Comments on: Mom Commits Welfare Fraud but It’s Dad Who Gets the Bill–and the System Wants It That Way

By: rastus

rastus — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 18:14:54 +0000

Hmmm. Seems to me the father’s proper response here would be to immediately seek the court’s recognition that it is he who has physical custody. Then, only once his custody has been established by court order, file a motion to collect child support from the mother. That way, he might eventually get his money back.

The risk, of course, is that the court will not recognize him as custodian, despite the fact that he has, and has had, physical custody of the child for years. That’s where witnesses and a good lawyer are important. And if the ex gets even a hint that she will be pursued for support, she will likely immediately seek to re-establish custodianship for herself. That’s why it’s important for him to get the custody order first, when the only opposition is likely to be the court’s greed for federal subsidies. There are limits on what a judge can get away with, even in family court, if the plaintiff is persistent enough.

By: mcd106

mcd106 — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:38:55 +0000

Very demonstrative of the tyranny of the courts. Many if not most judges think that they are the great annointed ones of our society. If you want to see realy abuse of power, real judicial terrorism just stop in any courtroom.

By: mruffolo

mruffolo — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:11:45 +0000

I went into marriage with both eyes wide open I thought. I heard that things were different in divorce compared to other decades. Though this statement is true as dads had it worse in the 70’s and 80’s. The main stream media and government did not report this, but fathers only recent got “visitation rights” of four days a month, also child support would be adjusted for any amount, while the dad was ordered to pay for all court costs.

Because the government issues marriage licenses, a law ought to pass that creates awareness of the likelihood for divorce (about 60%) and what the consequences – mom most likely gets kids, money, property; dad pays and loses civil rights, among other things.

Further, the future husband and wife ought to be required to spend 2 to 4 hours in their county’s family court. A short quiz could also be important.

If the government spent as much money and advertising on drug and DUI and seat belt awareness as it does on divorce awareness, then America may have stronger families for our country’s future.

By: Ouderkirk

Ouderkirk — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:44:48 +0000

Not to thow this guy under the bus here…but he has no-one to blame for this but himself. He needed to make the court and county agencies responsible for monitoring this aware the the minor child was in HIS physical custody.

As it stands, and as a matter of law, the divorce decree states that the ex-wife has physical custody of the minor child. Until that wording has been modified to reflect the reality that HE is, in physical custody of the minor child then the support oder still stands and it looks like he’s on the hook for whatever….

Sorry pal, you have my sympathy, but it ends where your tardiness begins.

By: metalman

metalman — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:35:10 +0000

roger:

You make a good point. However, there are some very helpfull books, such as Warren Farell’s “The Myth of Male Power,” and Stephens Baskerville’s “Taken Into Custody.” Unfortunately, and I think this speaks to your issue, these books are not well known outside of our movement. (Gee, I wonder why?).

A literal handbook would be a good thing, though. For example, young, college-bound men must now be warned against having sex with a female student that has consummed ANY amount of alcohol, as the law now considers a woman who has consumed any amount of alcohol unable to make an informed decision about sex.

By: tonysprout

tonysprout — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:07:31 +0000

We have gone from a system of Justice to a system of hungry-hungry power whores. American Justice? No, AmeriKan Bar Association. Mothers can steal the children, hide them or just deny visitation in direct violation of orders written by these Kommie Klowns, but let a father raise the kids and not continue to pay as directed by Herr Commisar and all hell breaks loose. F*CK the law!

By: shatteredmen

shatteredmen — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:45:25 +0000

Umm I guess she could have robbed a bank and he would do the time.

By: roger

roger — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:03:27 +0000

but in the US (oregon) there is no “handbook” or any other concise description of what it is you are in for. the laws are burried and you only find out about them when you trip over them by accident. there is no “user manual” on how to deal with or negotiate the support system. you just get whacked and then try and deal with it the best you can.

forums like this are the only beacons of light around. the truth is mostly available here. who are you going to believe? the government website that states that 95% of DV is man on woman? or the figures you find with the help of men here?

here is where the help begins.

By: metalman

metalman — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:52:12 +0000

A man who does not make sure all I’s are dotted and T’s are crossed is in for a rude awakening today. Like attorneys always say, “If it ‘aint on paper, it doesn’t exist.” The system will use whatever excuse it can to confiscate and redistribute a man’s wealth, as can be seen in this example. That is all the family courts really are: a method of confiscating and redistributing wealth.

This poses a big problem for less educated men, who are apt to believe that the system is fair and who do not have access to expensive lawyers and advisers that are paid to look after their interests. This is exactly what the system relies on. Any man who has been through the system via lawsuits, contracts, etc, would know that the second this woman brought her daughter to his doorstep, lawyers should have been contacted and paperwork set in order.

I think that many of today’s men are suffering from what I call, “Regular Guy Syndrome.” The tell-tale signs of this syndrome are the following: 1) A belief that they system is fair and honest prior to experiencing the workings of the system. 2) Shock in discovering that the system is self-serving, irrational, and unfair. 3) Ignorance of the various laws and poilicies that subjugate them. 4) A belief that a basic morality and worldview is shared by both genders.

It is the Regular Guy who gets screwed because he thinks that his ex-wife will ‘Do the right thing” post-marriage. It is the smart guy who knows that his ex-wife will do the wrong thing post-marriage and does what he can to protect himself before this happens. It is the regular guy who relies solely on his lawyer to handle his divorce. It is the smart guy who knows that his lawyer’s primary concern is himself and his BMW, and treats the situation accordingly. It is the regular guy who thinks the police will take him seriously when he files a well-founded complaint of domestic violence against his abusive wife. It is the smart guy who brings his lawyer or a qualified witness to the poilce station with him so that the police do not pull any funny business.

The point is that the Regular Guy is screwed in today’s world. We need to become the Smart Guy. The only way this can be done en masse is for men who have been through the system to teach Regular Guys the real deal.

And yet, people never really listen, do they?