It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


SOCIAL: DeadBeat Dads

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 09:08 AM
We have alot of issues this term. One of the most over looked is Dead Beat Dads. The Thing about Dead beat dads is that most are not well off, rich or even have a job. Dead beat dads is a real problem, not only in America but in Mexico also.

"Family Values Dont Stop At The Rio Grande"

Thats a slogan George W. Bush uses to justify illegal immigration.

And its truefamily values dont stop at the Rio Grande or any other river.

Everybody has family values. Its just that some family values are better than others.

Thousands of Mexican men use emigration to abandon their wives and children.

For them, thats family values. Our open borders and encouragement of illegal immigration help these Mexican deadbeat dads dump their families.

In Tremecino 25% of the mothers are left alone with their children, expecting a husband who may return this year, in 2 years or more, if at all.

In highly publicized raids, federal agents have hauled in 69 "deadbeat dads" from 29 states over the past few weeks, and are still hunting for 33 more. The Bush administration boasts that it is sending a message to deadbeats. However, the high-living deadbeat dad who stiffs his kids is largely a mythical creature.

Arizona State University researcher Sanford Braver, who over an eight year period conducted the largest federally funded study of divorced dads ever done, found that unemployment was the largest factor behind nonpayment of child support, and noted that his findings were "consistent with virtually
all past studies on the topic."

Most "deadbeat dads" are actually "dead broke," either because they have low-wage jobs, are unemployed, or are deep in arrears on unrealistic and crushing child support obligations. According to Bruce Walker, the Oklahoma District Attorney who ran the state's child-support enforcement program for three years and jailed hundreds of fathers for nonpayment, these men are "seldom the mythical monsters described by politicians."

Bush plans to intercept gambling winnings of 'deadbeat dads'

The Bush Administration wants to expand the collection of overdue child support payments by making it legal for the Government to intercept winnings from casinos, racetracks and other forms of gambling.

The budget President George Bush plans to release in three weeks will include about $US40million ($68million) over five years to set up a data system to link the names of parents who owe child support with the names of gambling winners, the Health and Human Services Secretary, Tommy Thompson, announced on Monday.

For some men showing up in court for being habitually behind in child support, their choice is jail or a vasectomy.

Family Court Judge D. Michael ``Mickey'' Foellger has given the option to a few men who had multiple children and were tens of thousands of dollars behind on their child support.

Foellger said he considers it an effective way to get his message across - that having children is a responsibility.

``If these children are in poverty because these guys are not paying their child support, I have no qualms about it,'' he said of his policy. ``I don't think these men deserve to have any more children.''

Foellger, the only family court judge in northern Kentucky's Campbell County, said he has never ordered a man to have a vasectomy.

Republicans Cut "legitimate interest" Anchor

It's no secret that the old media has strong ties to the Democrat Party. The huge contrast between "analysis" of events during Democrat and Republican administrations has proven that over and over again. From about the 1970s through to the last presidential election, Democrats and their media outlets made sure the public knew how proud they were to have fewer male ... ah ... more female votes than Republicans the so-called "gender gap."

It didn't matter that the extra share of the pro-Democrat females were being persuaded by feminist extremists and that the feminist agenda was actually put together by a coalition of organized crime, anti-West leftist extremists, and homosexuals interested in destroying the American family. It had become an agenda that benefited the Democrat Party, and that was good enough for the old media. Let loose the dogs of chaos.

Republicans are still obviously quite worried about that "gender gap." It's obvious that they still feel the need to pick up more female votes and shed themselves of more of those irritating male votes else the old media might pick on them again. All I can suggest to loyal Republican males is to help them by not voting for them.

On the campaign trail the Kerry's look like a devil-may-care, happy-go-lucky brood. But like many upper crust families, the Kerry's too have a dark history; one swirling in a shadowy fog of divorce, depression, thoughts of suicide, and perhaps even deadbeat parenting.

We ask for nothing less before we consider whether or not to put a potential deadbeat dad in the White House.

[edit on 6-8-2004 by SpittinCobra]

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 12:29 PM
This is a problem that personally affected me.

My father left 6 years ago, when I was 9 and I have not spoke to him, or seen him since.

He does not pay child support, and does not help out at all. The only time we have ANY contact with him is when my mother sees him in court.


If you do not want to have children, and take care of your children, then don't screw around!

Fathers should have to pay. It is hard on the single mothers role to raise one, two, or even more kids on a single paycheck.


posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 12:38 PM
I agree with you on this point actually. Fathers do just get up and go and it is wrong for them to do it. Like you said if they didnt want to be commited to a child or a family then they shouldnt screw about. However I have heard of case's by me, where either they didnt know the woman was pregnant, or the condom split resulting a pregancy to which the father has no knowledge.

Overall Verdict: Fathers should commit to paying for child they created with the mother of the child, however in extreme cases I think the father should be allowed off. For example if the controception split and the mother of the child still went ahead and didnt tell the father until after the birth.

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 12:59 PM
A quick personal story before I make my commentary...

My dad had to pay child support when I was a child and my sister too, when he left my mom he just said he'd take 24,000 she could keep one car, he'd take the other, she could keep the house, and all the belongings in it...

She agreed... Then, when he got a girlfriend my mom went crazy. She called him non stop, called us there when we went to visit him just to upset us and make our stay miserable...

The thing was before he got a girlfriend my mom told him he didn't have to pay that much because he was paying 150 every week for both of us.

They cut a deal " a verbal agreement" saying he would only have to pay half of that, but when he got a girlfriend, she went ape # and did everything in her power to # his life up.

They went to court and he was ordered to pay the full amount, even though for 2 years he didn't have to, he documented everything but because it was a "verbal" agreement it didn't cut the cheese...

So 7 years later my mom asked for backsupport which was about 50,000 mind you she was making up lies to try and get this money, but being the smart guy my dad is and learning from his mistakes he kept all his papers ect ect, and my mom got slammed in court...

Point being, there are dads out there who are anything but deadbeat dads that get labelled this because the woman is a wack job and wants his ass on a platter...

I know there are ahole dads out there who don't want to have anything to do with their child/mom whatever, and it should be their duty to pay, if not bring them back to the courts give them an ultimadum...

But the problem with this is that many times good men get caught up in these laws that shouldn't even apply to them and they get screwed, there needs to be some kind of way to sort these situations out, I don't know how to go about doing this I haven't put much thought into it, but I do know there are some things that need to change within family law because theres much back log, much confusion and limited laws that shouldn't apply to certain people but end up that way because there are stereotypes such as the dead beat dad...

And because of the lies she told my dad had to file bankruptcy start over and hope for something good to happen. He had to start over at the age of 43, he's finally rested at 45 because my sister and I moved out early so that he could get on with his life... I felt it was my duty as a good person to help my father out any way I could because I honestly thought he would get ahernia or something worse.
From the heartache, to slamming things around because he was so angry, I really felt bad for him, he gave her everything when they split up, he only wanted 24,000 to start his life over again, he trusted her with the verbal agreement, but it was one of those things where the woman knows in advanced and this put him right back around her finger.

This is an example of why I think the court system needs to change. Family and responsibility offices would call him saying they never got the payments, which was bs but because their backlogged and slow as # and I bet half of them aren't even tactful it made it harder for him, I remember him swearing at them and demanding to speak to supervisors ect... His lawer bailed on him and didn't even notify him, he blew 8,000 on this bunghole...

Divorces aren't pretty lawers expenses aren't pretty and the family court system is far from fair...

Something needs to be done to make it fair and balanced for all parties involved, especially because many woman are frickin nut jobs...

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 01:04 PM

Originally posted by racos
Overall Verdict: Fathers should commit to paying for child they created with the mother of the child, however in extreme cases I think the father should be allowed off. For example if the controception split and the mother of the child still went ahead and didnt tell the father until after the birth.

It doesn't matter.

If you are going to screw around, regardless of age, and the security does break, it is still your kid.

Get a DNA test, if it's yours, your going to pay!

If you stupid enough to fool around with sex, when youre not ready to suffer the consequences, then don't have sex. Plain and simple as that!

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 01:06 PM
Thanks for taking that stand True...

Its hard to be a guy and use that stand.. There are a lot of wacko women.
They have been taught that things are to be this certain way. And you cant have a cookie cutter for people.

I should have even named it dead beat parents...

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 01:55 PM
I got another one for you, my husbands friend got hosed and had to start over because his ex was a deadbeat, he put her through law school she dropped out, all she did was sit on the couch and talk on her cell phone all day, she got fat and he decided she's non productive so got rid of her, but she got a nice handful of cash, where'd she get this mentality from??

Her Mother! What did she do?

The same thing, she used to get a new car every two years from her husband because he worked for chrysler, she didn't work, he did, she ran up the bills, demanded things from him all the time, he was just a mat to wak all over..
She decided to leave him, and he had to pay her off, this guy is dead broke.

Another story:

my husabnds other friend married a second time to a girl that ran up his bills, bought expensive clothing ect, didn't work, had a child who she trained not to do any housework so she sat on her ass all day , he asked to mow the grass one day, and she told him her daughter will not be caught mowing the grass or washing teh dishes!!
They were only married a year and he decided she was just using him for his money so he had to pay her off and her child and he had to start over again...

Too many female leeches would rather pass off their true colors on somebody else... But it's pure self projection...

Again, I say there needs to be laws against this kind of thing from happening.

Especially when I bet the majority of the child support doesn't even get to their kids... I know I never saw any of that money, my mom would always come home with 400 dollar dresses , she put a jacuzzi in the bathroom, ect...
Plus she was cheap when it came to takig care of us...

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 02:28 PM
Very valid points true. Parents of both genders use marraige as a get rich quick sceme and it must stop. Back to the topic.

I agree with most of the points you are presenting. A possible solution could be that the dads support money should go to the kids college fund or the childs bank acount. This way the money can't be blown on 400 dollar dresses for mom.

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 10:56 PM
I agree with some of what you are saying, but, the fact remains that there are "DeadBean Dad's" out there that never think of providing for their children. This has touched me in my personal life on two levels.

The first:
My father and mother divorced when I was 5. I never saw him untli I was 14. He never paid the first cent in child support to mom during that time. Mom was going to school, trying to get her GED and we lived on a bare minimum all that time. I remember things from my childhood, things that I wanted or needed, that mom was just too broke to provide for me. Do you know what that makes a child feel like. Being the only child not to have a particular type of shoes, or a "cool binder like all the other kids"? It makes them feel like the only person in the world who can't afford things. Going to school in old clothes and carrying a hand me down backpack. All because of a dad that doesn't give a care about HIS RESPONSIBILITY AS A FATHER. Tell me it doesn't affect a child and I'll ask you which hole you've had your head stuck in.

My second point:
I am a single mother. I have been raising my daughter (that's her in my avatar) alone all her life. Her father and me split shortly after she was concieved (didn't know it at the time). I tried to track him down and finally ran into him in a resteraunt in my former town. I told him about OUR DAUGHTER. Showed him the results of the pregnancy test too, complete with estimated conception time. He gave me a number to reach him. I tried to call him, but the number was inactive. I tracked down his girl friend at the time. She refused to give him any message. He knew I was pregnant. He knew when the due date was. Have been trying to track him down for 10 months. He has ignored 3 requests for him to come in for a DNA test. He didn't show at court summonses. He is a dead beat.

Don't try and tell me it doesn't affect a child, because it does. Don't try and make excuses, because their is no excuse for the behavior. If a man fathers a child, it's part his responsibility to care for that child. I don't mean he has to turn over his shirt, but, he needs to help out.

Point made,
regs out...

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 03:11 AM
Deadbeat Dads and Moms should be persicuted and forced to pay thier child support. If it takes the federal government to back up the state agencies so be it. In California a deadbeat parent cannot register for a Drivers License if they are behind on thier payments. This could easily be expanded to place leins on properties, retierment accounts etc.

The above posters who were good enough to share thier personal experinces show it really goes beyond the money in term of emotional consequences. Aside from not divorsing and making payments, do any of you feel that a program, or support, or counseling would have helped? I ask, because int he pediatric ICU, parents automaticaly get a social worker consult even if they don't ask for one to make sure there needs are being met. WOuld something like that helped those of you who went through it?

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 10:52 AM
With all due respect to Spittin Cobra for starting this thread and all the posters who shared their experiences, how is being a deadbeat parent a Federal Campaign Issue?
The part of me that believes in individual rights and keeping the government out my life doesn't want the federal government interveniing in these issues. It's not their job. It's just another insidious way for the government to control more of our lives.

It's not a pleasant stand, but do we want the federal government to be our parent, babysitter or crutch?

If I am missing the point here, I apologize.

[edit on 7-8-2004 by DontTreadOnMe]

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 11:00 AM
Aparently the states cant handle the tasks. And its bigger than a state thing. There are far to many deadbeat parents for the states to keep up. Something on the fed level needs to be done. Bush has started, as i listed in the abouve he has a Sercet Task force that raids homes Of DBP.

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 01:59 PM
I know this is controversial, but I'm more in favor of letting state and local agencies handle this than I am of creating Yet Another Bureaucratic Position (yes, I know this is odd for a Democrat to be saying this -- but that's the way I feel.)

Bush will attempt to solve it as he's attempted to solve other things; with a new department, more people, and more of a debt load for us (while cutting our taxes to ensure we stay indebted for a much longer time. This hasn't been a successful strategy before, and I don't see that raising it to a Federal crime will do anything really except jam up the Federal courts and Federal prisons.

I believe it's much better for the states to keep handling this.

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 02:44 PM
Can we agree that, who ever runs it there needs to be jobs made for this and a better system put in place?

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 05:37 PM
I agree that dead beat parents are a huge problem that has to be addressed and I fully agree that it doesnt matter if you used contraception or not you still had intercourse and every high school health class teaches the only fool proof method of contraception is abstinence. However I would like to review the term Child Support.

To start with I would like to point out a few things. My parents divorced when I was seven and I am divorced myself and have children. So I have a little bit of first hand experience in this realm.

Truelies points out that there are women in the world that use child support as a revenge mechanism, which I believe we all can agree on. Regs illustrates the true power of a dead beat dad which can mold a child in more ways than any of us really know. However, what is the real issue.

Many times, marriages and couples just dont work out and many times these couplings produce children. We use that word a little loosely because children are not just furniture or electronics they are humans with feelings and emotions that are hurt the worst when a relationship fails. When you have a child, whether you intend to or not, you have a responsibility to that child to give it the best chance at life you can. This means sacrificing card night, golf, video games, frivolous shopping, hours in front of the TV, etc. This is the time of your life you devote most of your time to your children to show them as much love and caring as possible. This is what is needed to make a child grow.

What is sad is that many times one, or even both, parents(if they can be called that) dont want to care for children for varied reasons. This may be the dad who divorces the mom and the kids at the same time or vice versa or someone who is young and scared. Let me ask you, whose life is more infringed by these decisions the parents or the children? Of course the children are the ones scared emotionally and for life.

The amount of money the courts require to be paid for child support today is outrageous. I currently pay around 42% of my gross income for child support and that is for two children. Now that is an amazingly large amount of money and I never paid that much when we were all living under the same roof even considering housing. I agree that the non-custodial parent should be required to pay some monetary value but the current value only empowers the custodial parent while weakening the other.

Now for the real problem. There are parents out there that do not show up on any dead beat list yet are just as much of a dead beat as the next person. These are the parents who pay their court ordered child support but never nurture and love their children. Children need money to have food and shelter but, the most important thing that children need is not quantifiable, it is love. Love is what children need more than anything and this is the most overlooked aspect of a dead beat parent. This is also something that no law can correct. This is where our society is wrong children grow up bitter because their parents didnt love them not because their parents didnt pay child support.

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 08:16 PM

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
Can we agree that, who ever runs it there needs to be jobs made for this and a better system put in place?

While I agree this is a large problem, I'm afraid we cant't legislate parenthood. Even if you think the governement should step in for this issue, someone else thinks their issue if more important. And on and on. Where would it end? We taxpayers do not have bottomless pockets and I think there is a limit as to what we, as taxpayers, should have to support.

We really need to curb government. We really need to have government not live way behind our means.

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 08:28 PM
I pay Child support. Yeah I have missed a couple due to slow time at work and hours being cut, but that does not stop me from giving her what she needs, ie Clothes, School, Supplies, Toys, whatever it may be, and when my hours picked back up I made missed ones up.

The thing that needs to be looked at is I do not get a Tax Break on these Payments, She does not have to claim this as income, so she does not have to pay taxes on them. She gets to claim our daughter on her Taxes, thus gets all those credits and freebies, so in essence she is making out Pretty Damn Good every Year. I give whatever I can over what I am supposed to pay by the courts, I am very involved in her life, and I have 14 more years to go, as it is now.

Regardless of Laws, I will take care of my daughter in any way I can. It might be an incentive for "Dead Beats" to pay if there is something in it for them. It sounds Mean and Greedy, but thus is some peoples lives.

If the payer would be able to claim this on their taxes, or get some kind of break, it might help this situation out, or the payee pays taxes on it as income which could be used for programs for single Moms and Dads. This needs to be addressed, I have not seen any Candidates comment, nor have a plan for this type of thing.

posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 07:26 PM
There was a big issue in England (Protests ect)

Not about dead beats but about the way the "System" works concernting fathers

It was mainly about how are NOT allowed to interact or see them as much as there Mothers regardless of what they do for the child (pay benifits ect)

No wonder 50% (or more) of mariges end in devorce when a parent of a child can become a lot better off

Also i have notised that with many devorce settlements the "Father" has to always pay the "Mother" or in the case of no children its the male who has to pay out

Also i believe that some courts can be rally stupid due to where a (Usually Father) has to pay 30-40% of their income and you can tell that the child dosnt benifit from all of it (E.g how many 10 year olds do you see getting the equivelent of this 30-40% being spent on THEM?) Its the parents job to provide the house utilities ect (such as heating) as it would probly cost the same due to them using the same ammout (maby a bit more) of energy regardless of the number of house occupants

Food would cost a bit more but not 30-40%

I believe that the majority of the child support money should be put into the childs OWN bank account and then be allowed access to it when they are 18 or so (so that the parent cannon take money out)

There are many stories in the paper about devorce and child benifits (especially celebs ex wifes, partners who didnt have to work but recieved massive payoffs + future payments for their "Living Expenses" that get more money in a month in these benifits that others could get in a year or more

(Please excuse my spelling mistakes it was very early in the morning)

[edit on 10-8-2004 by Crash]

posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 09:47 PM
The issue at the center of deadbeat parents (I am loath to say dad) really is abortion.

Mother wants child dad does not - Too bad dad, you have to pay
Mother does not want child and father does - Too bad dad, you kid is dead

Case closed. If women are so hard pressed to get payment, then they should also say that it is a "Couples" choice for an abortion, not a woman's.

I am for less government involvement in our lives. The federal government is riddled with halfwits and unqualified people. The last thing we need is more people on the payroll.


log in