


I don't care why some miscreant robs a convenience store. I don't care why another sells drugs on a corner.
I don't care why a third rapes a 10 year old.

But I can still expect them to be arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced for their crimes.
302 posted on 08/23/2002 3:02:13 AM PDT by Home By Dark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
=>Spin, spin, spin.

The issues was the Constitutionality or lack thereof of what is done to fathers. I eviscerated the attempt to reframe that issue, and now you cry foul?

Put some ice on it.


Read the document.
303 posted on 08/23/2002 3:05:09 AM PDT by Home By Dark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe; realwoman
Realwoman, sorry, but I don't get "sent". I don't need others to point me in the directions I want to go. I long ago learned how to go my own way when I choose. Get out and try it sometime. ;-)

Don, being that you couldn't "be bothered" to read Drumbo's post, nor have you read even half of what I've said, you really have no argument. You cannot argue what you do not know.

You state "They married the bastards, so now they get to pay the price." Well you married your ex. Why are you pissing and moaning about the support? It doesn't fly both ways Don.

You want to know what I know about CS? Coming from a very large family, my experience probably doesn't amount to much. Is it that I draw my experience from an ex-husband who abandoned his family? Or perhaps I draw it from a father who abandoned his because the new wife forbid him to even mention his previous family? Maybe it's that my aunt had her ear drum busted and her sister had her nose broke with a pool stick in a public bowling alley because she dared to divorce her husband on grounds of abuse? Then again, I might just draw my conclusions from my step-father, who faithfully paid support and alimony and when his ex-bitch tried cheating him for more, he used the law to get her stopped. Or perhaps it's that my BIL was railroaded by his ex who had some dark secret over his head and I still think he should have stood up to her and that he shouldn't have to pay her one penny. Or maybe I was influenced by my cousin, who I had to help gather documentation and get in contact with the right ppl because they were cheating her husband and making him pay double support...with his ex's help of course? It might even be that a bit of influence comes from a cousin who, when she and her ex divorced, agreed on shared custody. Heck, they even clean each other's houses and are good friends.

I could go on with true story after true story which have influenced me. And perhaps, since I've seen so many of the true stories, that is why I remain "centered" on support issues. I am not the fanatical extremist who thinks all women are owed, nor am I idiotic loon who thinks all women are money grubbing bitches and will agree with the likes of Gay just because he happens to be a man...that which you seem to be doing.

I even only partly disagree with RGSpincich. He is correct in saying some don't show. My ex showed neither for the divorce nor the recent modification hearing. Yet there are some guys who actually do try to do right and get stepped on, just as some gals go through the same thing. I've never held an extreme view of either. Extremism only makes one appear to be wrong 9 times out of 10.

I have yet to see you give explanations for why Gay is right, just that you seem to be pushing that he is and that everyone else must be wrong. And those one-liners seem all you are capable of giving. Try "discussing" the issue, or is that too much for you?

I've been researching support guidelines online for many years, once set up a support reform site. I do have an inkling of what I'm speaking about. You simply seem to hold anger as the key to a discussion and that will only cause you to fail miserably. Now good day, I must get ready for work. ;-)
304 posted on 08/23/2002 3:06:38 AM PDT by almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
=>I don't condone violence either. The government is the aggressor in this situation however, and I think it's wrong / naive to presume that's ok. Perhaps you should read the article again and think about what it actually says.


Analogous to "she made me hit her?"
305 posted on 08/23/2002 3:11:04 AM PDT by Home By Dark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: Home By Dark
Analogous to "she made me hit her?"

We don't mind if you remain passive while someone beats the crap out of you. It's a personal choice. How about pedophilia? You haven't accused all heterosexual men of child abuse yet. I'm surprised you've been so slow off the mark.
306 posted on 08/23/2002 4:17:09 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo
I have to agree with realwoman. Over there in mafia, you girls gossip and lie all day, apparently because you have nothing better to do. Coming over here to lie about me is not of interest to anyone.
307 posted on 08/23/2002 4:44:43 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: almostheaven aka MrsDrumbo
And to be sure, mafia does not have permission to post my article. They are violating copyright law. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not, it's the law.
308 posted on 08/23/2002 4:46:35 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: 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.

What is actually needed is properly constructed child support statutes and a return to constitutional process. This system worked fine for more than 200 years until the fed moved in an suspended constitutional law in domestic relations. Child support awards were generally fair and reasonble before the federal reforms.

The Georgia court that declared their guideline unconstitutional recognized the problem and provided a statement of constitutional requirements in their ruling.
309 posted on 08/23/2002 4:51:48 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
But not you and not me and not millions of others. I've been through it too and like you I pride myself in staying current on child support. ... The horror stories usually only occur when the paying parent neglects repeated payments. They accumulate a large balance that is subject to compound interest. It's all downhill from there.

You've been through it yourself. My guess is no, you haven't. I'm guessing your use of past tense here indicates that you were through with child support years ago and were never effected by the current system at all. And I'm wondering why, with the wealth of descripitive and informative material available, including the article we're discussing, you haven't caught on to the fact that things have changed? Are you intimate with someone who is receiving child support?
310 posted on 08/23/2002 5:07:45 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: Constitutions Grandchild
I'm glad the moderator pulled my replies to you. I would have done so myself had I known how. I am ashamed you were able to provoke the response you did. You apparently are used to such reactions.

It's his fault? Gosh -- maybe we're getting somewhere. People are responsible for their own behavior, but quite often their behavior doesn't take place in a vacuum. Humans are social, responsive creatures. That's a fact of life.
311 posted on 08/23/2002 5:10:35 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich; shaggy eel
And as a follow up to my last response to you, in #310, I'm thinkin' since you've expressed so much admiration for the way things were back when you were paying child support; why is it that you aren't expressing the view that things should return to the way they were? They were good for you. Why isn't that good for everyone else?
312 posted on 08/23/2002 5:21:36 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
I've seen many recent divorces, and I can tell you this much: the horror stories start with repeated nonpayment of support.

I have a radical idea: pay the damn child support on time.

313 posted on 08/23/2002 5:22:07 AM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

Comment #314 Removed by Moderator

To: RogerFGay
You've been through it yourself. My guess is no, you haven't.

You would be wrong. Several times and with three exwives. I represented myself and had the judges treat me fairly. Reasonable deductions from my income were allowed for hardships and inflated hardships by my ex's were disallowed. You have to show up and not be combative to get where you want to go.

Things have not changed much in my local since 1992. The dissomaster program gets tweeked now and then but the percentages and the childcare allowances remain about the same as of a year ago.

Are you intimate with someone who is receiving child support?

I pay child support and I am supposed to receive it. I received custody through the courts of my son and do not receive the ordered amount from his mother. I pay now for one child who does not live with me. I have paid for three children living elsewhere in the past. One turned of age, one moved in with me and one payment still goes out. My point was that desperation is not an alternative, reason is.

A man has got to figure things will get better eventually, as they did for me, because CS is just temporary. It goes away, don't wreck your life over it. You are advocating that men act like the dumbshits they are portrayed to be by their exwives.

315 posted on 08/23/2002 5:44:58 AM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

Comment #316 Removed by Moderator

To: RogerFGay
Outrageous
317 posted on 08/23/2002 5:48:00 AM PDT by Octavius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #318 Removed by Moderator

Comment #319 Removed by Moderator

To: Poohbah
I have a radical idea: pay the damn child support on time.

That would solve a multitude of problems. In my younger days I would listen to these boneheads at the bar talking about how they were hiding money and not paying CS. The tabs were running though. It's funny how the bar tabs usually got paid on time but not the CS tabs.

One of the guys was one of the first "publicized" cases out of California. Mug shot on CNN the whole deal. He had a good asphalt paving business that he ran away from so that he could drive a truck for cash. He hasn't seen his daughter or a sober day since. The money amount was not the issue, his child was born disabled so it was hefty, he just didn't want to be told what to do.

320 posted on 08/23/2002 6:03:46 AM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 1,081-1,093 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson