Deadbeat Dad Myth

Parents Without Rights has been around since 1991. It was founded by a group of Rocket Scientists and Engineers on Kennedy Space Center who were outraged to discover that while they were competent to send men and women into outer space, that Florida's Family Courts did not consider them competent to be active Father and Parents, much less have custody of their children, when their marriages failed in divorce.

The Deadbeat Dad Myth: Strategies and Research in Defense of Men In Divorce,

by William N. Bender, Ph.D.

[Unpublished Manuscript, 1992]

Professor of Education - The University of Georgia

The Deadbeat Dad construct is a lie; it is a half-truth which masquerades as a truth, and that is, perhaps, even more dangerous than a lie. The available evidence, presented throughout these chapters, will indicate that the deadbeat dad phenomenon is, like many of the negative images of men presented in our nation's media, almost entirely, a result of a biased court system and an anti­male bias in our society.

Men are not genetically predisposed to abandon their children, nor do they refuse to pay child support specifically in order to hurt their children. Rather men leave a court which, their attorney explained, would be biased against them. The available scientific evidence, presented in this text, documents that anti-male bias. Men have seen their children, their homes, their financial futures stolen from them by that biased court. They are ordered to deny their parental love for their children and become a second-class citizen--i.e., a "visitor" in their child' life. Their human right to actively parent their child is stolen from them--most often without any evidence that they did anything wrong and they are told--inaccurately--that this decision is in the child's best interest. Their money is stolen repeatedly, for the next 20 years as ex-wife support rather than child support (There is never any documentation that those monies go to the child, so many men refuse to call it child support--it is ex-wife support).

Men are angry; indeed men are enraged by this discrimination, and rightfully so. In response to this bias, some men decide to not participate in that system. The best understanding of non-compliance with the current child support system is an understanding of an unorganized non-violent civil disobedience movement, founded almost exclusively on anti-male prejudice in the courts. Some men decide that they simply won't pay. I salute them, and encourage them in their courageous decision.
Furthermore this decision is the morally correct one. Men should make that decision. The evidence and rational for this position is presented throughout the text, but a brief introduction is provided here--the theses, if you will. First, the scientific evidence demonstrates that our current child support laws are quite biased. Meyers and Garasky, two government funded researchers, documented in a recent study that child support laws were enforced against men and not against women. In point of fact, even when women are the non-custodial parents, they are rarely ordered to pay any child support at all! On the rare occasion when women are ordered to pay child support, collection efforts are not a vigorous. Clearly, the application and enforcement of these child support laws represent sexist discrimination against men, and they are merely one example.

A related example of the discrimination against men may be found in federal programs for "Families." These programs would include federally funded child support collection programs, "family crisis centers", federal welfare programs (i.e., Aid to Families with Dependent Children), and many non-government programs such as Habitat for Humanity. When men are excluded from families, and the divorce creates financial hardship on all parties concerned, these programs tend to favor the parent with the children. In point of fact, the vast majority of "families" which are assisted by these programs are single parent, maternal custody families; simply put, the automatic discrimination against men at the point of divorce disallows many men from participation in many of these federal and private relief programs. These programs would more accurately be described as "women support programs" rather than "family support programs," and here, as elsewhere, the discrimination against men is apparent for the honest observer.

Apprentice star jailed for denying child access to father

A REALITY TV star was jailed for contempt of court today and berated by a sheriff for her attitude towards her son. Former Apprentice contestant Sharon McAllister, 38, was jailed for three months after repeatedly failing to hand her son over for contact with his father. McAllister was told ‘You’re jailed’ and led off in handcuffs after being found guilty of contempt of court in a long-running civil court battle with her former partner.

Sheriff Fiona Tait told her: “It gives me no pleasure whatsoever to do this. This is about the best interests of the child. “These were bad findings of contempt and, given your conduct since, I consider the only way to deal with the matter is by a custodial sentence.

“You have given excuses throughout – that is the way you have operated. I am very sorry this position has been reached but I consider you have shown – in the 15 months since the finding of contempt – that you will not obtemper the court order.

“The finding of contempt was made in October 2013. I made it clear I considered your actions had been flagrant contempts of court.

“My priority was to provide you with the opportunity to obey the court order. That was principally because it was in the child’s best interest to have contact with his father.

“It has been noted in a number of reports you have an entrenched position against contact. My fears were unfortunately realised.

“I am satisfied that the situation is that you remain opposed and will do whatever possible to obstruct the order of the court.”

Perth Sheriff Court was told that McAllister had repeatedly sabotaged agreed periods when her six-year-old son was due to be handed to the care of his father.

Read more about the story here:

Kids and Noncustodial Parents Get Screwed

Re-blogged from

Parenting Together….Living Apart

In working to reforming our current system, I meet great people on a daily basis who see unfairness.

I am not alone in this, of course.

Today’s post is from a Division of Child Support case worker in a neighboring state who has contacted me several times concerning South Dakota’s unfair custody laws. She asked to post anonymously as she believes she could lose her job if her superiors knew of her stance. So I post this, humbled she would take that risk and grateful for her insights. I believe you will be too.

This is from the front lines of child support and custody in South Dakota and neighboring states. Our anonymous writer today works with custody and child support on a daily basis.

Here is her unedited letter:

“I am a Division of Child Support Caseworker in a state bordering South Dakota. As such, I speak with other caseworkers in SD and nearly all other states in the US every day, and know there are very few options for “non-custodial” parents who are being denied equal access to their children, unless they are fortunate enough to be able to afford a long and expensive custody battle, which is extremely rare, especially in cases where the parents were never married.

While your group needs to pursue one issue at a time, your particular issue being custody and visitation arrangements after a divorce, I hope that you will also pursue shared parenting and child support arrangements for parents who were never married, as this is an issue that definitely needs to be addressed and rectified.

Before continuing, I will say that I, and all DCS caseworkers, recognize that the “non-custodial” (and we don’t like that term) parent may be the mother rather than the father. In most cases, however, the NCP is dad and the CP is mom, so please forgive my use of general terms such as “she” and “he”. I use them for the sake of simplicity, not out of a lack of respect or understanding that mothers do sometimes get the raw end of the deal, along with their children.

In every state in this country, the child support system is not only broken, but is in desperate need of repair. It is unbalanced and very often unfair. The child support calculation is based on the income of both parents, in every state, although I will admit there could be a state or two that does not do it this way and I am just not aware.
In most states, if either parent is unemployed but not disabled, they are presumed to be capable of working 40 hours a week at minimum wage, so their income is imputed at $1275 per month. Following this calculation, if mom is willingly unemployed and dad is employed full time, making a mere $10 an hour, dad has a child support obligation of $357 per month for one child. (I got this number from SD’s child support calculator website and it is accurate).

Every parent, regardless of the relationship (or lack of one) that existed at the time the child was conceived, has a responsibility to provide financial support for their child. That is a fact. But, should dad, making $10 an hour really be forced to pay $357 to someone who is not willing to work? Where is mom’s responsibility in this? In these situations, mom (unless she is actually working 40 hours a week for minimum wage, which is rare), is receiving food stamps, Medicaid, and housing assistance, so she is sitting back, living a meager life and doing nothing to improve the lives of her children, and not having to lift a finger to do it. In the meantime, dad is working hard and still can’t afford to keep the lights on in his own home.

Most of the dads I speak to are willing to pay the child support, despite the financial stress. They understand that there is a little person out there who needs their help, and they are okay with that. In many of these cases, dad has not seen his child even once since the relationship with his child’s mother demised, and he has no recourse other than to hire a lawyer to get a visitation order. The first problem with this is that dad, making $10 an hour and paying $357 a month in child support has no money left over for to hire a lawyer. The second problem with this is that, even when he does and gets the order, mom can still deny the visitation and there will be no consequences to her for doing so. Sure, dad can take her back to court again, and the judge will tell her to behave, but if she doesn’t, nothing will happen in SD. Dad and the kids are still denied access to one another.

Approximately 2 years ago, the state of Illinois passed legislation that actually puts repercussions in place for CPs that refuse to follow the Illinois State Visitation Guidelines. If the CP denies access to the children to the NCP, her driver’s license can be restricted, and not be reinstated until she complies. What a novel idea. I am beside myself, wondering why every state has not enacted this legislation. We restrict, suspend, or revoke the driver’s licenses (and other licenses) of NCPs when they don’t pay the child support, even when they are unwillingly unemployed, yet we allow CPs to use their children as weapons against NCP, regardless of whether he is paying.

I had two office visits today, both from dads who are doing the best they can and still are being denied access to their children, simply because mom decided she doesn’t like them anymore. The first has a 5 year old daughter that he desperately wants to have a relationship with, but hasn’t been allowed to see since she was 1 year old. At least in that situation, the poor child doesn’t know what she’s missing in not being able to see her dad.

The second is much more sad, and it honestly makes me very angry. Dad raised mom’s first child as his own from an infant to 4 years old. In the meantime, they had a child together. They were together for another year or two. For the next several years, dad had BOTH kids – even the one that was not his – for weekend visitation. Not enough, but at least it’s something. Then, mom decided to pull the rug out from underneath dad, with no consideration for her children. Dad has now not seen either child for a year and a half. He and mom were not married, so mom has all the power, unless he can afford an attorney, which he can not possibly afford to do.

As we sat and talked, there were several times that I could see he was struggling not to cry. Ever since mom decided (for what crazy reason no one knows) to withhold visitation, both children, and especially his biological child, have been acting out in school. They’ve been bullying other kids and being defiant to authority. His biological son was finally allowed to see his half sister (that dad had from another relationship) after being denied access to her for a long time. According to his sister, all he talked about was how much he missed his dad and how he is so happy he has all these things that his dad gave him, because it helps him remember his dad. Mom has the kid in therapy, that dad is paying for, and she is apparently oblivious to the reason why the kid needs therapy. I could tell her, but it would probably result in me being fired. Mom has 3 kids by 3 different dads and I would like to talk to her about that as well. Bottom line is mom is sitting back, collecting child support and state benefits, and not doing a damn thing to support her children, but she will be the first to call if a payment is a day late. This is just one case I am telling you about, and it’s not even the worst one; it’s just the one at the top of my mind.

The bottom line is this. We need to have state agencies that provide free services for NCPs to have fair and equal access to their children. We already have state agencies that help people who make no contribution themselves collect child support, and we are screwing kids and NCPs in the process. That is not acceptable in any state. I hope your legislature – and mine – will figure that out. Good luck and God Bless to you and your children.

All that being said, I hope all the NCPs (I really hate that term) understand that your CS case worker is not against you. We are forced to support the order, whatever that may entail. We have no power to help you with anything else, but we really would like to. God bless and God speed to you and your children.”

WHY IS THIS A CRITICAL ISSUE?

• Your voice is louder when joined with others. The best leaders join forces with like-minded leaders. 
• Everything the government does wrong is our fault if we let them get away with it, and everything we let them get away with is re-lived by others.
• Add The White House to your Google+ circles to follow.

The Best Interests of Children in Family Law: CALLING ALL FAMILY RIGHTS FACEBOOK PAGES.Click here to learn how to participate.

American Fathers Liberation Army

plus.google.com

Related articles

• Family Law Industry Destroys Those They are Paid to Serve
• Your Views: Let's alter Child Protective Services System to keep dads in kids' lives
• Dr. Leon Koziol Delivers Custody Court Dysfunction Report at United Nations Family Rights Conference
• U.s. Legal System Abuse - Rise and Overcome
• Divorced Co-Parenting Oxymoron
• Americans for Equal Rights for Fathers
• "We have not endorsed a presidential candidate" ~ The Father's Rights Movement (TFRM)
• Rick Scott is a complete retard even for an elected political Hero!
• Extraordinary Book Features Human Side of Parent Alienation
• Junk Science and the Real Parental Alienation in Family Court That Nobody Talks About

It Is Horrifying

How Do You Tell This Story?

There is no one way or no best way to tell the story of a man driven by others to take his life. I know, because I have been trying to explain to state leaders, media, and professionals how this is happening to good people who trust our legal system to work to protect them and their children. Challenging doesn’t even touch it. Author Mike Volpe…Read More

2016 is the year in which we must tell it like it is and demand change.

It’s taken ten years for us to get here, but finally it seems the most senior minds inside the Family Court are starting to actively push for change.

Suggesting people would be forgiven for thinking the system was, “neither compassionate, nor even humane”, President of the Family Justice System, Sir James Munby was passing judgment in a case which involved two parents unable to access legal aid to fight to stop their three year old child from being adopted. Munby also touches on the human rights principles this case raises –the right to a fair trial is a well known and basic human right, which is currently being eroded by the government’s ongoing cutbacks to the child welfare and legal sectors.

These cutbacks are preventing parents and children from accessing legal support and this, to our mind at least, is a direct breach of Article 6. 

Munby’s observation that the Family Court is a place devoid of compassion and humanity does not just apply to access to legal aid. It applies in every corner of the system where support services are being pared down, where training is not up to par and where working culture allows child protection processes to be ignored and even illegally circumvented.

Researching Reform supports Munby’s continued efforts to speak out about these issues, many of which he has touched upon in previous judgments – now we need Sir Munby to push a little harder. We have seen him talk about other controversial issues, such as male circumcision, but much like his comment on access to legal aid in the current case above, his wording is typically sheepish and cautious.

And whilst some might argue that judges should not be political nor allow their personal views to intertwine with their work (which for the most part we agree with), when it comes to government policy and legislation, the moment they begin to impact on basic human rights, every judge in the land has a duty to speak out.

The family justice system does not need more armchair philosophers or half hearted sentiment. 2016 is the year in which we must tell it like it is – and demand change.

Family Court is a MAFIA

Divorce Corp. Official Trailer
“I think death would be easier than divorce.” Here’s a look at what’s to come in the new documentary, Divorce Corp.
Posted by Divorce Corp. on Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Dr Sophy, a psychiatrist that works for DHS in Los Angeles, talks about the devastating brain changes that occur when you remove a child from their parents no matter what the circumstances are. He starts discussing these brain changes at the 24:43 minute mark on this video:

We didn't use the word Mafia in our movie.  "Perhaps we made a mistake!" Visit our website to learn more!

Copyright © 2014 Divorce Corp LLC, All rights reserved. Family Law Reform American Fathers Liberation Army Family Court Story and Advice  The art of forcing parents into a paid arena to do battle. A FORUM FOR IDEAS TO REFORM U.S. FAMILY LAWS. CALL TO ACTION: Many of you have reached out to Divorce Corp asking for specific ways you can help make a difference to correct the injustices of the family courts. We believe that there is a real opportunity to speak up and help right a wrong in the case of Carnell Alexander. The story takes place in Michigan where Carnell Alexander has been ordered by a court to pay $30,000 in child support for a child that everyone now acknowledges, and a DNA test confirms, is not his. The child’s mother named Mr. Alexander as the father in order to qualify for welfare benefits. Carnell Alexander was not served with paternity suit papers and had no knowledge of this until an officer arrested him for being a “deadbeat dad” during a routine traffic stop. He has been fighting the charges ever since. The court is holding him responsible for the child support, even though they acknowledge he is not the father, simply for not filing a motion to set aside the acknowledgement of parentage within the time frame required by the court. How can you help? Read more about Carnell Alexander’s story using the links below then copy the following text and email it to the addresses provided. If we all stand up to be heard, we can put an end to this injustice. Judge Orders Man to Pay 30K in Child Support for a Kid That Isn’t His Detroit Man Turns Himself in After Not Paying Child Support for A Kid That Isn’t His Michigan to Jail Carnell Alexander for Child Support for A Kid That Isn’t His Judge Orders Detroit Man to Pay 30,000 in Back Child Support for A Child That Isn’t His Carnell Alexander Detroit STOP BY THE NEW FAMILY LAW REFORM WIKI, FAMILYPEDIA. Become a member and add content or simply browse the Familypedia pages. This is a great place to share your personal experience or valuable information you have learned about family court. USE THE “SIGN UP FOR REFORM COMMITTEES” FORM TO YOUR RIGHT TO JOIN ONE OF THE NEW REFORM COMMITTEES. We have terrific leaders for the reform committees. Check your email for details on the leadership council for each committee. The committee leaders will be working with all committee members to establish and prioritize reform goals. If you have any questions, please email info@divorcecorp.com. FAMILY LAW REFORM CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS Family Law Reform Conference 2014 – Joe Sorge The Economic Cost of Raising Children – William Comanor Mental Health & Wellbeing in Different Living Arrangements – Malin Bergstrom RICO Suits Against the State Courts – Cole Stuart Judicial Bias and the Political Process – Susan Settenbrino Policy Solutions: Fraud & Corruption in the Courts – Anne Stevenson Report from Workshop A Child Custody & Support – David DeLugas & William Comanor Report from Workshop B Alimony Reform – Alan Frisher & Steve Hitner Report from Workshop C Mediation vs Litigation – Stephen Erickson (( As a reminder. )) Why do we tolerate public servants that abuse our children to obtain federal funding? How many children will not share the love of Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles and their parents because of the greed of "friends of the courts"? How many children live in poverty and will not receive any toys this holiday season? Please use your talents and resources to expose the truth about, judicial abuse, government abuse and demand prosecutions.