Deadbeat dad's

Status
Not open for further replies.

timjude

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2004
Messages
282
Location
In the pines where the sun never shines
I have a 11 year old stepdaughter that is severly handicap,She was in a head on collision when she was only 3 weeks old and had 6 effected areas on her brain,She takes 10 pills a day for seizures.She is a happy child and is doing ok.I met her mom 3 years ago after she divorced her husband.And since that time i have tought her daughter how to walk and say a few word's and just adore her she is such a sweet child,What bug's me is her own dad is ashamed of her because she is mentally challenged and has problems communicating and walking.I have been with her mom for 3 years and i bet he has not spent 5 weekend's with her and hardly ever calls to check on her,How could anyone treat there own child this way.The way i see it he is not worth the led and powder to blow ihis brains out.Men like this make me sick..Just venting..
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,379
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
How about calling them deadbeat PARENTS?

I absolutely hate the term deadbeat dad. Don't get me started. There are just as many deadbeat moms out there, but apparently they are not as newsworthy. I have 3 children, now all grown, and had to fight for my rights. I was an executive officer of a statewide (California based) organization to fight for the rights of all parents. Once people understand how the system works, the picture is a lot clearer.

The government "likes" divorces and typically awards children to the parent who earns the least (although times have gotten much better over the past decade). Then they make the higher wage earner pay the custodial parent support. The amount of $upport is usually a formula which is a percentage of the wage earner's income PLUS extra-ordinary expenses (like in your situation). Child $upport collection is a HUGE business, and the state gets the most money from it. The FEDERAL government pays what is called "incentive" money, based on amount collected, to the states. This causes the states to collect as much as they can from the good parents, as the true deadbeats are just that.

This site is really not the right place to get into all of this, but I could tell endless stories of situations that make you sick. Whether it is the new family ruined because of government involvement, or children not getting the $upport they deserve (whether monetary or parenting support). How about all the moms who use their child $upport to take yearly vacations to Hawaii and abroad? How about the moms who drown their own children in a lake or bathtub?

Society is now reflecting all of these problems; mostly caused by children being raised by a single parent. As the old saying goes, it takes a whole village .. and these days children are lucky to have 2 parents. I don't mean to play down your specific situation, but I've also learned there are ALWAYS 2 sides to every story. Often dads are forced to pay such a high level of support that all they do is work. THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN.
 

45SigSauer

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
150
Location
Lowell, IN
Some people just ain't strong enough to handle such situations, it's very sad, but at least there are caring folks like you out there to take their place. Keep up the wonderful work your doing.
 

timjude

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2004
Messages
282
Location
In the pines where the sun never shines
hoser147 said:
My hat is off to you for what you are doing Tim, but deadbeats come in both sexes. Hoser
Yea i agree 100% My sons mom is a deadbeat,And i am not just saying that,I left her in 2002 for being unfaithful and she had custody of my son,Well by that time i was working in Ga,And one day my mom calls and say's hey Tim guess what your son want's you to come to ky and get him his mom dropped him off here and ran off with some dude from western ky,Well to make a long story short that was the best thing that could have ever happened i have had him ever since that day almost 5 yr's now.She has never paid a dime's worth of child support and yes i have tried to get it enforced and no action was ever taken,If that were a man we would have been burried under a jailhouse with no driver's license and 1,000,000 worth of fine's.In 5 years she sent him a grand total of 20.00 for his birthday,And the short time she had custody 6months i paid her 150.00 a week or i would have gone to jail..Very unfair system and biased like the other poster said the system is broken..
 
Last edited:

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,379
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
Deadbeat DAD, not dads

timjude said:
I understand your point but thats not the point of my thread,I just don't understand why anyone would be ashamed of their daughter just because she's handicapped.
The the name of the thread should have been "deadbeat DAD" (singular). Not "deadbeat dad's". Oh and plural dads does not have an apostrophe anyway.
 

45SigSauer

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
150
Location
Lowell, IN
gmclam said:
The the name of the thread should have been "deadbeat DAD" (singular). Not "deadbeat dad's". Oh and plural dads does not have an apostrophe anyway.
While your checking everyones grammar, check yours, there should only be one "The" at the beginning of your sentence:D :lol:
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,379
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
Lol

45SigSauer said:
While your checking everyones grammar, check yours, there should only be one "The" at the beginning of your sentence:D :lol:
You are correct, I should have only had one "the", definitely a typo. But your sentence has several errors and should be typed:
While you're checking everyone's grammar, check yours.
 
N

nec208

Guest
The government "likes" divorces and typically awards children to the parent who earns the least (although times have gotten much better over the past decade). Then they make the higher wage earner pay the custodial parent support. The amount of $upport is usually a formula which is a percentage of the wage earner's income PLUS extra-ordinary expenses (like in your situation). Child $upport collection is a HUGE business, .
Child support is huge business to who? Who is making the profit?
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,379
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
The counties get the money

nec208 said:
Child support is huge business to who? Who is making the profit?
1. The lawyers (duh).
2. The state & county governments. The FEDERAL government PAYS the STATES for the collection of child $upport, based on the amount they collect. They also pay a substantial portion of the costs to collect child $upport.

Years ago there was such a thing as "private child support". This was where one parent paid the other each month directly. What happens now is that those payments either get registered or handled by the government so they get "credit" for them. There was a push for wage garnishments for all $upport payments, but that only happens in specific situations (to my current knowledge).
 
N

nec208

Guest
2. The state & county governments. The FEDERAL government PAYS the STATES for the collection of child $upport, based on the amount they collect. They also pay a substantial portion of the costs to collect child $upport.
I don't understand US laws !! Are you saying the parent does not pay the other parent ?But the parent pays the state?

And the feds pay the cost of court?And people only pay the lawyers ?
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,379
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
nec208 said:
I don't understand US laws !! Are you saying the parent does not pay the other parent ?But the parent pays the state?
It used to be a function of the District Attorney's office in each county of each state. Here in California we now have an Office of Child Support Collection (I believe that is the official title). There are several different modes of payments, but all are tracked by this office. Then the state reports how much is collected to the Federal government and receives "incentive money" for the collection. The incentive money is given back to the counties based on how much each collected. What this does is create scenarios where honest working parents are "constantly" updated to make sure they are paying the maximum allowed. Parents who live on Yachts or hide assets are too much trouble to go after (the real deadbeats).

And the feds pay the cost of court?And people only pay the lawyers ?
No. The federal government ALSO pays the states/counties a substantial portion of their COST to collect child support. Court costs and lawyers vary depending on each case. In many cases, the high wage earning parent pays for it all.
 
N

nec208

Guest
There are several different modes of payments, but all are tracked by this office.
The office does not get any money from the parent ? But they just track the money to make sure the parent is paying the other parent ?

Then the state reports how much is collected to the Federal government and receives "incentive money" for the collection.
But it just saying parent XY is paying parent XT? There is no money going to the office than to the parent ?

So why does Federal government give money for its collection?

The incentive money is given back to the counties based on how much each collected. What this does is create scenarios where honest working parents are "constantly" updated to make sure they are paying the maximum allowed. Parents who live on Yachts or hide assets are too much trouble to go after (the real deadbeats).
So the parent who makes the most pays no matter age,race or sex?
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,379
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
nec208 said:
The office does not get any money from the parent ? But they just track the money to make sure the parent is paying the other parent ?
That is one mode. In another case payments are made directly to the office, and that money is theoretically forwarded to the other parent. A 3rd example is a lot more complex. In that situation the recipient parent is on government assistance. The amount they receive in government aid is based on how many children (and any income, etc). Then the government collects what is called "recoupment" money from the non-custodial parent. The amount collected from that parent is based on a formula, and often greatly exceeds any aid amount. "Excess" funds are supposed to be forward to the recipient parent as well, but back when I followed this stuff all the time, it did not always work that way. Both sides complain the system is broken; the non-custodial parents pay too much (which is definitely the case when 3 or more children are being supported or the wage earner has enormous income), and the custodial parents don't get what they feel they deserve, get payments timely, get all the money being sent, and a host of other complaints.

But it just saying parent XY is paying parent XT? There is no money going to the office than to the parent ?
In at least one mode ALL $upport payments are funneled through the Office.

So why does Federal government give money for its collection?
So that local government workers will do their job. Go back years before all this started and child $upport collections were on the honor system. That's when the true deadbeats thrived. The Federal government decided children were not getting what they deserved and started not only to pay for a major portion of the cost of collecting the money, but the incentives too. And from (strictly) that point of view, it worked.

So the parent who makes the most pays no matter age, race or sex?
Complex question. Way back in the dark ages, $upport amounts were totally a judge's discretion. As part of all this quest to get more money to the children, the Federal government mandated that all states would devise a "formula" to calculate $upport amounts. Family Law courts/judges have computers which run software now to calculate these support amounts. The formula for California is very complex in part because it must first be a tax program. The factors which go into the California formula are: high wage earner salary, other parent's salary, percentage of time the children spend with the high wage earner, and any extra-ordinary expenses (this would include needs for special children, etc).

There are situations here where the high wage earner has full custody (visitation with the other parent 10% or less) and still has to pay the other parent a 6 figure (per year) amount. Now if all that money actually made it to the children, and made their lives better, that would be one thing. But it doesn't usually.

Here's another issue that's OT for this thread. Someone might want to go dig up statistics on how many cases of child abuse were reported back in the 1960s, 1970s & 1980s. At some point you will see a STEEP INCREASE in the number of cases reported. Do you want to guess WHY that happened?
 
N

nec208

Guest
But the Federal government does not pay the court or the lawyers ? The people have to pay the court or the lawyers ?So where is that money going.

But the Federal government or courts do not give money to the parent ?

You say the honor system? what is that?The more kids you have and the less money you make than more money the other parent must pay.
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,379
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
nec208 said:
But the Federal government does not pay the court or the lawyers ?
Correct.

The people have to pay the court or the lawyers ?
Correct.

So where is that money going.
County governments.

But the Federal government or courts do not give money to the parent ?
Correct.

You say the honor system? what is that?
It was the responsibility of the person ordered to pay to make the payments. No one was watching to make sure they did.

The more kids you have and the less money you make than more money the other parent must pay.
The more you make, the more you pay. The more children you parent, the more you pay. If you are the non-custodial parent, and the high wage earner, then the more time you spend with your children, the less you pay.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top