Fathers' Rights, Child Support, Custody

After a long hiatus, the ANCPR Discussion Forum is now back online.  Please use it to post questions about your personal cases as well as to comment on anything you wish having to do with Family Law issues.  Just click on the Discussion Forum button above.

This issue always gets debated, and then just dropped.

With attention fully on the Vikings stadium issue, a bill that would change child custody proceedings for divorcing parents in Minnesota is quietly inching its way closer to the governor’s desk.

The latest version of HF322 would simply increase the presumed time each divorcing parent would get with his or her kids from 25 percent to 35 percent. (The remaining 30 percent of time would be figured out through mediation or divorce proceedings.) The Senate held a second reading of the bill Monday.

Rep. Peggy Scott, R-Andover, had initially authored the bill with more complex reforms that would affect the calculations of child support payments. She also wanted to create a presumption of true shared custody — at 45.1 percent for each parent. The bill also included a new concept for Minnesota law – virtual parenting time — and would have required courts to consider the use of wireless and video technology to help children remain connected to both of their parents. A version of her bill with these provisions passed the House last month by an 80-53 vote.

Those concepts don’t exist in the bill before the Senate. While Scott said that was somewhat disappointing, she would be happy with the passage of a bill that would take an incremental step toward shared custody. The percentages in law are just starting points for negotiations. But Scott said she felt 25 percent is too low, and encourages parents to fight too much in divorce proceedings to claim the remaining time with their children. A presumption of shared custody, she argued, would compel more constructive negotiations.

Not everyone agrees. In committee hearings, opponents argued that a presumption of shared custody is unrealistic and potentially harmful if it requires children to ping-pong back and forth between parents too much. They argued that a move toward shared custody might be easier on parents, but might not necessarily be in the best interests of their kids.

I notice that a lot of attorneys don’t see and increase.

CHICAGO, May 8, 2012 — /PRNewswire/ – This Mother’s Day, it appears that an increasing number of moms will be setting aside time to sign child support and alimony checks.   Overall, 56% of the nation’s top divorce attorneys say that they have seen an increase in the number of mothers paying child support during the past three years, while 47% also note a rise in women being responsible for alimony throughout the same time period, according to a recent survey of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML).

“The court system always ends up reflecting changes in our society and this is certainly the case with issues regarding who pays child support and alimony,” said Ken Altshuler, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.  “As more women achieve success on their career paths, they are also finding themselves increasingly responsible for financial obligations during and after the divorce process.”

In all, 56% of AAML members cited an increase in mothers who pay child support, while 44% said no change, and there was not an observed decrease.   Additionally, 47% have noticed an increase in the number of women paying alimony, while 53% said no change.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/05/08/4474906/more-women-paying-child-support.html#storylink=cpy

This article was written for NM, however, the same holds true wherever you are.  Be very careful about documenting everything concerning child support.  Be aware that some counties will actually not accept anything as proof, and so just charge the ncp with back child support.

Child support payments can become an extremely contentious issue among former partners. While non-custodial parents sometimes simply fail to pay their child support obligations, in other situations non-custodial parents pay child support regularly, but a vindictive custodial parent claims not to have received payment. For this and other reasons, it is important to keep accurate documentation and proof of every child support payment. Parents that chose not to document payments, or to pay in cash, face several serious consequences.

In general, New Mexico child support orders contain a mandatory wage withholding provision where child support payments are deducted directly from the non-custodial parent’s paycheck. However, certain child support orders do not contain a wage withholding provision. This can happen if the non-custodial parent is unemployed or self-employed or both parents and the court come to an agreement on a different payment method.

Problems often arise in these situations when a non-custodial parent pays child support and the custodial parent claims that they did not receive the payments. The most difficult problems occur when the non-custodial parent has paid child support in cash and there is no documentation of the payment ever being made. Documentation of payment can be in the form of cancelled checks, money order receipts signed by both parents, cash receipts signed by both parents, bank statements, or any other form of record that shows support was paid by one parent and actually received by the other parent.

The New Mexico Human Services Department’s Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED) enforces child support orders. If a dispute over payment of child support arises, under CSED regulations, the non-custodial parent has the burden of proving that payments were made; CSED does not have to prove that the non-custodial parent did not pay child support. If a parent cannot show proof of payment of child support, under CSED regulations child support has not been paid, the parent will not be given credit for undocumented payments, and CSED has the authority to obtain payment through several different methods, such as intercepting tax refunds.

If a non-custodial parent cannot prove that they paid their child support, then the custodial parent can initiate a CSED action to obtain the support payments that are allegedly due. If there is no possibility for wage garnishment because the parent is unemployed or self-employed, CSED may place a lien on property owned by the non-custodial parent, suspend driver’s and professional licenses, seize bank accounts, intercept federal and state tax refunds, and seek contempt fines and jail time.

Child support payments are also enforced under Federal Deadbeat Parent Punishment Act (“Deadbeat Dad Act”). Under the Deadbeat Dad Act, a parent that willfully fails to pay child support faces a prison sentence of up to two years and may be ordered to pay restitution.

In order to avoid having to prove child support payments should a custodial parent claim that payments were not received, a non-custodial parent can apply for CSED to collect and distribute payments. This will create a record of payments made by the non-custodial parent. Non-custodial parents who are self- employed may also be able to arrange for automatic funds transfers from their bank to CSED. Non-custodial parents often resist wage-withholding orders, but it can be the best way to ensure that they are given proper credit for all of their child support payments.

Child support issues can spiral out of control quickly, especially if one parent claims to have paid support and the other parent claims the contrary and if CSED is involved. For this reason, it is important to pay child support in a way that can be documented. If you are having problems with a former partner regarding child support payments, an experienced family law attorney will be able to identify your responsibilities under New Mexico law.

Another tragedy brought to you from the divorce courts of America.  If divorce and custody issues were handled from the perspective of parental rights to children, instead of best interest, these kinds of events would be fewer, since there would be less opportunity for enmity to escalate.

(Reuters) – A man California prosecutors say shot his ex-wife and seven other people to death in a Seal Beach hair salon in revenge over a child custody dispute was charged on Friday with first degree murder in their deaths.

Scott Evans Dekraai, 42, who is accused of carrying out the largest mass murder in the history of Orange County, was also charged with a single count of attempted murder, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas told a news conference in Santa Ana.

The lone survivor of Wednesday’s shooting rampage at Salon Meritage, 73-year-old Harriet Stretz, remains in critical condition at a hospital in nearby Long Beach.

An emotional Rackauckas announced he would seek the death penalty against Dekraai, who he said was targeting former wife Michelle Fournier, a stylist at Salon Meritage, in the shooting rampage.

“There are some crimes that are so depraved, so callous, so malignant, that there is only one punishment that will fit the crime,” Rackauckas said. “When a person in a case such as this goes on a rampage and kills innocent people in an indiscriminate bloody massacre, I will seek the death penalty.”

Dekraai made an initial court appearance on Friday afternoon, wearing a yellow Orange County Jail jumpsuit and handcuffs and shackled at the waist as he sat in a caged area.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Erick Larsh agreed to a request by Dekraai’s lawyer, Robert Curtis, to postpone the arraignment until November 28 so Curtis can assemble a defense team.

Curtis also asked the judge to order to ensure that Dekraai was given his medications, including two anti-psychotic drugs. Larsh said he could only order jail doctors to “do what is appropriate” for Dekraai’s medical conditions.

‘I HATE YOU!’

As Dekraai was being taken out of court, a woman in the audience shouted “I hate you! I hate you!” toward his back. Another man clutched a picture to his chest.

Prosecutors say Dekraai, who divorced Fournier, 48, in 2007 and was still battling her in court over custody of their young son, wanted revenge when he stormed into Salon Meritage and began shooting.

The former couple had been in court over the child custody issues on Tuesday and Rackauckas said the hearing apparently “didn’t go very well” for Dekraai. He said Dekraai and Fournier had argued over the phone on the morning of the rampage.

“We believe that the defendant committed this unimaginable act of violence because he wanted to kill his ex-wife over a custody dispute over their 8-year-old son,” Rackauckas said. “He was willing to end any life in his path, and he did.”

via Accused Seal Beach gunman sought revenge: prosecutor | Reuters.

This case clearly illustrates the difficulties faced by fathers of children whose mothers don’t want the child to know the father, and would rather get money from an adoption agency.  This story is truly ludicrous. The mother should be in jail.  The adoption agency should be out of business, and the judges in this case should all be hung from the nearest tree.

A Florida man’s court fight to gain custody of his daughter, given up for adoption after her January 2010 birth, may hinge on whether he is allowed to argue a state employee’s delay in registering his paternity notice violated his due process rights.

The Utah Supreme Court is now considering whether Ramsey Shaud, of Crestview, Fla., adequately argued in a lower court that his constitutional rights were violated by the delay at the Office of Vital Records and Statistics, caused in part by the state’s four-day workweek and a legal holiday.

Shaud is the latest in a string of unmarried fathers from across the country to make his way to Utah in hopes of undoing an adoption — in this case, of a child referred to as “Baby Girl T.” It will likely be months before the justices issue their opinion.

via Did Utah four-day work week cost dad rights to his child? | The Salt Lake Tribune.

No surprises here.  The courts simply will not look at the constitutional issues, nor do they particularly care about the issue of fairness.

The highest court in Massachusetts has rejected a challenge to child support guidelines that a fathers’ rights group say are unfair.

The Supreme Judicial Court today upheld a lower court judge’s decision to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Fathers & Families Inc. and about a dozen fathers against the state’s chief justice for administration and management, who promulgated the new guidelines in 2009.

via Mass. high court upholds child support guidelines – BostonHerald.com.

Glad to see Dear Amy sticking up for fathers.  Unfortunately, what this father is experiencing happens everyday, in the entire western world.  The political forces that are invested in the “mothers first” movement are simply too powerful for any progress to be made.  All a father can do is to know his rights, hire a good lawyer, and spend lots of money making sure his child doesn’t grow up forgetting who he is, due to the perfidious behavior of a truly selfish, self-absorbed mommy.

By Amy Dickinson ,QMI Agency

DEAR AMY: My longtime fiancee and I split up three months ago. It was her choice to split. We have a 20-month-old baby, and we are having a major disagreement about “visitation.”

The fact that a parent has “visitation” at all should be a thing of the past.

I am a father who took parental leave for three months to help raise our baby, and I have been a very involved father since her birth.

My ex and I work shift work on opposite shifts. My ex would rather send our baby to day care than have me take care of her. The day care shift my ex wants for our daughter would be from late afternoon to 10:30 p.m.

What do you think of the prospect of a 20-month-old being in day care, versus being with a parent?

My ex thinks our baby won’t fit in at school if she doesn’t attend day care. I understand the importance of her social development but not between the hours of dinner, bath and bedtime.

I grew up in a split family where I only saw my father every other weekend, and I don’t want that for my child. I truly believe that setup is outdated and fathers should have more rights! What say you? — Frustrated Father

DEAR FATHER: I agree with you on every front.

It is in the best interest of the child to spend as much time as possible with both parents, when both parents are committed, loving and involved — as you obviously are.

Parental care is preferable to day care, especially given the scenario you present in which a toddler would be away from home during dinner, evening, bath and bedtime.

Your child’s pro-social development can be encouraged through playgroups with other parents and toddlers and, later, a nursery school.

Your ex is using this as an excuse to deny your parental rights — and it’s absurd. You need to mediate a common-sense solution — one that is firmly focused on the child’s needs.

You could achieve this working with a mediator if your ex were being reasonable, but you should see a lawyer all the same.

I agree with you that the assumption that the child belongs with the mother with paternal “visitation” is an outmoded model, and I think the courts are moving slowly to recognize this.

via Dad stands up for his parental rights | Life | Toronto Sun.

Most fathers new to the divorce scene have no clue as to just how precarious their relationship with their own children really is.  It can be stripped from them by the stroke of a judges pen, just because mommy checked some little box on a form that said there was abuse in the home.  They don’t get that the assumption is that it is the father who is guilty of abuse, when as often as not, it is in fact the mother herself who is really the abusive and manipulative one.

Advocates explain that the leverage gained by a divorcing spouse who falsely accuses her spouse of abusing children or herself leads to a denial of due legal process to the victim of those lies.

September 04, 2011 /24-7PressRelease/ — The divorce process presents tremendous challenges for spouses who face questions about parental fitness or financial improprieties. One issue frequently raised by a spouse is serious accusations of domestic violence followed by petitions for restraining orders. Even if the abuse claim is shown to have been backed by false accusations, tremendous damage to an innocent person’s reputation may have already occurred.

Because spousal or child abuse claims are most frequently leveled against husbands by wives, fathers’ rights groups have sought help from Florida legislators to create legal consequences for those make false accusations in divorce cases. Advocates explain that the leverage gained by a spouse who falsely accuses her spouse of abusing children or herself leads to a denial of due legal process to the victim of those lies.

One national model for reform is the Partner Violence Reduction Act, which seeks to better distinguish the consequences of an allegation from a judicial finding, while making existing domestic violence laws more gender-inclusive. The most important goal seen by many is reducing the incentive for abuse of the legal process, because too many participants in family law disputes recognize that such allegations can be particularly powerful in the divorce context.

via Florida Fathers’ Rights Update: Legal Reforms for False Abuse Claims? – U.S. Politics Today – News Media Monitoring.

I saw this on Mens News Daily.  It is always amazing to me that the father has so little in the way of rights, but so much in the way of responsibility in these kinds of cases.  If the mother decides to abort, the father has no say.  If the mother decides to keep the baby, the father will be responsible for child support and more.  If the mother decides to give the child up for adoption, she can do it without the consent of the father.  Everything is up to her.

Apparently Utah’s laws on fathers’ rights are making it a haven for women who want to give babies up for adoption without the agreement of the fathers. This kind of consent by default is much like how men in California “accept” financial responsibility for kids that aren’t even theirs. In this case, fathers who want to raise the children have twenty days from notification to dispute the adoption.The man in the video was sent a text message from his girlfriend, who contacted an adoption agency in Utah without telling him, saying she was giving the baby up for adoption. She did not tell him when she went into labor. He had twenty days from that text to file for paternal rights to the baby. That sounds nice and official, right? By the time he knew his baby was in Salt Lake City with an adoptive family, the deadline had expired.The other man in the video had a girlfriend who lied about having a miscarriage, then later called him to say the baby was going to be born in Utah. A deadline he didn’t even know he had was already looming. I thought you’d be interested in this sort of inversion of paternity fraud and how Utah is screwing men who want to raise their children. The local government doesn’t seem to want to do much about it, either. The short video is here. There is also a longer Dateline special here.

via Birth Fathers Getting Babies Adopted Out From Under Them In Utah | Amy Alkon on MND.