Jack Pan - 11/30/97 17:00:03
I am glad that I find a site that really speaks for my voice.
Tim Hatchett - 11/30/97 02:45:54
I am a 34 year old father of five with two ex wives. I have temporary custody of two of them untill my upcoming court date. At wich time I will win full custody of those two. My other children are still with an unfit mother. I am also trying to get cu tody of them. In the mean time I am being charged by the State of Florida for AFDC and child support.
R. Barnes - 11/29/97 03:28:58
I'm sure that being a woman signing on in here, may raise some eyebrows, but I assure you that I am all for your fantastic web page. I have been divorced three times (not proud of that fact), have three children (all grown now), and have never been throu h what I am going through now with my fourth and final husband. He has an "EX" from hell that we have to deal with on a regular basis, due to his 13 year old son that lives with her. I had heard horror stories, from other people I knew, that had gotten divorce and were dealing with their "exs", but never thought I would actually have to deal with someone like that. Boy was I wrong! All I ever heard in the press was how so many fathers were not paying their child support payments, and how rotten they ll were. Well, I now live with a man that would give anything he owns, to have his son with him. He has fought over and over again in court to try and maintain his rights as a father to no avail, and he always has paid his CS pymts. on time. We have on y been married for 4 years and yet we have been taken to court, by the "Ex" on such trivial matters, more than 23 times. This is ludicrous! She is just trying to bankrupt us, I'm sure of it. I have never asked for child support for my children in the pa t (luckily my ex and I worked it all out in a grown up manner), and I just can't understand how our so called "Judicial System" can treat all these men in the manner that they do. Please keep up the good work. I know that my husband has found a good for m to check with, when times get bad.
Adina Greiner - 11/28/97 01:47:13
There is a book called Meta-Modern Era written by an Indian lady named Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi. In it, she talks about the problems of the world today. Regarding women-men relationships, she talks about the abuse of women in Islamic fundamentalism, and then she says about America: "In America, the family culture has gone to the other extreme. There, women rule the men and make them crazy." It is good to know that objective outsiders also see the same problem with America, when the politically correct fashion says otherwise.
Steve Wentworth - 11/26/97 01:16:34
State: South Carolina
Very interesting information.
Bill Granger - 11/23/97 19:36:52
Sure would appreciate ANY insight from anybody regarding the Maryland and Virginia legal systems. My child is resident of MD but ex to be has her in VA. I'm fighting for 50/50 but she disagrees and attorney says judge won't order. ANY help out there?
Donna Jaffke - 11/23/97 07:02:14
State: SC but want to know about IN
We have faithfully paid child support through the years. One child is graduating from college in Dec. She is 22. Another child is a sophmore in college and she is 19. We get to stop (finally) paying support on the oldest when she graduates. College by he way was not in the divorce decree. Now my husbands ex is saying that she is taking him back to court to have support DOUBLED. Can she do this? Thank You Donna Jaffke
Tiffany - 11/23/97 01:10:44
Great page! It made me laugh....it made me cry....thank you!
Christine Mauras - 11/22/97 16:28:03
I want to congratulate you on such a well thought out and informative site. I am a supporter of Father's rights. Being raised by my Dad, I have come to develop an understanding of the role a Father plays in the upbringing of his child. It is not only be eficial, but imparitive to the well being of a child. Keep up the good work!! If there is anything that I can do to help support Father's Rights, please do not hesitate to contact me at my email address. Sincerely, Christine Mauras Support Father's Rights
- 11/21/97 01:45:46
In California, and many other states, CS is based on after-tax income. To minimize CS, take all income-generating funds and pay down the mortgage. This reduces income *and* increases taxes, both of which reduce after-tax income. Since the NCP gets no credit for living expenses, he might as well minimize them by paying off the mortgage entirely or by living with a relative. Note that in CA, the CP's income has very little bearing on the CS formula unless the NCP has more than a 20% time share. Computing CP's income is thus pointless. Please don't cite me as the source for any of the above, but these facts are clear to anyone who knows the CA guidelines in any detail. Feel free to private email me with any questions.
patty - 11/19/97 08:00:04
State: New Jersey
I am a second wife and therefore suffering by default at the hands of the family court system. My husband is forced to pay huge support, $433 per week and yet he never sees his kids. The courts do not care about me or our 3 yr old daughter, just the 3 kids from the first marriage. I am very angry and bitter about the whole system. I only hope our m rriage survives the latest round of court battles. Keep up the good work. maybe some day if enough guys complain, things will change.
Stephen A. Swisher - 11/19/97 05:49:30
Louis Rouleau - 11/17/97 02:03:51
Thank you for this wonderful and timely service! My coparent (x g-friend) moved my son from Massachusetts to Missouri 6 years ago. I've been sending child support and trying all this time to visit with him and play a nurturing role. His mother has been denying all visitation for the past 2.5 years. I moved to Tennessee for work and to be closer to my dream of being a supportive father to my boy. I finally have an attorney; still I am sure she will try other 'extreme' behaviours. Again Thank you very much for this valuable forum.
Linda - 11/16/97 18:25:41
Its really coming along. Good work!
Joe - 11/16/97 17:40:31
State: Soc. Republic ofTaxachusetts
N.O.W. saying the courts (family) are biased is like hearing an obease person saying they never have enough food to eat. They both may be right, but not in the way they are thinking.
Richard C Redus - 11/16/97 16:44:44
Sherilyn - 11/16/97 16:11:06
Your web page is great and I amdire what you have done with it! I agree that the system is exploited and that it is biased. I've seen too many women that take a man for everything and the courts let her get away with it! I personally am divorced but ha not kids (thank god) but I feel that if we had I would have accepted my ex raising the kids... after all we only fought with "you keep it! No, you keep it!" There are too many women that feel they should be given everything and expect the man to give it to them, even if they make more than him. While I can understand the biological bond of a mother and her children the father does have an emotional bond that is very strong also. After all, we bond to our mates right? I don't think I imagined the nervo s breakdown I had when he left me. The fathers should have rights and do have a right to raise their children just as much as the mother does. While joint custody is the best, it is not always possible.
The Father's Role in Society - 11/14/97 09:14:57
The Father's Role in Society by Daniel Amneus, Ph.D. A conference was called by (Calif.) Governor Wilson because of the widespread concern about crime, educational failure, drugs, social decay, etc. and the perception that these are connected with family breakdown, in particular with the erosion of the weakest link in the family, the father's role. Anthropologist Margaret Mead has emphasized that, unlike the mother's role, which is biologically based, the father's role is a social creation. Male dogs and cats have no reproductive importance after their minuscule sexual performance is over. The emergence of a similar male rolelessness in the inner cities was becoming apparent some decades ago and is now becoming obvious in the larger society. At present the law appears to be less concerned with how to strengthen families than with how to provide for ex-families or fatherless families created by Illegitimacy. It is becoming better understood that these fatherless families breed most of the criminal and underachieving classes. Many politicians think the problem is one of punishing the male criminals generated by such fatherless families--building more prisons, hiring more police, passing "three-strike" laws, squeezing money out of ex-husbands ("deadbeat dads") for the purpose of subsidizing ex-wives or ex-girlfriends and "their" children. Success in providing for these fatherless families means there will be more of them, that fathers will become still less needed and less motivated, and in consequence there will be further weakening of families and more of the resulting pathology this conference is concerned about. The weakening of male motivation means less male productivity, less male willingness to undertake family responsibilities, more fatherless families, more fatherless children, more crime, less economic growth. A society which cannot motivate its men to be family providers will deteriorate, as ours is doing. A society which threatens husbands with a fifty percent divorce rate combined with virtually automatic loss of children and home and property is forfeiting this motivation. It is too little understood how male motivation is related not only to family and social stability but to the economic growth of society. Thanks to family stability and the male motivation it created, the twenty years following World War II were a period of astonishing, indeed unprecedented, growth. America's industrial plant, already the wonder of the world during the war, doubled during those twenty years, the GNP grew 250 percent and per capita income increased 35 percent between 1945-1960--as much as it had during the previous half century. Joseph Satin could say, "Never had so many people been so well off." William Baumol could say, "The future can be left to take care of itself." That was when families were stable--and headed by fathers. America's prosperity was based on growth, not on trying to pinch budgets here and there, to squeeze one program in order to finance another, to borrow from next year's revenues. As family stability eroded, so did the growth. In 1989, "Sixty Minutes" ran a program called "New York Is Falling Apart," showing streets sinking into the ground, bridges collapsing, Mayor Koch closing the Williamsburg Bridge on the grounds that it is "better to be inconvenienced and safe than to be convenienced and dead." Judith Wallerstein says only half of the male students she followed in her study of divorced families completed college, forty percent of the young men were drifting - on a downward educational course, out of school, unemployed. When so many of them have seen their fathers expelled from the homes they bought for their families, when they themselves face the same fifty percent chance of divorce and the loss of their children and their role, they wonder why they should work as their fathers and grandfathers did in the years after the War. If you ask a man why he works at his job, he will bring out his wallet and show you pictures of his family. This motivation has been weakened even for the lucky fifty percent who still have families. Males have lost confidence that society wants them to be heads of families rather than providers for ex-families. This is what men hear when President Clinton tells them, "We will find you. We will make you pay." Most men still would like to be fathers, but our society is giving them little assurance that they can have families--that they will be able to spend their own paychecks to provide for their own families rather than to subsidize ex-wives and pay for other things judges and bureaucrats deem proper. A judge will try a divorce case in the morning and place the children in the mother's custody. He will try a criminal case in the afternoon and send a man to prison for robbing a liquor store. The chances are three out of four that the criminal he sends to prison grew up in a female headed household just like the one he himself created that morning when he tried the divorce case. He can't see any connection between the two cases. The reason he can't is the time lag. The children he placed in the mother's custody were perhaps toddlers who would not yet rob liquor stores or breed illegitimate children. But they will grow older. They will become teenagers, boys capable of committing crimes of violence, girls capable of breeding illegitimate children. And then the chickens will come home to roost. In 1980, crime increased by a startling seventeen percent. L.A. Police Chief Daryl Gates was flabbergasted. Nothing in the economy, he said, could account for such an increase. What did account for it was the huge increase in divorce and illegitimacy in the mid-1960s--plus the anti-male bias of the divorce courts which changed the father headed families into female headed families. The judges who placed the children in these families hoped they could force the fathers they exiled to subsidize the families they destroyed--to pay to have their children brought up in female headed households where they were more likely to be abused, neglected, impoverished, delinquent and sexually confused. They would like to blame the fathers for their own inability to create an alternative to the family. The welfare system is equally responsible for subsidizing (therefore creating) female headed households. Like the divorce court judges, welfare bureaucrats would like to make biological fathers pay. They fail to understand what Margaret Mead explained, that fatherhood is not a matter of biology but a social creation. If these (merely) biological fathers are to pay, they must become (or be allowed to remain) real fathers in Mead's sense, men with a role such as that taken away from ex-husbands by the divorce court. They need to be given better motivation than "We will find you. We will make you pay." This latter motivation will not create real fathers. Real fathers must be created, as Mead says, by society. Our society is doing the opposite--destroying millions of fathers through its divorce courts and its welfare system. Much of the social breakdown now going on is the result of the attempt to find taxpayer-funded alternatives and ex-husband-funded alternatives to fatherhood, the creation of which must always be one of society's primary responsibilities. The anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski said that if the family ever ceases to be the pivotal institution of society, we shall be confronted with a social catastrophe compared to which the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution are insignificant. There is no substitute for it. We should stop trying to find one and recognize that the weakness of today's family is the consequence of society's failure to support the father's role, the role most in need of society's support. The biological weakness of the father's role is not a reason for throwing fathers out of the family but a reason for strengthening their role within it. A Georgia judge named Robert Noland routinely places children in the mother's custody when he tries a divorce case, and justifies what he does by saying, "I ain't never seen a calf following a bull. They always follow the cow. So I always give custody to the mamas." The reason Judge Noland never saw a calf following a bull is that cattle don't live in two-parent households. If we want to live like cattle, Judge Noland has the right idea. - Daniel Amneus, Ph.D. Dr. Amneus is author of The Garbage Generation and The Case for Father Custody.
George Racin - 11/13/97 11:19:30
State: West Virginia
I need to find support group in West Virginia. Apparently a law was just passed in June that increased my CS (for 1 child) to one-quarter of my income!
George Racin - 11/13/97 11:00:30
Glad to see that a web site like this exists!
Tracy Hornschuch - 11/12/97 17:04:10
Good work Val... It's a tough battle, and fathers should not give up. Keep up the good work...
Mark Offenbacher - 11/11/97 03:00:41
I have screwed time and time again by the courts. Even winning at the Court of Appeal has meant nothing. The judge just ignores the ruling and does what he wants anyway and forces me to spend thousands to go back to the higher court to overturn him.
i>Sounds like a candidate for the Wall of Shame---Val
Carl Lachenmayer - 11/10/97 15:44:10
Great page. Most helpful. Good resource, good reading.
David Wightman - 11/10/97 12:37:17
I have headed a support group for the past 6 years. We have worked for change and worked on ledgislation, in addition to the weekly suport group that we get two or three new men visiting each week. The suport group has been in existance since 1980.
Tim Robertson - 11/10/97 01:39:29
John Singewald - 11/09/97 01:43:47
I have two children about to turn 18 mom went on welfare, she has a three bedroom home she pays 200 per month curtesty of HUD/ She also has a very lucrative antique business where she makes about 400 per week.She has been on welfare since seperation. Duri g four years of my life I was a dry cleanning presser making 6.00 per hour. I had no money after taking care of myself to help in support during those four years I raked up a 50,000 bill to the county she gets welfare from. For the last ten years I've bee paying 900 per month yet cant touch that arrearage which by the way is getting tagged with interest...I remaired and worked my but off had another child and this time fought the courts for all it was worth to win full custody of my young 5 year old boy.. ...I've been an active opponet to this corupt system for years talking to everyone I meet....Unfortunately Im not sure I will ever be able to surmount this debt...probably go to the grave with it...........Thanks for the page good to know others who belie e and fight as I DO.....JOHN
Tony Wright - 11/09/97 00:35:00
My ex used her union supplied attorney to sue me for back child support, for a period of time that we were living together. It cost her nothing, and cost me $2000 to loose another $5000. Trust no one. I now represent myself in all matters and will neve give an attorney another dime. Nobody knows my story the way I know it.
But in most cases, it's still highly advisable to talk to a lawyer. The Dad may not know the law the way the lawyer knows it. --Val
Joe Leg - 11/08/97 18:35:03
The only one that makes out in a divorce is the lawyers. Stop suppoting them, Represent yourself, and kick ass!!!!
Mel Wilde - 11/07/97 00:22:13
State: Alberta, Canada
Canada has recently adopted rules very similar to that in the USA. I think the feminists working in the Justice Department in Ottawa used this as a model. Progress? Maybe the horror stories (the rules with examples) should be shared with high school, college and university students so they know what they into. This will affect them far more than most of their classes ever will. We don't have a system of Justice ... we have a Legal System! The difference is huge.
Bill - 11/05/97 15:56:07
Need to find out more info on childsupport and if im paying too much... Please if you know of anybody who can help let me know.......
Check under "minimizing child support" on this site--Val
Jim Moore - 11/05/97 15:26:53
I am a Custodial Father and have had Sole Custody of my 11 year old son since August of 1993. Since then I have been dragged back into court by my ex numerous times on a whim, thus being forced to pay exorbidant attorneys fees/court costs, loss of wages e c. I strongly believe a BIAS DOES EXIST IN THE COURT SYSTEM favoring the WOMAN.
Kendall Bridges - 11/05/97 01:13:41
I am very pleased with the information I have learned from your site. I am going to the father's right's organization in Colorado and see what I can do about my situtaion. Thanks for the help, it's a relief to know that most dad's are being taken for a ride.
Debra Hart - 11/04/97 21:32:01
My brother lost custody of his 4 children in Louisiana to his charismatic Christian ex. Family court in Baton Rouge put a church counselor in charge. Women were in control of the whole circus. Result: The "world's best Dad" had a 30min visit with them onc this year.
Grayson Walker - 11/04/97 03:24:15
Good job. Please visit the web page of Parents Without Rights.
Larry Rogers - 11/03/97 15:43:39
MA guidelines, as far as I know are the worst in the nation. I am currently paying a woman with a CPA and Masters degree nearly half my pay for one child while she keeps all she earns and works when she wants. You are 100% right in fighting this. Women do not deserve to get rich in the name of children.
John W. Makin - 11/03/97 06:15:12
Arizona is my home state, I live in South Africa working in the hotel industry. I am divorced and have two children in Arizona of whom I am denied Several basic rights as a father without any Knowlage of recorse. I am happy to have found your service on t e web and am anxious to begine my search for answers as well as to add my voice to this group Fathers.
Robert Alpert - 11/03/97 05:55:42
Greg Narron - 11/03/97 05:52:46
You are right! I wish that there was some way to safeguard my child's money and make it just for him only!
Tom Viveiros - 11/03/97 05:27:57
Have more horror stories about child support issues than Tales from the Crypt.
Patrick Henry - 11/03/97 04:44:53
This site is great!!! It's time for revolution, time for justice. Why overthrow the system when we can underthrow it! Drive the Feds, States and County governments into bankruptcy.
David J. Hebert - 11/02/97 23:47:21
GREAT PAGE KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
Janet - 11/01/97 22:56:54
Checking this out to help my son.
Mark - 11/01/97 17:22:38
Great page! Only wish I had known of it 11 years ago, as I'm coming (I hope) to the end of 11 years of unfair treatment by the court system, and a vindictive ex! Keep up the good work, us fathers need the support!
Minh Phan - 11/01/97 15:12:45
State: Ontario (Canada)
1st time visit. Going through a divorce myself. My daughter is only 3-months-old on Monday.
DAVE MACKEY - 11/01/97 03:15:53
My Email:NONE YET
Jerry Moore - 10/31/97 21:57:08
I pay my Support, never behind, I agree about somethings I read here, I but extra things to send home with them cause I feel they don't get enough things with the money(not toys) But the mothers do have to keep a roof over there heads also. Everyone have nice day things will be better in the furture! I hope LOL
ANGELA TENNIS - 10/31/97 17:43:30
Albert E. Whale - 10/31/97 00:36:58
Thanks for a great site on Capitol Hill! Come visit the Father's Rights Network from my Custody page! Kids need Fathers .... NOT Visitors!
Dave - 10/30/97 05:03:09
COOL AND INFORMATIVE SITE
Nick Herren - 10/29/97 23:20:35
Jim Unger - 10/29/97 21:39:47
This is a good addition to the web. We need more resources such as yours, since our stories will typically never get coverage in the feminist biased media.
Gary Folger - 10/29/97 05:26:38
Thanks for putting your time into this site. Gary
Lawrence J. Swearingen - 10/28/97 18:28:26
Let's defeat the unjust in this nation!!!
J.R. Seitz - 10/28/97 04:25:39
From what I've seen on your home page... I've finally started finding a resource.... THANK YOU!
Daniel Vestecka - 10/24/97 23:38:33
Rose Petty - 10/23/97 23:28:06
Great page, keep up the good work. Rose
MICHAEL DAVIDSON - 10/23/97 16:54:42
My Email:PP BOY 71