Skip to comments.
Legal Tragedy for Unemployed Divorced Men & Fathers
Posted on 08/17/2003 2:34:43 PM PDT by ImFightingMad
I am writing this to make this Legal Tragedy better known and also in hope that someone could help the thousands of us in this tragic situation.
Like many Americans at this time, I have been laid off. This in itself is bad enough for most Americans, but those of us that have been divorced face a Legal Tragedy that is against The Constitution and all moral concepts. Men are almost exclusively affected by what I am about to tell you. This shows the discrimination of the courts and the laws in this country.
Since I have been laid off, I am only earning unemployment insurance, which is only 16.6% of my previous gross income. I therefore cannot pay the alimony and child support that the courts ordered in my divorce in Florida. I do not even have enough money for my own expenses. The courts in Florida are looking at finding me in contempt of court because of non-payment. They would therefore put me in jail along with countless others for the same reason. This makes no legal or moral sense in many ways:
1. If I was still married and got laid off, would the courts care, of course not! The family would have to do what they could to survive. But, since I have been divorced, and there is no relationship anymore, Im supposed to support them over supporting myself, otherwise go to jail. How does this make any logical, moral or legal sense? Why is it that since I am divorced I have a greater financial responsibility than I ever did when I was married? Why should all of my rights be taken away because I am unemployed now, and yet my ex-wife is suppose to maintain the same or better lifestyle as when I was employed? This again, would not be the case if I were still married. This shows that divorce laws take precedence over basic human rights and are stronger laws than marriage itself, which is a bond with God.
2. If Im in jail, how am I supposed to find a job? After being in jail, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to ever find a good job again!
3. This type of incarceration was abolished with the 13th Amendment. Which prohibits Involuntary Servitude. Also 8 USCA-56 prohibits Peonage.
Why should my life and others be completely destroyed just because we were ever married and now unemployed?
Isnt the fact that I, and many others have lost our jobs enough of a tragedy in itself? How does completely destroying the rest of our lives solve anything? In this situation, what could any of us ever do to help ourselves?
I was extremely involved in the 2000 Presidential election, supporting George Bush. I lived and worked in Austin, Texas, but I was still a registered voter in Florida. The government and country that I so dearly loved and put so much energy into, has now let me down.
Please Help!
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; US: Florida; US: Texas; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: childabuse; constitution; deadbeats; divorced; fatherhood; ignoringchildren; mdm; unemployed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280 ... 701-703 next last
To: mlmr
Women are not only "gestation chambers" but often provide the nourshment and bonding and care for the first years. Bullsh*t.
Today's woman shuffles her sprats to the nearest DayCare Center - so as to have the time for "fulfillment".
You are trying to pass off the current state of Westernized females as some idealized June Cleaver.
To: RGSpincich
In the cases I've been involved in, judges are quite understanding Are you a Florida lawyer? Because that is not my what I saw.
I watched my brother get ripped to shreds by the Florida family courts. The judges, the DSS workers, the Guardian Ad Litem, all ignored facts and un-refutable evidence. It was the most hideous thing I ever witnessed.
242
posted on
08/17/2003 6:32:56 PM PDT
by
SC Swamp Fox
(Aim small, miss small.)
To: StatesEnemy
hey some of us are june cleavers, or would like to be! well okay maybe not THAT goodie goodie, but you get my drift. some women are old fashioned, some women would prefer to stay home with thier kids, bake cookies and take care of the man in thier life. not all of us are man eaters, ugh.
To: familyop
You mean back in the dark ages when men believed that they planted their "hominiculus" in women and owned what came out? My goodness we are not talking conservative or even paleoconservative. We are talking bitterly Dark Ages. When men battled with swords and women were cattle, nuns or queens.
244
posted on
08/17/2003 6:33:57 PM PDT
by
mlmr
(Today is the first day of the rest of the pie.)
To: Mr. K; ImFightingMad
Bureaucrats love to pump up the "deadbeat dad" statistics artificially. It makes for great press and funding for their departments.
245
posted on
08/17/2003 6:34:11 PM PDT
by
P.O.E.
To: GGpaX4DumpedTea
She said:
"You should have kept your pants on."
He (the good GGpaX4DumpedTea) said:
"A really stupid comment. He was married, we are not talking about a shackup. Really some kind of a freaky reply, IMHO!"
You are right-a-mundo, Tea! That was such a standard
Marxist-feminazi-infiltrating-conservative-forums kinda
reply, that it just slipped out!
We need to throw the few, rare, noise pieces of trash
(feminists and other socialists) out of the Repubican
Party, instead of going around, begging them, with our
"horns showing" (as one who was a victim of adultery).
246
posted on
08/17/2003 6:34:48 PM PDT
by
familyop
(Essayons.)
To: StatesEnemy
Ahem, you ARE speaking to June Cleaver reincarnated. There are many more of us than you would imagine.
247
posted on
08/17/2003 6:35:22 PM PDT
by
mlmr
(Today is the first day of the rest of the pie.)
To: mlmr
Were I not made of hardtack fiber, I would have left it all. The emotional drain is exponentially harder than the financial.
I got a call this week. My goofy doped up ex-wife living now in NYC La-La-Land environs let my 14 year old girl get an eyebrow ring and the 15 year old a lip ring....did she call me to ask what I thought knowing full well I'd have a coronary? Hell no...she knows damn well that I'm not spending 50K in a contempt battle over this but that is simply one little ripple in the shite I live with from her.
A true bitch. Another year and she'll be smoking dope with the girls...I have no doubt.
She is a prize nut. I'm glad she is the worst woman I've known but I sure wish I had not married her sorryass.
Responsible fathers get screwed and like I said, folks only whine about the obvious male faults you so aptly mentioned. That's all that gets attention.
Many men just leave all the heartache behind. Children are a the nuclear bomb in the ex-wife's arsenal and I have yet to see any woman including women I respect who won't use it. Not one.
Look at my profile page and see my two little darlings and know full well now that they look like Goth/junkie/trash....all on purpose and allowed by my brainless ex-wife.
You think that is easy for all the family those girls have down here?
There was a reason fathers were the traditional heads of the home for a couple of thousand years. It is to our discredit that we abandoned that.
248
posted on
08/17/2003 6:36:20 PM PDT
by
wardaddy
(lost in a knuckledragger wilderness of my own making)
To: moondancer
some women are old fashioned, some women would prefer to stay home with thier kids, bake cookies and take care of the man in thier life. What are ya doin' Saturday night?
To: mlmr
It matters that my ex-wife wastes my hard-earned money on herself and uses it essentially as alimony.
Given her circumstance, that money would be better used going into a trust for the children.
Give the platitudes a break will ya?
Admit it, you're a fembot playing around on a conservative forum cause you're bored.
250
posted on
08/17/2003 6:38:58 PM PDT
by
wardaddy
(lost in a knuckledragger wilderness of my own making)
To: wardaddy
My bad...It is $100 per week. approx. sorry
251
posted on
08/17/2003 6:39:00 PM PDT
by
mlmr
(Today is the first day of the rest of the pie.)
To: frodolives
Spoken like someone who hasn't lost their job. Yet.
To: StatesEnemy
LOL:)
To: mlmr
Well, with my wife and I, I'm her chattel, she's my chattel,
and we don't listen much to the family hating Susan B.
word spins from her time or ours, whether from insurgents
in our Party or the noisy ones outside.
And BTW, June Cleave, Ward, Ozzie, Harriet--let's not hold
ideals like that or even try to live up to them, naw, naw
(sarcasm, irony here)! Oh, let's be more like Ozzy Osbourne
(bigtime sarcasm, irony here!)!
"...Dark Ages?" That's an old, emotional, radical lefty
argument, and I stay away from language devised from the
left to divide my Party.
254
posted on
08/17/2003 6:41:59 PM PDT
by
familyop
(Essayons.)
To: mlmr
Quit dissing June Cleaver...you are no June Cleaver and your posts are a regular liturgy of fembot codewords and womyn's vaildation garbage.
You've got all the answers but don't know Jack.
Please show all of us how a man in Maine making 30K per year only pays 100 bucks per month alimony.
You are either lying or are simply ignorant and don't know better.
255
posted on
08/17/2003 6:42:24 PM PDT
by
wardaddy
(lost in a knuckledragger wilderness of my own making)
To: mlmr
geez, what states do you men live in? your getting shafted on support. my x made approx 6500 a month on a good month (with OT) and only pays half of what is on the spreadsheet.
since i stayed home with our son he used that against me in court and imputed my income at the level the states deams for a woman "my age" even thou he wouldnt allow me to work or go to college...found a way to make that work for him in the end too. maybe some of you men should be imputing your wives incomes as well. might be woth looking into. hes just lucky im not big on support..id be happy if hed just be a decent, loving father.
To: mlmr
mlmr?
Let me ask you this. For the sake of argument, let's say once my Divorce is final, I go out and marry a woman worth Millions.
Do you honestly believe that the court will allow my child support payments to stay at the same level?
I can hear the arguments in court now "But your Honor, how can it be fair for my client, a poor working woman, struggling to support her near starving children, while this apparent Dead Beat Father lives in a Mansion, paying only what we had originally agreed to..."
Please, you're barking up the wrong tree...
257
posted on
08/17/2003 6:43:41 PM PDT
by
Lord_Baltar
(God Speed to the Men and Women of the Armed Forces!)
To: nmh; JohnHuang2; MadIvan; TonyInOhio; MeeknMing; itreei; jd792; Molly Pitcher; muggs; ...
Can't you simply go to a judge and show him your unemployement stub and ask him how you're supposed to live AND support kids? Should you starve? Should you live on the street to make sure they get money from you? Seriously, to expect child support payments while unemployed is absurd
BUAHAHAHAHAHA
NO ! you cant they dont give a damn about you or how you live as long as you pay your child support ! I've been through this twice and ive sat in jail twice over it when the state is sitting there and the judge looks at you and says how do you plan to pay and you show them the stubs he gives you a month to find a job after that your in contempt of court
The second time it happened to me i was in contempt after 2 weeks of unemployment it sounds real simple to be able to talk to the judges but its not and because you were employed well unless you've got a lawyer on attainer YOUR SCREWED public defenders arent allowed to help you because you made to much money !
There again your screwed!
I just hope he's not in a state where they make you pay to be locked up like ohio!
Thats right if you go to jail in ohio you pay to be locked up 25 bucks a day i think it is !
All i can say is good luck and next time you get married stay that way make it work or youll be screwed again!
258
posted on
08/17/2003 6:43:50 PM PDT
by
ATOMIC_PUNK
("History is written by those who would hang heroes" ....Touch not the cat but a glove)
To: familyop
But the Tender Years Doctrine came from a bunch of man hating, ranting, socialist "free love" chicks The Tender Years Doctrine is a product of the early 20th century, not the sixties (in fact it began to go out of favor around that time).
Before that, true conservatives were for father custody for several thousand wise years.
Why would any woman get married if her husband can dump her for any reason and automatically receive the children. (they were considered the property of their father)? It would produce the same problem we have today, only in reverse.
259
posted on
08/17/2003 6:43:58 PM PDT
by
LWalk18
To: Lord_Baltar
wow your states are messed up. in the homestate of our decree his wife can make booko bucks and it doesnt matter. the only income they can take into account is the parents of the child.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280 ... 701-703 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson