Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Supreme Court Clarifies for Mothers the Very Real Limits of Restraining Orders

High Court Nixes Restraining-Order Suits

Justices Protect Police from Legal Action over Enforcement

Monday, June 27, 2005; Posted: 4:41 p.m. EDT (20:41 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court ruled Monday that police cannot be sued for how they enforce restraining orders, ending a lawsuit by a Colorado woman who claimed police did not do enough to prevent her estranged husband from killing her three young daughters.

Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to police enforcement of the court order against her husband, the court said in a 7-2 opinion.

In a dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said that the woman's "description of the police behavior in this case and the department's callous policy of failing to respond properly to reports of restraining order violations clearly alleges a due process violation."

"The restraining orders are not worth anything unless police officers are willing to enforce them. They are just paper," said Brian Reichel, the attorney for Gonzales. "If nothing else this case has shined the spotlight on a very important issue."



If Judges ever lie awake at night pondering past rulings this will be one of the cases that keep them thinking long into the wee hours of the morning, for it is truly a tragedy of our modern age. A woman marries a dangerous man bears him three children and then attempts to leave. She is given ALL the help our society has to offer from supervised visitation of the children to the infamous ‘restraining order’ and YET he still manages in a final, bloody, spite-fueled and heinous act, to violate the order, take the three children and subsequently murder all of them. It’s his final deadly act of revenge against his estranged wife.

As always in these tragedies, we look for some meaning, reasonable explanation, something or someone that can be assigned blame. Not just for reasons of punishment although that is part of it, but more so I believe to assure that this does NOT happen again. To convince ourselves, in spite of some evidence to the contrary, that we are in complete charge of our destiny and are capable to handle whatever life throws at us, come hell or high water…

Unfortunately in the case of Jessica Gonzales and her family, this did not prove to be the case. She put her faith in the ‘system’ and the system failed, as it often does and probably will continue to in the future. For ultimately women have to be aware that a restraining order is NOTHING MORE THEN A PIECE OF PAPER…only as good as the greater society’s willingness to follow it’s dictate. For law enforcement in the field to ENFORCE it’s provisions and mostly for the person it’s served against to FOLLOW the rules as it lays them out…otherwise as many women have found out to their sorrow, restraining orders are pretty much useless.

Today everybody and his grandmother is having restraining orders placed against one another and they mostly appear to have morphed into a tool used by enterprising lawyers and their clients to get the jump on an adversity in a divorce/custody case or any case really involving property issues of one kind or another where the first one to get a restraining order ‘wins’ due to the long held legal principal of “possession being 99% of the law”. Thus a restraining order barring your adversity from the property is a tool now of negotiation as opposed to a legal restraint against a dangerous individual. Actually the people who follow restraining orders without question are probably the least likely to need having one issued against them.

I, myself, was threatened with a restraining order for sending too many emails to someone in one of those internet ‘flame wars’ when I discovered they had allowed my personal information, including my picture, to be posted on an unfriendly website. So instead of being a victim I instantly morphed into the victimizer, through this clever ‘bait and switch’ tactic that was used against me.

Thus, we can see that the use of restraining orders has now mushroomed to the point that it’s probably a physical impossibility to expect the local police department to be able to monitor the use and misuse of them. Colorado, which is NOT a small state, probably has Judges issuing thousands of restraining orders covering couples fighting over custody to neighbors disputing property lines, loud music or Christmas tree lighting issues. Thus, I’m sorry to say how were the police to know this was the one time out of 10,000 where a restraining order was issued against an extremely dangerous individual and that they needed to put out an Amber Alert to locate him and the children.

Short answer, they couldn’t know.

Same issue with parental abductions now btw, for the mothers who don’t know this yet. As many mothers have told me that the police in their states have become so immune to hearing about abductions by the other parent now, that mothers who sent their kids for a visit to their fathers and never get them returned are routinely met with a yawn when they go to file a complaint and directions to hire their own attorney to handle this.

So mothers be prepared.

I wish it was different. I wish that there had been something that could have been done if not to help this mother and her children, to help the next ones, as there will surely be others. The only thing I can say that applies and hopefully it won’t sound like blaming the mother here is that women MUST take great care in who they marry and/or have children with today. I’m not sure if enough of us retain this age-old, simple, common-sense way of ordering our lives anymore. I mean I hate to say this but sometimes I get the sense that many women no longer take the care they should in choosing a future spouse or father for their children. Perhaps there is a feeling amongst many of us that because we live in a world safe from 4-legged predators, the elements and plague in marvelous cities, with accessible public transportation, supermarkets and a hospital, library or precinct on practically every other corner, that we are invincible from ANY harm.

Remember there are STILL dangers that lurk out there especially for unwary women, the smaller, less aggressive and generally physically weaker of our species.

STILL…danger exists...

Bringing an aggressive, violent man into your life and allowing him to become the father of your future children can turn into a mistake that there is NO recovery from…

NONE…

So you not only place yourself in danger, but any offspring that he spawns, as with or without marriage men today have the exact same legal rights as you to any children you birth…the moment the children are born your sole legal rights are lost…those children are no longer yours to protect and legally a court can rule that the man you picked as a father (no matter how dangerous he is) has the same or MORE access to them then you do…

Women in their role as mothers need to keep these facts in mind for future reference.

As this Supreme Court decision makes clear, care MUST be taken BEFORE this becomes an issue.

37 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are a whore who should get back into the kitchen and make men a sandwich to show your gratitude for making your life so much easier.

NYMOM said...

I was going to immediately erase your comment but decided to leave it up to give mothers another example of the sort of monsters that 'lurk' in wait for them if they are not careful...

Blahger said...

NYMOM,
I would like my sandwich with extra mayo. BTW, why do you erase blogs? That seems so cowardly. Real men wouldn't do such a thing.

Anonymous said...

Agreed.
Opinions should stay in any forum unless they maliciously threaten physical harm, property harm, or ignore well thought out responses by the site owner (or supporting members)

Standing up to scrutiny is what creates crediblity.

Anonymous said...

I dont know why ppl bother to come to this site as it is obvious you are another feminazi who deletes comments you dont like, are 'hateful', or say something you cant spin or distory.

NYMOM said...

"Agreed.
Opinions should stay in any forum unless they maliciously threaten physical harm, property harm, or ignore well thought out responses by the site owner (or supporting members)

Standing up to scrutiny is what creates crediblity."



I see and you think that I should waste time with a 'well-thought out response' to a jerk who posts anonymously, calls me a 'whore' and wants me to make him a 'sandwich with extra mayo'... that, in your opinion, would be a good example of me 'standing up to scrutiny' and creating credibility???

If you truly believe that, then you're a bigger jerk then he is...

So just to give you a hint: you and him are BOTH about to be deleted if you continue with this stupidity...

Chris Key said...

NYMOM Said: "Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!"


Chris Key Says: Very true, as chimpanzees possess efficient spatial skills; allowing the chimpanzee to analyse and interpret data from the outside world and being to invent numerous tools in order to survive within that environment. Females in general possess poor spatial skills and do not possess the intellectual skills that are required to advance technology through the invention of new products; which is why 95% of inventions have been invented by males.

NYMOM Said: Exactly we [women] are a HIGHER level life form...


Chris Key Says: Obviously that explains why 95% of inventions have been invented by males and why 13 out of every 14 persons who possesses an IQ over 160 happen to be male.

NYMOM said...

NYMOM Said: "Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!"

I do NOT believe I ever said this...you slightly changed the wording to make your point...What site did I say this on as I will go back and check myself...it doesn't even sound like the sort of wording I would use...



NYMOM Said: Exactly we [women] are a HIGHER level life form...


This clearly was a sarcastic remark that I do recall making, but it was in reply to another similar remark; NOT to the above post as you are trying to make it appear...

Please stop trying to make false points by taking part of one post and then part of another one and mashing them together, like they were consecutive one following another...

It's a very cheap stunt...

NYMOM said...

"Obviously that explains why 95% of inventions have been invented by males and why 13 out of every 14 persons who possesses an IQ over 160 happen to be male."

AND btw, even if this is true, (it could be) still it means nothing...as Orientals have far higher IQs then most Americans, much longer history, more inventions, earlier discoveries of writing, gunpower, waterpower, paper, agriculture, etc., YET the United States (heir to the European tradition which was really the last race of people to even settle down and start farming) YET WE rule the WORLD...

Okay...

I don't think that anyone could argue that point...

Yet following your logic China or Japan should be the world's leader and we should be following humbly behind them...

Thus I don't listen to eggheads who think they know everything because all the dots match up on the computer chip or some such crap...it's all so freakin logical YET frequently does not work or make much sense when subject to the test of real life...

Okay...

So go back to your computer keypad and try to figure that equation out...

Chris Key said...

NYMOM Said: AND btw, even if this is true, (it could be) still it means nothing...as Orientals have far higher IQs then most Americans, much longer history, more inventions, earlier discoveries of writing, gunpower, waterpower, paper, agriculture, etc., YET the United States (heir to the European tradition which was really the last race of people to even settle down and start farming) YET WE rule the WORLD...

Chris Key Says: The USA developed a stronghold over the world due to the fact that the American Government imported a large amount of highly educated and intellectual persons from Europe and Asia during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. It was the persons that the USA imported who were able to revolutionise the USA. The difference between USA and the Asian nations is that the USA is a very socialist/totalitarian state which collects money from the people and distributes that money into the various institutions which focus on developing a strong economy and the advancement of technology.

However since the majority of persons in the USA happen to be female along with the fact the USA is a democratic state the political parties within the USA have been forced to obtain the support of the female population in order to be elected into office as females outnumber males; and within a democracy the political parties need to obtain the support of the majority if they wish to be elected into office.

As a result the political parties within the USA have had to enforce a socialist/totalitarian system which appeals to the feminists and that system has taken power away from the people and given even MORE power to the Government. The amount of money that the USA Government has collected from the people and distributed into feminist institutions in order to obtain the support of females has been so great that the USA economy is beginning to weaken.

The education system within the USA has become a fascist institution where the Government and feminists have altered the curriculum so that socialist/feminist ideologies are instilled into the minds of the youth; producing a generation of uneducated persons who are dependent on the Government. This has resulted in a greater amount of persons exiting the education system and workforce and therefore caused a lesser amount of persons who are qualified to work within the engineering, science, IT and other important industries.

As a result the USA has been forced to import qualified persons from India and China to work within those industries; causing the USA to LOSE money and allowing China and India to GAIN money. Within 20-30 years the Indians and Chinese will probably lead the world’s economy.






NYMOM Said: Okay...

I don't think that anyone could argue that point...

Yet following your logic China or Japan should be the world's leader and we should be following humbly behind them...

Thus I don't listen to eggheads who think they know everything because all the dots match up on the computer chip or some such crap...it's all so freakin logical YET frequently does not work or make much sense when subject to the test of real life...

Okay...

So go back to your computer keypad and try to figure that equation out...

Chris Key Said: The result of World War 2 was the major reason as to why USA became a global superpower and why Japan remained a weakened state.

NYMOM said...

Can I be honest with you Chris Key...

I'll read your entire response tomorrow and reply as I'm too tired tonight...BUT from my initial glance through it...it appears to be hogwash...

But I'll reply tomorrow...

Chris Key said...

NYMOM Said: Can I be honest with you Chris Key...

I'll read your entire response tomorrow and reply as I'm too tired tonight...BUT from my initial glance through it...it appears to be hogwash...

But I'll reply tomorrow...

Chris Key Says: The statements you tend to make are mostly unsubstantiated, fallacious, bigotry, delusional, erratic and illogical. If you bothered to offer some conclusive evidence to substantiate your extreme claims then people would be more willing to listen to your points of view.

Chris Key said...

NYMOM Said: "Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!"

I do NOT believe I ever said this...you slightly changed the wording to make your point...What site did I say this on as I will go back and check myself...it doesn't even sound like the sort of wording I would use...

Chris Key Says: At another forum there was a topic in which one of the members stated the following;

Here's some quotes of her (NYMOM).


QUOTE
"Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!"

Exactly we [women] are a HIGHER level life form...

At least you finally admitted it...

Men are disease-carrying pedophiles...

Chris Key Says: Based on how that person quoted you, I assumed that you had made the entire statement; however after performing a search of; “Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!” at Google I was able to find a link back to Trish Wilson’s site which shows the exact location of the original comment and it appears that you DID NOT write that comment. As a result I would like to apologise and make it clear that NYMOM NEVER said the following:

“"Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!"

It appears that some one called; “tttwtanbtt” stated the following:

Maybe the REALITY is that women are parasites on men, and children are merely the mechanism by which they attempt to secure their own attachment to the host!
Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!
What a thought! ;-))

NYMOM then stated the following:

"Bearing in mind, of course, that genetically speaking, females are more different from men than chimpanzees!"
Exactly we are a HIGHER level life form...
At least you finally admitted it...

gazpacho said...

NYMOM Said: AND btw, even if this is true, (it could be) still it means nothing...as Orientals have far higher IQs then most Americans, much longer history, more inventions, earlier discoveries of writing, gunpower, waterpower, paper, agriculture, etc.

Not to nitpick, but you are comparing "Orientals" a large and somewhat vaguely defined ethnic group encompassing many nations and cultures, many of which no longer exist, and going back thousands of years, to America - a nation of people with many different ethnic backgrounds which was founded just over 200 years ago. I think most humans knew about writing, agriculture, etc. by 1776.

However, I would like to point out that although America "rules the world," people of Asian background are extremely well-represented and even outnumber white people in many science and technology professions. Furthermore, there is generally a strong correlation between an Asian background and the top performers in American public schools. So yes, there DOES seem to be some truth to this argument, and it's worth considering since it's exactly these types of statistical demographics that are used as evidence of the alleged "oppression" of women.

Though I must say your comment about the "dots connecting" on a "computer chip" or "some such crap," as well as your use of the term "eggheads" makes me suspect you have a strong prejudice against those more intelligent than you. That is not a healthy attitude for anybody to have. Not only is it offensive to intelligent people, it will prevent you from reaching your own potential.

NYMOM said...

Chris I read your response and just as I suspected it's a lot of baloney...

The US taxing people and then giving a few dollars to a couple of womens' organizations has NOTHING to do with what I was talking about, as if we actually look at the numbers (which I'm not going to bother doing, you can if you wish) I bet it's a very small percentage of the overall US economy. Even this nonsense about women getting more degrees them men is more hype then reality...as the degrees women are gettting are still in ALL the low paying fields such as teaching, social work, daycare, nursing, etc.,

Actually I work in an Ivy league university and I can tell you right now MOST of them will have a problem even paying back their student loans at the salaries their professions pay, never mind having the impact you imagine on the US leadership position in the world.

NOR does the few immigrants from India and/or China that went into the tech industries(which still constitute a very small percentage of our overall population) have anything to do with our leadership position either...

How would it even explain, for instance, that the US inherited the mantle of world leader from the British????

In fact immigration has nothing to do with what I was talking about whatsoever.

I suspect that you yourself probably work in some industry where you come into contact very frequently with these immigrants in their tech positions and like most people who spend a LOT of time with others similar to themselves, you have an overinflated sense of the importance of these people and industries to the role of the US as world leader.

In fact, the importation of these people to take jobs from Americans has NOTHING to do with the US leadership role. In fact, if anything it might eventually undermine it...

NYMOM said...

"Chris Key Said: The result of World War 2 was the major reason as to why USA became a global superpower and why Japan remained a weakened state."

Japan remained in a 'weakened state'...

Well right there I can see you're anti-American as Japan (like Germany) has NEVER had it so good...Japan is actually one of the leaders of the WORLD not just Asia (China being their only rival in Asia) and this in spite of Japan's small size and lack of any natural resources.

BOTH Japan and Germany were treated far far better then the US would have been if the situation had been reversed and we had lost the war.

BOTH Japan and Germany have been allowed to obtain previously unheard of economic success, political stability and social progress especially Japan, and they have the US to thank for it...

The US, by it's actions after WWII, really set the standards for chivalry (a much misused concept today) by our magnanimous treatment of two such ferocious enemies...

So if you know anybody from Japan tell them they should be bowing everytime they pass an American flag, same with Germans...it should be part of their constitutions...

Now Chris, let's end this right now...

Because I see either an argument coming when you make a reply to this post which is going to aggravate me AND more importantly, this is a site for women in their role as mothers which I have created for LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE to get together and discuss what can be done to stem the tide of negativity that has been unleashed by men like you against mothers...

Okay...

Thanks.

So if you have anything POSITIVE to add about mothers fine... otherwise shut it up...

Again, thanks.

NYMOM said...

"Men are disease-carrying pedophiles..."


This, of course, as you know I never said...I've never used the word pedophiles until today (not knowing how to spell it even and not really wanting to bother looking it up either)...

It's not really a word I would have need of on this site...believe it or not...

I don't sit around all day posting stories about the horrible crimes men commit, in spite of what you think or do on other blogs. I will post a story about some horrible crime committed by anyone IF it has some other intrinisic value within it that a mother could read here and pull some useful information out of...

For instance, in the Jerica Rhodes murder case, I posted that story here NOT because it was a man murdering a child; BUT because the manner in which the man got access to the child was through a judically-sanctioned abduction...

Many mothers do NOT even have any idea of that concept or that it could even happen to them...so that story highlights an important new development in family law that has really been sneaked in through the back door and very little is really known about it.

So that's the purpose of the memorial post on this site...and also the humane one, now that Jerica's mother contacted me herself, of honoring her mother and the brief life of the little girl herself...

But back to what you did AGAIN:

Essentially you did the exact same thing this time as you did the first time...you just picked out a few quotes from an entire thread on another site and mashed them together trying to pretend it was something I said...

If you continue I'm going to have to erase what you post as I'm not going to tolerate deliberate lies being posted on my own blog...

NYMOM said...

"Not to nitpick, but you are comparing "Orientals" a large and somewhat vaguely defined ethnic group encompassing many nations and cultures, many of which no longer exist, and going back thousands of years, to America - a nation of people with many different ethnic backgrounds which was founded just over 200 years ago. I think most humans knew about writing, agriculture, etc. by 1776."

Well I could have defined it better but I was tired and said so...but anyway I think my main point was correct...

I mentioned the US as being the heirs of Europe (which is an older civilization then the US, but far younger then the oldest civilization in China or India for instance and yes, Europe had civilizations that no longer exist as well such as ancient Greece and Rome)...

So I think my comparisons were correct, in spite of the different ethnic backgrounds you refer to...German, English, Dutch, French, Spanish
'ethnicities' who settled America were more alike, then different. in spite of what you'd like to paint them as...all were Christian, for instance, all had similar governing structures, Kings, Emperors etc., and even similar historic memories, links, etc., since from Russia right down to Spain, all felt linked by a common classical tradition handed down from Greece to Rome and then onto the dark ages of Europe...

Sorry to disappoint as I'm sure you would like to paint the US as being successful due to IT engineers immigrating here...Unfortunately for your thesis, we were a successful nation long before the computer was even thought of...

So again, no the immigration link is NOT the reason the US is the premier power on the earth, as let's face it power is about what it has always been about, military might...and how many Indian and Chinese immigrants are sitting in the Pentagon...

Again sorry...

Additionally I've already reached my potential and it's just fine...I've graduated from an Ivy league university and raised two fine adult daughters both college graduates and working with good positions. I help in raising one of my grandchildren btw...

My reference to eggheads is based upon working for years in a university setting and seeing people draw up ideas on paper that appear to be perfect flounder when applied to real life...

Thus, my ideas are not from prejudice but based upon real life experience.

AND in spite of what you would like to think, there is oppression against women that goes on...some of it could even be self-inflicted, who knows.

As you don't oppress any group for thousands of years and then suddenly 'free' them and think they are just going to walk away and lead 'normal' lives...their oppression has already been imprinted upon them for eons...it's probably even impacted their genetic heritage as women who didn't fit into society (in the subordinate mode women were born into) were probably either killed or never married, thus only the genes of the most submissive women were even passed on...

I actually read somewhere that certain facets of depression, if you pick apart the symptoms: easily crying, afraid of new people/situations, not able to function under stressful situations, etc., was at one time probably very adaptive behavior for women to exhibit. If nothing else, it probably kept women in their home with their children, afraid to go outside very much or far from home. Staying in your home was a virtue that was mentioned as early as the Illiad for Pete's sake. So clearly it was something valued in a woman.

This (what today would be considered neurotic behavior) was probably closer to the reasoning behind men not wanting their wives or mothers to know anything
bad that was going on, as they expected the sort of hysterical reaction that would ensue and were possibly trying to avoid it...it wasn't due to chivalry at all that men kept women from these things...

Some people have said that it might be that women are suffering disorientation from the sudden freedoms that liberation of women has thrust upon them...and that can surely be the case...as you don't 'liberate' any people and they just suddenly turn around and start living like nothing ever happened...it might take centuries for any people to recover...look at African-Americans in this country and even in Europe..the most neurotic people over there are the Serbs and Russians I think, both slavic peoples where the very word for slaves originated by describing them...

So yes oppression against women exists and we must be prepared to deal with it for a long, long, time and men must stop being so selfish regarding it...

Anonymous said...

Sounds to e like these guys have nothing better to do than to surf the web and find something to b@@ch about. If they don't like what you are saying then why the heck do they keep coming back.

Okay guys hear's my .02 for what it's worth. NYMOM has done an incredible thing by hosting this blog. It's a place where women can go to find out the latest news from around the world "concerning a mother" in one way or another. She puts herself out there every day in hopes that she will prevent one of the horrible crimes from yet another unsupecting mother/person.

I personally have an incredible husband whom I love with all my heart. I also have an ex that I dispise, along with my biological father. There are two kinds of men in the world in my opinion. One's who are kind, loving, good fathers, good husband's. Then there are those who constantly want to keep the pot stirred. One's who will do anything to get a rise out of someone. Ones who get hurt and want to hurt others at all cost. Now look at the descriptions above and tell me honestly which one do you fit in???

I think the latter by a far landslide. The name of this site is "Women as Mothers" are you a woman? Are you a mother? This site is welcome to anyone for support, BUT if you aren't a woman and you aren't a mother and your definately not here to support. Then what the heck are you even doing hear...

NYMOM your the best, keep up the good work. Don't let the pettiness of others deter you...

Birdie (not anonymous my password isn't working again.

NYMOM said...

Hi Birdie...

Thanks.

I'm on vacation for two weeks and wanted to put up a few articles in that time and even start that project I spoke with you about (the interviews with the non-custodial mothers) YET I've been on here since about 11:30 responding to nothing but NEGATIVE postings...

AND I guarantee you that most of these people posting are from mens/fathers rights sites that I've been banned from since they didn't like my opinions...yet it doesn't bother them at all to come here...they see nothing inconsistent about their behavior...

Probably for the sake of peace, I've decided that people should NOT post on sites that they strongly disagree with...it just causes too much dissension...

So basically as Birdie said and my blog clearly states this is a site that exists to support women in their role as mother...and that's the bottom line...

Chris Key said...

NYMOM Said: Chris I read your response and just as I suspected it's a lot of baloney...

Chris Key Says: Actually the claims I made can be substantiated with ease while the claims you made are ignorant, illogical, and unsubstantiated.

NYMOM Said: The US taxing people and then giving a few dollars to a couple of womens' organizations has NOTHING to do with what I was talking about, as if we actually look at the numbers (which I'm not going to bother doing, you can if you wish) I bet it's a very small percentage of the overall US economy. Even this nonsense about women getting more degrees them men is more hype then reality...as the degrees women are gettting are still in ALL the low paying fields such as teaching, social work, daycare, nursing, etc.,

Chris Key Says: Actually the American Government does divert a lot of the money collected through taxation into the various programs that fund Women’s Organisations and women through the institution of welfare. The Child Support Agency is an institution which allows the State Government to benefit as the more money that the Child Support Agency collects from non-custodial fathers; the more money the State Government receives in federal grants.

This has led to the Child Support Agency instilling a fascist system in which men are being forced to pay child support for children that are of no biological relation; even when these men provide a DNA test proving they are not biologically related to the children they are accused of fathering.

According to official data, 66% of non-custodial fathers who fail to pay child support are UNABLE to due to living in poverty, and that 52% of fathers who owe child support are earning less than $6,155 per year. Apparently only 10% of non-custodial fathers fail to pay child support, with 90% of fathers who have joint custody meeting their child support requirements.

There is a total of 2,907,000 custodial fathers compared to 111,268,000 custodial mothers; yet 79.6% of custodial mothers receive a support award while only 29.9% of custodial fathers receive a support award. 47% of non-custodial mothers default on child support compared to only 27% of non-custodial fathers. The entire Family Court has been constructed in a manner that discriminates against males as the state is fully aware that males tend to earn more than females; therefore the state is able to make a larger profit by collecting child support from men than from women.

The point is males who are unable to pay child support tend to have their drivers licenses taken away from them and are placed in jail; while females who refuse to pay child support are given impunity. There are millions of males in the USA who have been victims of paternity fraud yet the Child Support Agencies are STILL forcing these men to pay child support; even though DNA testing has proven these men are NOT the biological fathers of the children they are financially supporting.

This is just one example of how the state is able to make a profit from oppressing males and the state is oppression males in a severe manner. The definition of oppression is when a group is treated in a harsh, cruel, unfair manner in which they are given a lesser amount of rights than other groups, and are being weighed down physically and psychologically; and the Family court and law system in general treats males in a harsh and unfair manner which is meant to weigh them down physically and psychologically while giving impunity to females.

The vast majority of child murderers happen to be females and the vast majority of child abuse is perpetrated by females; yet females are still more likely than males to obtain custody of their children. If you wish to deny this then you can however in the process you will only be demonstrating a sign of ignorance, unintelligence, and lack of education that as there is sufficient data and physical evidence that proves my claims are substantiated.

Look at how biased the Divorce Law is at the present, as the majority of abusive women who commit adultery are STILL given alimony, child support, custody of the children along with the house. Again, this all comes down to the fact that on average men tend to work LONGER hours than women and tend to dominate the engineering, science and IT industries; leading to males earning more money than females; meaning the state is able to make a larger profit by taxing men than by taxing women.

If you wish to learn more than visit my website www.mens-rights.net

Chris Key said...

NYMOM Said: Even this nonsense about women getting more degrees them men is more hype then reality...as the degrees women are gettting are still in ALL the low paying fields such as teaching, social work, daycare, nursing, etc.

Actually I work in an Ivy league university and I can tell you right now MOST of them will have a problem even paying back their student loans at the salaries their professions pay, never mind having the impact you imagine on the US leadership position in the world.

Chris Key Says: The majority of university students tend to be females, however the females who attend university tend to dominate the subjects that are based on indoctrination rather than the ability to think analytically; therefore once they obtain their degrees in such low class fields such as sociology, Women’s Studies and nursing; they end up working in non-important industries that DO NOT require a high intellect and therefore do not offer high salaries to their employees as the work is NOT dangerous nor is it important when compared to other industries.

The engineering, computer studies, science and mathematics subjects are STILL dominated by male students as the biology of the male brain gives the male a superior ability to analyse and interpret data from the outside (analytical thinking) due to the fact that the male brain possesses a far more complex ability to think spatially than the female brain.

The highest paying industries are those that require the most extensive and intellectual form of knowledge known to Mankind; therefore since males tend to dominate the most intellectual subjects known to Mankind it is therefore males who tend to dominate the higher paying industries.

The fact that males possess a superior intellect to females is not sexist in any manner as it is merely a product of evolution and the fact that throughout Humanity it was the MEN who were the providers and protectors and it was the MEN who were required to revolutionise their environment; therefore over time males developed a superior intellect.

It seems that you are unable to understand the concept that the rise in the amount it costs for a person to obtain an education within the USA is the main reason as to why there is a declining amount of intellectual persons attending University; which is why there is a lesser amount of Americans who are qualified to work within the industries that sustain a strong economy.

The fact is while the majority of University students tend to be female it is still extremely rare for females to enter the more intellectual subjects such as; engineering, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, computer studies. Therefore since it is MALES who dominate the more intellectual subjects and since fewer males are attending University that means there is not an adequate supply of qualified persons who can replace the ageing and retiring persons who are currently within the workforce.

NYMOM said...

You know the most interesting thing about every single reply, this was a post about THREE YOUNG CHILDREN BEING MURDERED because a restraining order was ignored by the police...yet not ONE of you even commented on those poor kids but we're having a long ongoing conversation about child support...

That's interesting knowing people's priorities here...

Anyway:

"There is a total of 2,907,000 custodial fathers compared to 111,268,000 custodial mothers; yet 79.6% of custodial mothers receive a support award while only 29.9% of custodial fathers receive a support award. 47% of non-custodial mothers default on child support compared to only 27% of non-custodial fathers."

Then if you know ALL of this you probably already know the racial breakdown of these figures as well and KNOW that many of the women who do NOT pay child support are minorities...

As amongst white women 92% (or some figure like that) pay their child support, while amongst white men, it's about 78% who do so...

Amongst minorities, both men and women, it's in the low single digits, somewhere like that for non-custodial parents who make any payments...

So clearly the parents who CAN pay do pay, with more women paying then men btw, and the parents who can't don't...

That's pretty clear...

But I'm getting a little sick of white men trying to use figures from the black community to make a case for discrimination against themselves...

It's using statistic dishonestly...to say the least.



"The vast majority of child murderers happen to be females and the vast majority of child abuse is perpetrated by females"

This is another statistical lie but one I'm not getting into as few parents abuse or murder their own children...so I am not allowing a discussion on this blog to try and smear all mothers as being abusive...

Thus if you bring this up again, your post referring to it will be deleted...



"If you wish to learn more than visit my website www.mens-rights.net"

Thanks anyway. To be honest I'm not interested in learning more about mens rights...I'm concerned with the rights of women in their role as mothers...that's what this site is about, that's what I'm about and if you're not interested in that topic, you should probably NOT bother visiting again...

NYMOM said...

"The fact is while the majority of University students tend to be female it is still extremely rare for females to enter the more intellectual subjects such as; engineering, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, computer studies."

So then what are men complaining about? Men keep trying to claim that because women are getting more university degrees, they'll get all the best jobs, thus men are being discriminated against...

It's complete nonsense...men still get the better paying jobs even w/o college degrees...

Actually many men today just skip right over the major 4-year universities and go right on to tech schools and enter into higher paying jobs through this route...

For instance, my nephew just graduated hs last week...he's going to a tech school, not an ivy... YET I guarantee you that a few years after graduating, he'll be making MORE money then a woman with a MASTER'S DEGREE from any ivy...actually I guarantee you that his first job AFTER graduating he'll be making MORE money then ME...and I have a BA from an ivy...

Women who graduate from the ivy leaque schools are STILL usually going into teaching or something like that which are still the lowest paid professions...so no matter the amount of degrees awarded to women I believe they will STILL, for the most part, make less money then men...

Also many of them will owe student debt of $30,00 to $40,000 or MORE and will barely be able to meet their student loan payments in the low paying professions they are entering...This hasn't become clear yet because of the lower interest rates that are allowing students to get 20 year repayment plans from their lenders, but when interest climbs again we'll see a lot of later female students having to default on these loans...

So again we see another example of men trying to paint themselves as the victims of discrimination when, in fact, you are not...just like what you did with child support...you try to use 'true' statistics, but present them with only HALF the story behind them...

It's all smoke and mirrors...

Callum said...

So medicine and law are low paying occupations?

NYMOM said...

Even though women are over 50% of the STUDENTS who graduate in medicine and law, they do NOT ultimately wind up being the majority of practioners in either medicine or law...

Probably because by the time you actually start making real money in those fields, you're already pushing 30...and MOST women DO still plan on becoming mothers and generally have to make some hard decisions around their mid-30s or so...

Actually there have been a few articles lately about this...how many women graduate med-school, for instance, and then never wind up becoming practicing doctors...I understand this could cause a doctor shortage in places like England at some point, which has a small population and thus a smaller pool of medical school graduates...

Anyway, Warren Farrell in his book about why women make less money refers to this issue as well...he thinks it's because women look for flexibility in professions, where they can easily hop in and out of jobs, as they have children...This would make sense in fields like teaching for instance. I've even noticed a lot of mothers with young children working in nursery school around where I live and just bringing their own young children with them into work...

This is probably even the reason so few women are members of Congress as well...since MOST of the members of Congress are still lawyers, although it's not a requirement, and the prime years they are running for office are probably the years most women are focusing on their kids; especially with so many women having kids later and later today...

Heck when I was growing up most women were finishing up raising their kids between the ages of 38 or 42...the kids were in high school and you were getting ready to pack them off to either college or maybe the service...TODAY women are JUST STARTING with their kids at those ages or their children are just a few years old...

You can't run for Congress or face a grueling work schedule with young children at home...at least not if you want to raise them...and the bottom line is that I generally find that if women DO NOT want to RAISE their kids, they probably are not even going to bother HAVING ANY...since why bother going through everything women go through to have kids and then hand them over to someone else??? It's not like men who really invest NOTHING physically to bring children into this world...

This is another thing men don't think about...it's easy for you to want 3 or 4 kids...you go through nothing having them...I would have wanted a bunch of kids too if I didn't have to invest anything to get them here...as it is I settled for 2 and STILL have significant health-related issues TO THIS DAY due to my second daughter's birth...to this day...

Anyway, I constantly run into women in their late 40s early 50s who still have relatively young kids...I'm a grandmother in my early 50s and they keep telling me what a young grandmother I am...I don't want to hurt their feelings so I don't tell them, it's just the opposite and they are OLD MOTHERS...it's not that I'm a young grandmother...my oldest daughter had her child in her mid-twenties just as I did...which is the normal, natural age to have children...

So things are NOT always what they seem to be...sometimes you have to look beneath the surface to find out what is really going on...

Graduation rates do NOT always tell us who is actually going on to successfully practice in many fields...

Callum said...

Well, I think you went off on a bit of a tangent there. Lets stick to the subject we're debating.

I'm glad you mentioned the UK, lets take that as an example. The government in the UK pays for people to take medicine degrees (the UK has a National health service - its different to the USA). Actually, to be correct here, the government doesn't pay for it (governments don't have any of their OWN money), the TAXPAYER pays for it.

Now, as education has become more and more femininised, and boys are ridiculed more and more, and girls are encouraged more and more, two things have happened: 1. girls are doing better (no problem with that), 2. Boys are doing worse than ever (BIG problem for society).

Gradually medical degrees are composed of a higher and higher percentage of females than males. But the problem is that many of them are NOT in it for the long run. They are not commited to working as a doctor for a whole career, they are just doing it until they can find a relatively wealthy man (trust me, these women are NOT dating poets and carpenters)to support them so that they can retire from work around age 30, or that they can take a far easier and more relaxing job. Basically, a high proportion of female medical students see it has a high status vanity career to fiddle around at for several years until they can find a man to be their mealticket.

The problems with this are easy to see:

1. The taxpayer is paying out (at great expense) to train women as doctors, who then leave the profession after a few years, putting a huge strain on an already weak system, endangering lives and causing untold pain as people have to wait even LONGER for opperations and treatment.

2. More and more taxpayer resources that could be going into new hospital equipment, research, and childrens health is being wasted on training vast numbers of women who do not stay in the field.

3. In the near future there will be a growing shortage of qualified surgeons and specialists as women are not commiting to the field long enough to train themselves in these areas. This is resulting in a lowwering of standards in order to make up the numbers.

4. In order to attempt to cover the doctor shortage, the UK is having to import doctors from poorer countries, leaving THEM with a shortage that they cannot afford.

The questions becomes: How many female medical students can the UK taxpayer continue to fund if they are not commited to medicine for a full career? And are there not better areas to focus such money, like children's cancer care?

Chris Key said...

NYMOM said...

Then if you know ALL of this you probably already know the racial breakdown of these figures as well and KNOW that many of the women who do NOT pay child support are minorities...

As amongst white women 92% (or some figure like that) pay their child support, while amongst white men, it's about 78% who do so...

Amongst minorities, both men and women, it's in the low single digits, somewhere like that for non-custodial parents who make any payments...

So clearly the parents who CAN pay do pay, with more women paying then men btw, and the parents who can't don't...

That's pretty clear...

But I'm getting a little sick of white men trying to use figures from the black community to make a case for discrimination against themselves...

It's using statistic dishonestly...to say the least.

Chris Key Says: Interesting that you did NOT cite the source of your so called “statistics”; which speaks volumes about their validity. So far I have failed to find any report that can verify your claims and until you are able to cite the source of your information; it is most likely that you are making a fallacious claim.

Now you claim that the majority of women who are required to pay child support happen to be white, and then you made the claim that 92% of white women who are required to pay child support actually do so; which contradicts the fact that 47% of all non-custodial mothers DEFAULT on child support. Therefore considering that 67% of persons who pay child support are non-Hispanic white persons; how could there be a total of 47% of non-custodial women who default on child support when you claim that 92% of white women (as a group, white women make up 67% of the total amount of women who provide child support) are paying child support?

To put it simply, your mathematical skills are either poor or the source you obtained your data from is unsubstantiated, fallacious and possibly corrupt.

Another flaw within your argument is the fact that official sources clearly indicate that 90% of fathers with joint custody actually pay child support; refuting your claim that only 78% of white men pay child support.

In fact the data from the 1994 Census Bureau Child Support Statistics will also refute your claim; http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/p60-225.pdf

If you take a look at that site you will see that in the year of 1994 it lists many statistics. Basically the statistics on that website support the following statements;

“Out of the 6,878,000 mothers who were awarded child support 4,501,000 of them received child support (76.1%).

Out of the 922,000 fathers who were awarded child support 569,000 of them received child support (73.4%).

According to the statistics on that website, the average amount of child support that males tend to pay is higher than the average amount of child support that females tend to pay; with a greater percentage of custodial mothers receiving child support than custodial fathers.

The statistics from the Census Bureau are official and they refute your claim.

Others sources of information can be found at

http://www.childrensjustice.org/stats.htm

http://singleparents.about.com/cs/childsupport/a/childsupportsta.htm

NYMOM said...

As usual people like you can never say or see anything good or nice in anything women do, so quess what, I'm going to ignore your reply regarding England and doctors as obviously your original question wasn't serious but just a way to find something bad to say about women...

NYMOM said...

"According to the statistics on that website, the average amount of child support that males tend to pay is higher than the average amount of child support that females tend to pay; with a greater percentage of custodial mothers receiving child support than custodial fathers.

The statistics from the Census Bureau are official and they refute your claim."


Actually I forgot where I got my statistics since unlike you I don't sit around all day trying to plow through stories and numbers that make one group or another look bad...

Okay...

I'm cleaning up my papers this week, so if the source turns up I'll let you know....

AND of course, since most non-custodial mothers come from the most backward regions of our country (the south and west) and they are the lowest income Americans I would expect that's there no money there for custodial fathers to bleed out of them so that explains the fact that they get no or little child support...

Does this make custodial fathers better persons then non-custodial mothers as you keep trying to imply...NO...many of these men are still parasitical life forms who deliberately separated their children from loving mothers, probably to avoid paying child support themselves...so they are busy destroying the lives of their children so they can save a few dollars...frankly they disgust me...

NYMOM said...

"The statistics from the Census Bureau are official and they refute your claim."

No they don't as my 'claim' as you call it was about more then numbers...

It's a claim that states that white men, who are in the forefront of this very phony mens/fathers rights movement, are using false statistics to paint a phony picture about mothers here...that you using the numbers that are VALID for minority communities ONLY to smear all mothers and trying to make yourselves look better in the process then you really are...

NYMOM said...

Announcement:

Since none of the people responding to this post seemed very interested in the original point of it which was WHY those three little girls died; I will be putting up my new post earlier then I planned. I was going to change it tomorrow, instead I'll change it today...

It's a topic dear to men's hearts: child support...and how the greed of men caused the child support laws of Pennsylvania and now New York to evolve into their current state...

Thanks.

Callum said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
NYMOM said...

"Quite frankly, seeing fat, over-educated Western women bleating that they are "oppressed" makes me want to vommit. Your the most over-pampered, spoilt, greedy organisms that planet Earth has ever known."

Well I guess my early quess about you was 100% correct...wasn't it...

So you are not welcome here anymore...

Chris Key said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Chris Key said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
NYMOM said...

Chris Key: I told you already what this site is for, if you have nothing to contribute in that area, I suggest you post elsewhere.