Deadbeat Dad's = Death Sentence

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
America's No.1 Enemy



Some very interesting points from the editorial.



Quote:

Some fathers crack under the pressure. According to a 2000 study published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, divorced men were more than twice as likely to commit suicide as married men, and almost 10 times more likely to kill themselves as divorced women.



Another interesting point...



Quote:

According to a chilling exposé in the June issue of Men's Health Magazine, on any given day about 15,000 American men are in the slammer for falling behind on child support payments. How they are supposed to earn money while they are in jail, no one seems to know.



I started reading on this area when my brother got himself fired from his last job. I couldn't believe that in America a man could be sent to jail for quitting his job for another job. The new job allowed him the schedule to actually enjoy his custodial time with his children. However if he quit his older job, which paid more, it could be seen by the court as him attemping to intentionally lower his child support. If you quit your job and take a lower paying job, the court can find you in contempt and jail you, for making less money.



So his only option was to get himself fired on purpose, so that he could a) see his children and b) not go to jail.



Lastly consider this point.



Quote:

Much of the problem can be traced to the arithmetic used to caclulate the payments. Back in the 1980s, Robert Williams was hired by the federal government to come up with a formula to figure how much fathers in various income brackets would have to pay. Then Williams created his own company, Policy Studies, Inc., to track down the deadbeats and receive a cut of the take.



But there's a basic conflict of interest at work here -- the higher the guidelines that Williams sets, the bigger the profits that flow to his company. That's like telling the IRS that they can increase their agency's budget by jimmying the tax rate charts.



Can any policy that makes your 1000% more suceptable to a negative trait (suicide) and was calculated by someone who has a stake is seeing you fail really be fair? Should this not be reviewed and replaced with something else?



Lastly why should courts only treat men as cash registers? Women have a choice after divorce of working full or part time and repeatedly petitioning a court for a man's earnings if they feel they aren't getting enough.



While I am sure there are women who suffer from their spousal choice and never get a dime, does that mean that the general system should treat men as criminals or put them under such fear and pressure that suicide is a preferable alternative?



Nick
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    fotnsfotns Posts: 301member
    Never get married, it creates too many problems. My parents are still together after 30 years and are like Frank and Estelle Costanzas. They drive me nuts!
  • Reply 2 of 47
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Where's Jeffery M. Leving when we need him?
  • Reply 3 of 47
    aquafireaquafire Posts: 2,758member
    How can this be ?

    In the land of the free ?

    That men must pay

    & have no say

    In what goes down

    and round this town.



    We have no voice

    We have no choice

    We're just a bag

    of money drops

    & if we dont pay

    they call the cops.



    Lose your job

    and maybe fail

    Try your best

    but go to jail



    Aint no way that this should be

    In the land that men call free

    that all men pay in silent pain

    while others sit and reap the gain
  • Reply 4 of 47
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Where is the good old time

    when a man can make a women pregnant

    and leave her without a dime

    hearing her cry like a malentendant

    living himself in the sunshine

    while she go in despair.
  • Reply 5 of 47
    aquafireaquafire Posts: 2,758member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    Where is the good old time

    when a man can make a women pregnant

    and leave her without a dime

    hearing her cry like a malentendant

    living himself in the sunshine

    while she go in despair.




    Hey: that sounds like Neil Young or is that Bob Dylan ?
  • Reply 6 of 47
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aquafire

    Hey: that sounds like Neil Young or is that Bob Dylan ?



    Obviously it's so crappy, that it means he can only come from me
  • Reply 7 of 47
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    Can any policy that makes your 1000% more suceptable to a negative trait (suicide) ...



    This 'statistic' you're throwing out is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start. I would prefer that you just make stuff up (since that is effectively what you are doing) rather than twist and abuse a real statistic in such a manner.
  • Reply 8 of 47
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,448member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by stupider...likeafox

    This 'statistic' you're throwing out is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start. I would prefer that you just make stuff up (since that is effectively what you are doing) rather than twist and abuse a real statistic in such a manner.



    If you don't like it, you are welcome to site your own.



    Men's rate of suicide in general is much higher than women starting from puberty on. If you can't understand why someone you love divorcing you, having a court determine how much or little you can see your own children whom you love, letting the mother have free rein to poison your children against you while moving her new boyfriend into your former home, and being ordered under the threat of jail to provide whatever she and the court deem appropriate support couldn't make you more suceptable to suicide, then that is on you.



    Again provide something to back up how or why it is "wrong." If you are feeling empowered and oppressive you don't go around killing yourself.



    BTW, here is the study cited. You can look at the abstract, the full study requires a subscription.



    suicide



    Nick
  • Reply 9 of 47
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    you could easily claim that men who are emotionally unstable in general are more likely to commit suicide and get divorced.



    correlation≠causation.
  • Reply 10 of 47
    aquafireaquafire Posts: 2,758member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    Obviously it's so crappy, that it means he can only come from me



  • Reply 11 of 47
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,448member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by alcimedes

    you could easily claim that men who are emotionally unstable in general are more likely to commit suicide and get divorced.



    correlation≠causation.




    This is true except for the controlled for that by comparing to single, married and widowed men as well.



    Unless you are claiming that getting married makes a man emotionally unstable.



    Nick
  • Reply 12 of 47
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    single men are men who don't get married.



    married men stay married



    widowed men stayed married until the wife died.



    divorced men got married, then divorced.



    single men are obviously different from the other three. they never married so there could be a whole world of differences in their mental/emotional/social makeup.



    married men and widowed men are both similar in that they stayed together with their wives as long as possible. so it could just be that married men and widowed men are more emotionally stable.



    divorced men got married, then divorced. could be any number of other variables are responsible for the tie-in between divorced men and suicide.



    the biggest problem with human relationship studies is that you can never really have a control group. you can't randomly assign people to a single life, a married life and a divorced life then see what happens.
  • Reply 13 of 47
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    If you don't like it, you are welcome to site your own.





    Christ on a bike! I don't need to cite my own, the statistic that you mention (divorced men 1000% more i.e. ten times more likely to commit suicide than divorced women) is a perfectly fine statistic.



    It is the process of going from there to "policy that makes your 1000% more suceptable to a negative trait (suicide)" that I'm complaining about.



    Are you seriously trying to tell me that the day this law/policy/whatever was passed, the male divorcee suicide rate, which was until that time exactly equal with that for divorced women began to climb to ten times its previous level.



    In the very same sentence that *you* quoted, it is revealed that married men are 5x (500%) more likely to kill themselves than even divorced women. That means that even if (and it's one hell of a big 'if') the entire difference in suicide rate between married and divorced men was accounted for by the introduction of this policy then it would only have caused a 2x (200%) increase in suicides.
  • Reply 14 of 47
    timotimo Posts: 353member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    While I am sure there are women who suffer from their spousal choice and never get a dime, does that mean that the general system should treat men as criminals or put them under such fear and pressure that suicide is a preferable alternative?



    This is interesting...you're characterizing the demonstrated victims of deadbeat dad (after all, being a deadbeat dad presupposed rejecting a previous judgment instructing them to pay alimony) as "women who suffer from their spousal choice": you're blaming the victim! Your laying the blame at the mother's feet ("spousal choice") while letting the father off. Why? Because he's the real victim? Because "the system treat men as criminals" or "put them under such fear..."



    What about a mother's fear? This argument doesn't make any sense when you consider men who are "under such fear" put themselves under that fear and pressure.



    On the one hand you've got men who are victims of the system, while on the other you freely blame women for their bad choices. Sounds like a double standard to me.
  • Reply 15 of 47
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Going to jail? No.



    He's still responsible for providing for his child and if his lowered pay does adversely affect the child then he has shirked his responsibility as a father.



    Also, how many threads have you started on this subject? 90?
  • Reply 16 of 47
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,448member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    Going to jail? No.



    He's still responsible for providing for his child and if his lowered pay does adversely affect the child then he has shirked his responsibility as a father.



    Also, how many threads have you started on this subject? 90?




    How many threads have I started? This board has a search function and you have the intelligence to use it. I'm sure you will see that I have not started numerous threads on this topic.



    Lowered pay does not automatically adversely affect a child. Likewise since when did what you earn become a CRIMINAL matter. If the mother can't work or doesn't earn enough, she applies for aid, if the dad doesn't he goes to jail?!? As the article mentioned, how is he going to somewhow earn more money in jail?



    Support payments are a percentage of earned income. No one should go to jail for working full time and then choosing to still work full time at another job. Likewise people can choose to quit jobs because the environment is hostile or dangerous. Should a man go to jail because he decided he would rather drive a diesel rather than work in a mine or oil drilling? He would make less, but there would be less danger as well. Death or jail, nice choices.



    I could fully understand your point if a father were simply choosing NOT to work or even to go from full time to part time. (though again a woman would never go to jail for this, but again life isn't fair) However EVERYONE should have the right to choose where they are going to work full time. Likewise it does occur to you that since support is a percentage of income that if their support goes down for their children, it also means their own personal income must go down even moreso as well.



    Nick
  • Reply 17 of 47
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    trumptman:



    Quote:

    How many threads have I started? This board has a search function and you have the intelligence to use it. I'm sure you will see that I have not started numerous threads on this topic.



    There was no interest in the number, it was dirisive sarcasm.



    But you have mentioned it more than once, I have a bad memory and I can remember you telling the "quit a job/go to jail" story more than once.



    If you and pscates had a baby it would be the most self-pitying white man in history. Like an albino Al Sharpton.



    Quote:

    Lowered pay does not automatically adversely affect a child.



    Which is why people use magical words like "if".

    and if his lowered pay does adversely affect the child...



    I can think of zero situations where it would be a good change for the child. Bad? Debateable and specific to each situation.



    Quote:

    Likewise since when did what you earn become a CRIMINAL matter.



    That's a petulant and ignorant way of asking it. The legal question is not how much you make, it's what you are paying (as legally obligated) for your child's upbringing.



    What one earns is not a criminal matter, in this specific context and under certain legal obligations it's more than valid for this to be a criminal issue.



    Quote:

    If the mother can't work or doesn't earn enough, she applies for aid, if the dad doesn't he goes to jail?!? As the article mentioned, how is he going to somewhow earn more money in jail?



    He's not, but he's going to be punished. I don't think anyone is saying that they will make more in jail, so who are you arguing against?



    Quote:

    Should a man go to jail because he decided he would rather drive a diesel rather than work in a mine or oil drilling? He would make less, but there would be less danger as well. Death or jail, nice choices.



    What about suicide rates for single mothers? You're going to tell me it's harder on a man who owes child support than the mother who has to raise the kid AND work?



    Boooo-****ing-hoooo.



    (And in case you had a hard time reading my post. My first words: Going to jail? No.)



    Quote:

    However EVERYONE should have the right to choose where they are going to work full time. Likewise it does occur to you that since support is a percentage of income that if their support goes down for their children, it also means their own personal income must go down even moreso as well.



    Their own personal income (with child support taken out) is not the issue here. The issue is the child. The person who is bitching so hard about this is obviously a very selfish person with inadequate regard for impact on the child.



    WHAT ABOUT ME!? ME!?!!?!



    He shouldn't go to jail but he shouldn't hurt his child because he couldn't keep his marriage together. Morally the guy is screwed, in my opinion. You can't leave your kid and then cry wolf when someone is moralizing to you.
  • Reply 18 of 47
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    I'm not sure I understand all of the hostility against trumptman on this issue.



    Sure, I think the case is a little overstated with all that talk about a "death penalty", and that there's not anywhere near enough context or comparison for the suicide statistic for it to mean much. Still, I think there's a good case to be made that men often get a raw deal when it comes to divorce and child support.



    Speaking for myself, I have nothing to complain about: I've been divorced once, there were no children involved, and my ex-wife and I worked it all out without lawyers. We're still on such good terms that I let her move back in with me when she lost her job last year.



    But many of the things I've heard about from other people's divorces and child support situations are very alarming. In particular, it bothers me that a divorced father doesn't have just as much flexibility and leeway as a married father when it comes to supporting his kids.



    If you're married and lose your job, no one's going to throw you in jail because your kids don't receive some fixed dollar amount from you every month. You'd be allowed to work it out on your own, and as long as you weren't starving your kids to death or sending them to school in rags, your children would be expected to ride out the tough times with you.



    I certainly reject the notion that if you're well-off when you get divorced, that your kids are somehow entitled to be "maintained in the manner to which they have become accustomed." If I stayed married and decided my high-pressure job as a VP of sales was just too much for me, the law isn't going to be on my case about how I'm supporting my kids if I decide to quit and take a job at Walmart stocking shelves instead -- that would be my choice, and my choice alone. Why should it be any different after divorce?
  • Reply 19 of 47
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by shetline

    I'm not sure I understand all of the hostility against trumptman on this issue.



    Sure, I think the case is a little overstated with all that talk about a "death penalty", and that there's not anywhere near enough context or comparison for the suicide statistic for it to mean much. Still, I think there's a good case to be made that men often get a raw deal when it comes to divorce and child support.



    Speaking for myself, I have nothing to complain about: I've been divorced once, there were no children involved, and my ex-wife and I worked it all out without lawyers. We're still on such good terms that I let her move back in with me when she lost her job last year.



    But many of the things I've heard about from other people's divorces and child support situations are very alarming. In particular, it bothers me that a divorced father doesn't have just as much flexibility and leeway as a married father when it comes to supporting his kids.



    If you're married and lose your job, no one's going to throw you in jail because your kids don't receive some fixed dollar amount from you every month. You'd be allowed to work it out on your own, and as long as you weren't starving your kids to death or sending them to school in rags, your children would be expected to ride out the tough times with you.



    I certainly reject the notion that if you're well-off when you get divorced, that your kids are somehow entitled to be "maintained in the manner to which they have become accustomed." If I stayed married and decided my high-pressure job as a VP of sales was just too much for me, the law isn't going to be on my case about how I'm supporting my kids if I decide to quit and take a job at Walmart stocking shelves instead -- that would be my choice, and my choice alone. Why should it be any different after divorce?




    From what i have read the law is approximatively the same in France except that they will never send anybody in jail, and that it's not forbidden to change of jobs, even if you are paid less (but this last point has to be proven : i am not a lawyer).



    Laws have goals. Some fathers do not give a shit about their childrens, they don't care for them, or will care when they become adults. This law was made for that. This kind of fathers will try all tricks to avoid their duties.

    In reverse, this law who is nearly 100 % proof against bad fathers, have negative effects for the good fathers.

    In short it's not well balanced, or not enough discriminating.
  • Reply 20 of 47
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    I can think of zero situations where it would be a good change for the child.



    If the father has more time to spend with the child, it will benefit the child. That is, if you're talking about taking a job with lower pay.



    Welcome to the public forum.
Sign In or Register to comment.