 |
After all, "deadbeats" is a masculine term, so we would have to call the females, "deadbats", I suppose.
Scott, to amplify your point, you are saying that those few women who do not receive custody are the kind of person who would not pay child support either.
Well I was kind of avoiding saying that ;). I would say that generally there are two types of women who would not get custody of their children in a divorce. The first type would be those unfit or incapable of raising a child and those so driven by their careers that they don't want to be mothers. I would imagine the first group would be more prevalent and that group would also be less likely to pay support.Quote:
Originally Posted by George_1950
Here is a stastic I got from the Florida law library.
Child Support
Information from multiple sources shows that only 10% of all noncustodial fathers fit the "deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of those with NO visitation rights still financially support their children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).
Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because they lack the financial resources to pay (Source: GAO report: GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).
The Poverty Studies Institute at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, discovered that 52% of fathers who owe child support earn less per year than the national average.
66% of single mothers work less than full time while only 10% of fathers fall into this category. In addition, almost 47% of non-custodial mothers default on support compared with the 27% of fathers who default. (Source: Garansky and Meyer, DHHS Technical Analysis Paper No. 42).
Total Custodial Mothers: 11,268,000. Total Custodial Fathers 2,907,000 (Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 458).
66% of all support not paid by non-custodial fathers is due to inability to pay. (Source: U.S. General Accounting Office Report, GAO/HRD-92-39FS).
The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.
Custodial mothers who receive a support award: 79.6%
Custodial fathers who receive a support award: 29.9%
Non-custodial mothers who totally default on support: 46.9%
Non-custodial fathers who totally default on support: 26.9%
As well as we were told to our face by child support office. That they will not make the mother get a job therefore won't have to pay child support.
There is also a forgiveness program in the state of Illinois for back child support where you can have the back child support erased, or reduced. Provided you show cause for lack of employment or earnings. Not that hard really to do, they are finding when they helped with the back child support and set new amounts the fathers are not behind anymore.
I have to say this subject is a hard one almost like politics, or religion.
Non-custodial mothers who totally default on support: 46.9%
Non-custodial fathers who totally default on support: 26.9%
That (and your other stats) affirms what I said. Non custodial fathers outnumber non custodial mothers by more than 4-1 (11,268,000 to 2,907,000). So if 46% of mothers default, that's about 1.5 mil moms. But if 26% of dads default, that's more almost 3mil dads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by afitz
Before I start quoting this do you have a citation and year and where this was published because I'm pretty sure I will have to defend myself -
I will definitely go through all my research notes and get that info for you. I wrote this paper about a year and a half ago. All was done in the Florida law library where I no longer live.
Yes I know more mothers have custody of the children than fathers so that does effect the stats. My point is that there is double standards, also I seen where others have said that someone they know works 2 jobs to pay there support. How can any person mother or father be a good parent and spend time with any of the children if all he or she is doing is working. As well as why should the child from the first marriage each prime rib and the second marriage children eat peanut butter sandwich's what is fair about that. There is a lot of variation on this subject depending on the case.
I agree that if you have a child you have a financial responsibility, That being said its not spousal support its child support and it should be 50/50. If the court orders a parent to pay 300 a month than the custodial parent should have to provide 600.00 worth of expenses.
I think that a lot of you don't understand, sometimes things do not work out with the original person you are with and yes someday you want to start over and have a new family, you should not be chastised for this. I think the court system needs to pull the stick out of there butts and not only look out for the children of the previous marriage but look at the current children. The system always says its for the children, but I guess it doesn't mean all the children it just means for the children of the pissed of parents who want to take all the money the other parent has. I feel for your situation and I wish you the best of luck, hopefully the court system will work for you, it does not work for most. And for the women on here, get rid of your bitterness and look at the big picture your not a victim.
A) This thread is from 2008.Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
B) While I agree with you in some aspects, you seem to be the bitter one - and I AM a woman. There are deadbeat fathers AND mothers - gender has nothing to do with it.
C) Your post offered absolutely no advice. It's nothing more than an angry rant at the system. On the law boards, our answers must conform to the law. If you have something to add, please feel free. Otherwise, this kind of rambling is out of line.
Closed.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:53 PM. |