Saturday, March 11, 2006

MANY POOR MOTHERS CAUGHT IN THE NET

Prisons ask for alternatives to jailing deadbeat parents COLUMBUS, Ohio —

Prisons officials are asking lawmakers to consider alternatives to putting deadbeat parents behind bars, where they don't earn much money and continue failing to support their children.

The 601 men and 24 women sent to prison in 2004 for not paying child support made $12 to $18 a month working prison jobs, while taxpayers paid about $63 a day for each prisoner's shelter, food, clothing and medical care.

"We strongly think each child should receive the support they are due," said Andrea Dean, spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction.

"But we also understand there are going to be some deadbeat dads or parents for whom, if they had an opportunity, an alternative sanction other than prison would be a good option."

About 2.5 percent of inmates admitted to prisons in 2004 were felony child support cases.

Prisons officials want lawmakers to consider work release or other programs that would allow nonviolent child support violators to work under supervision. They say those options could help alleviate crowding and save taxpayers the $23,000 each prisoner costs annually.

Some officials in charge of collecting child support payments say they go through many options before cases are even prosecuted. The Franklin County Child Support Enforcement Agency tries punishments such as suspending drivers' licenses, withholding money from paychecks and seizing bank accounts before filing charges, agency head Anthony Bond said.

"We've exhausted every possible administrative and judicial remedy before we do this," he said.

I just want to point out that this is not true in the case of mothers that they have exhausted every possible administrative and judicial remedy before they put them in jail.

Sadly this is more propaganda.

Since most mothers have custody of their children, even though every year that number decreases due to gender neutralized feminists and mens/fathers rights advocates, who have pushed for more mothers to lose custody, they have fewer women compared to men to jail for NOW.

YET to get ANY women in the net which they need to satisfy calls for women to go to jail by gender equity advocates, they jail women for lesser amounts or time then men...

For instance, I have heard about a mother who was jailed for missing even ONE PAYMENT or being a little late. Actually a woman in New Jersey was jailed for missing one payment, her second husband had to bail her out.

Another woman on a board I used to post on was locked up to an electronic device, where she could only go to work each day, no where else, and they just took her check for child support.

She hasn't been allowed to see her children in three years. This was in Georgia or Alabama.

Anyway, I don't want any mothers to think these gender neutralized beasts will be satified until as many women are in jail as men... that is their ultimate goal.

Actually mens/fathers rights advocates lobbied to have the amount of child support that became a felony lowered...just so they could have more mothers targeted. Most men who are finally arrested owed many thousands, women much less.

So even though many have admitted that women make less money when they have children, mothers are still subject to prison for not being able to pay enough child support.

So this is our future if we continue allowing gender neutralized feminists to claim to represent mothers' interest or speak on any public policy forums in our name.

12 comments:

Stacey said...

Wow! Keep informing, your great!

silverside said...

What FR organizations were lobbying for a reduction in the amount of child support owed?

Interesting change of tactic for them. Used to be they would argue that child support was legalized "debt slavery" or against the constitution or something. Then I guess a critical mass of them started to screw their ex's for custody and actually win (buying judges helps), and then EUREKA!
THEY SAW THE LIGHT! Child support is now a GOOD THING (that is when men get it from women who are still underpaid in the workforce). So now that controlling, vindictive ex of yours can finally make good on his threat to have you thrown in jail--so much for FR tripe about nicey nice co-parenting and all that.

silverside

NYMOM said...

Mens/fathers rights groups and their advocates lobbied to get more mothers locked up as deadbeat parents to make fathers look better. Also it's one fo these gender equity type of issues where they want so many of each sex in jail for everything. Of course, mainly trying to make men look better, as always.

It used to be that the primary people the state were after for arrest were true scofflaws. So you had to miss payments for YEARS or owe very high amounts before they would arrest you...

That is still the case generally for men...btw. It's just not the case any longer for mothers. I have now heard of and corresponded with mothers owing very small amounts or missing maybe ONE/TWO payments and being put in jail.....

Misery loves company...Also men figure by including mothers in all these child support cases, they can get better deals for themselves, like greedy beasts...using women like Trojan horses to help men win advantage...

I lurk on their boards sometimes and read all the little spiteful tricks they use against mothers...Pretending these things are all in the interest of the children, of course, they charge into many of these committees that discuss these issues and then get these changes sneaked in under the radar.

Most PEOPLE aren't even aware that a state like New Jersey, for instance, can arrest you for missing ONE PAYMENT...these are like trip wires they got put into laws and public polices that ambush mothers...as she is usually the one with little money...

A New York mother of three children was just telling me a month or so ago (on a non-custodial board I post on) that she has been sent notices already for missing a few payments and she is ONLY paying the minimum of $25.00 a MONTH...she's not working, was a stay-at-home mother...ex-husband got kids, house, furnishing, car, all bank accounts and she's left with nothing but a bill, which even not paying that small amount can lead to her being arrested...

So even, for your own situation, be careful...as when they look to make these roundups of deadbeats now, they ALWAYS look to include a few mothers in them...so you might be a few days late and wind up being rounded up with men who haven't paid a penny in ten years.

NYMOM said...

Yes...

Actually when I had that on-line child support petition up on this blog, a good number of MEN signed it...I only got about 90 signatures but MEN were looking to change child support to reflect that whole Colonna vs. Colonna thing too, where you get paid child support by diferential in INCOME, not custody...

AND they are still fighing that whole tax exemption/EIC to be divided amongst NCP AND custodial parents...so they could get some benefit as well...

I support all these things however, as the bottom line is the way to stop all these custody fights, abductions and other crap mainly instigated by men is to FIX the child support situation.

If we fix that, ALL this other stuff will go away...

Maybe even the DV and custody issues.

As MOST of that DV business and custody fighting is related to money as well...

I mean my father was abusive and drank, YET when he abandoned my mother he never even THOUGHT of fighting for custody...I mean it wasn't going to cost him anything; so I don't think he gave it a second thought to leave us with our mother...and plenty of other families I knew had their fathers abandon them as well...the poor man's divorce as they used to call it...and I NEVER remember any of these custody fights going on either the way they do today...

It's ALL about the money...

silverside said...

Actually, I wouldn't much care if he threw me in jail. In fact, there are days I am tempted not to pay, just to dare him. Let him prove what he's like.

Frankly, as I enter year 10 as a non-custodial mother, and as any hope of him tripping over his own !@$%% is less and less likely, it has finally occurred to me that my life is prison. So I really don't care if I spend it in a formally designated cell, or just a general cell.

NYMOM said...

Yes, he won the battle, not the war however as I have a feeling your daughter might not be very close with him as an adult...

Remember his g/f didn't marry him OR have any kids with him so this saids to me that ultimately she didn't feel safe enough with him to have any kids...so I have a feeling your daughter is not going to feel very safe with him either.

His time is coming, don't worry...

Anonymous said...

NYMOM wrote:

I lurk on their boards sometimes and read all the little spiteful tricks they use against mothers...Pretending these things are all in the interest of the children, of course, they charge into many of these committees that discuss these issues and then get these changes sneaked in under the radar.

I write:

With respect, NYMOM, this is a serious charge. Can you provide examples of said "dirty little tricks"?

NYMOM said...

Well on Pandagon they have an example of how men have been using statistics mainly culled from black and latino students to act like there is a war against ALL boys going on...

http://www.pandagon.net

Then you get laws and/or public policies passed that help middle class white males acting like ALL BOYS are being discriminated against.

That's the sort of thing I'm talking about...ways you distort statistics to paint ALL men as victims, when it's NOT all men who are victims at all...

Even these statistics lies smearing all single mothers is more of this same bullcrap...you scour the ghettos of every city for horrible stats on single mothers and then trot them out smearing all single mothers.

So these are some of the examples of your "dirty little tricks" that the public needs to be made aware of.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for your examples, as well as your respectful reply. I completely agree that those who routinely use words such as "all" or "none" are clearly attempting to delude not only others, but themselves as well.

What one needs to understand, in an effort to be completely fair, is that there are decent, loving mothers AND fathers who have been screwed over by the system. Would it not be in the best interest of our children if those who have been hurt work together to correct such wrongs, rather than making this yet another sex vs sex issue? Please don't think I mean only women; I am well aware many men do the same.

NYMOM said...

Unfortunately we cannot be gender neutral on this issue as women invest more physical in children and this must be recognized and compensated for fairly one way or the other, not to mention we take a hit financially by losing out on educational and job opportunities in order to have children initially...

Again this cannot be ignored as happens now...

Even MRAs have admitted that the pay differential for women is mostly due to those who become mothers and take time off or even work p/t etc., for years until the children are older...

Thus deciding to go gender neutral as soon as all the heavy lifting is over clearly sets up a situation that discriminates against mothers.

I'd love to correct the wrongs but we need to establish what they are first BEFORE we go out to correct them. As I don't hear any recognition from people as to those undue burdens women carry vis-a-vis pregnancy, child bearing, etc.,

So when I hear people addressing these real burden for women THEN we can go on to righting all wrongs associated with custody and child support issues...

I mean one big issue for me is that if men invest little in children and build well-paying careers for themselves because of this lack of investment, why should women have to pay men guideline child support? You've already built the career, now you got the kids using the money from that career and then you want some of the little we've managed to salvage out of the job market as well????

It seems a little much don't you think?

So we cannot sign off on any of this until these issues are fairly addressed.

Sorry...

Anonymous said...

You speak as if women are broke, and men are rich. Men have college education and women have do not have even a GED. I would agree with you if the work force was gender bias. But it is not. Therefore, family court should not be gender bias.

Child support is NOT income. It is is used SOLELY to support the child. Not the Adult.

There is a reason we call it CHILD support. Unless you are a child as well. In that case, the child support should go to your parents to support you and your kids.

Men and women need to think about the cost of raising the kids way before having them. It is a 50/50 split. Not a 70/30 split.

Who cares about your physical care. Physical care does not buy food for the children.

PS. If your are a parent YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO CARE FOR THE CHILDREN PHYSICALLY. DUUHHHH

I can never understand being proud of doing something you are supposed to do.

NYMOM said...

Unfortunately, bearing the next generation is gender biased as the male of the species, risks, invests, and ultimately contributes absolutely little or nothing to bringing child forth.

Women bear 99.99% of the risk and make 99.99% of the investment in bearing life and any system that refuses to recognize that simple factoid will ultimately wind up destroying itself as the west is currently doing. For in spite of what you say about what people are SUPPOSED to do, having children is a choice and women can (and do everyday) decide not to bother risking it...

So keep patting yourself on the back about what everyone is supposed to be doing, you useless idiot.