NPO Blog Archive

Los Angeles, CA–Jeana, a reader, recently wrote me about the new movie Nim’s Island. She says:

“I wanted to tell you to take your daughter to see Nim’s Island. It’s about a widower scientist who lives on a deserted island with his 10 or 11 year old daughter and who becomes separated from her and tries (and succeeds) in finding his way back to her.

“It shows a great father image, a wonderful relationship between a father and daughter, and a strong, resourceful girl (who is that way because of the unconventional life her dad and her live).

“It’s a great movie, and I think it would get 2 thumbs up from Father’s Rights Activists.”

Have any readers seen it?

To learn more about the movie, see the trailer here, the Wikipedia write-up here, or the theatrical trailer here or below.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6KzKraJBWw&feature=related]

Detroit, MI–“A son’s thirst and a father’s oversight at the ballpark turned an otherwise fun outing into an ordeal for one family.

“Christopher Ratte of Ann Arbor recently took his 7-year-old son, Leo, to a Detroit Tigers game and stopped at a Comerica Park concession stand to buy him some lemonade. But it wasn’t until the top of the ninth inning, when a security guard asked the University of Michigan classical archaeology professor about the bottle in his son’s hand, that Ratte learned what puts the hard in Mike’s Hard Lemonade.

“‘I’d never drunk it, never purchased it, never heard of it,’ Christopher Ratte told Detroit Free Press columnist Brian Dickerson for a story published Monday.

“Ratte said he told the guard he had no idea that the $7 lemonade contained alcohol. But when he tried to look at the bottle, the security guard snatched it — and his son was taken to a ballpark’s medical clinic. The mistake three weeks ago began a two-day stay for Leo in state custody and nearly a week before his father would be able to move back into his home.

“Leo was taken by ambulance to Detroit’s Children Hospital because clinic officials said he reported feeling a little nauseated after drinking about 12 ounces of the drink with a 5 percent alcohol content. But a blood sample taken at the hospital detected no trace of it.

“Ratte said the workers from the state’s Child Protective Services unit told him that day the intervention was unnecessary but they were just following orders.

“Child protection officials cannot by law discuss a specific investigation. But Mike Patterson, Child and Family Services director for the Wayne County district that includes Comerica Park, said his agency’s discretion is limited once police obtain a court order to remove a child from the home.

“An assistant state attorney general said the state had no interest in aggressively pursuing the case, so a juvenile referee on April 7 agreed to release Leo to his mother as long as his father relocated to a hotel. Three days later, the complaint was dismissed and Christopher Ratte was allowed to go home…”

This dad could/should have been smarter, but I hardly see why this calls for a big Child Protective Services action, complete with seizing the kid for two days and booting the father out of the home for a week. Were he a divorced dad, God knows how long it would be before he’d be able to see his son again…

The full story is Ann Arbor man gives 7-year-old son alcoholic beverage during Tigers game–thanks to Lloyd, a reader, for sending it.

Los Angeles, CA–One of the unfortunate types of letters I often receive this time of year is the move-away letter. That’s when the custodial parent has decided to move the child away from the noncustodial parent–often ending that parent’s meaningful role in their children’s lives. The noncustodial parent writes, seeking a way to keep his or her children from being moved away.

Since parents usually like to move during the summer so they don’t interfere with schooling, the move-away requests are often made and fought out in the late winter and early spring. In many, many cases, noncustodial parents (usually fathers) who were spending 10 or 12 days a month with their children are reduced to short, once a month visits–if they’re lucky.

Move-aways are an issue we’ve devoted a lot of attention to. We worked with the California Alliance for Families and Children in running two successful campaigns to preserve the California Supreme Court’s 2004 LaMusga move-away decision. That decision affirmed that courts have the power to restrain moves which run counter to children’s best interests, and several thousand of you participated in those campaigns. To learn more, see my co-authored column Is a Pool More Important than a Dad? (San Francisco Chronicle, 5/4/04) and click here.

Steven Carlson is the author of How to Win Child Custody, and has devoted a lot of time to the move-away issue. He has an interesting article which recaps the various move-away cases and provides an updated overview of the situation with move-aways.

The “Move-Away” Case
By Steven Carlson

Parents who share custody of their children face a difficult dilemma when one parent wants to relocate or move away to a relatively distant location thereby effecting a Move-Away Case. Recent California cases indicate that in custody situations, if one parent is functionally the primary parent and the children have been living primarily with that parent, that parent is likely to be permitted by the courts to move away and take the children along, even if he or she agreed earlier not to move away or relocate.

California Family Code section 7501 provides, “A parent entitled to the custody of a child has a right to change the residence of the child, subject to the power of the court to restrain a removal that would prejudice the rights or welfare of the child.”

Although this statute appears to be straightforward, the interpretation of it has not been.

Los Angeles, CA–Obviously, being the father of a little girl, I can relate to the dad in this ad for being a pushover at times. Daughters can be very convincing, and my wife often makes fun of me for this.

On a larger note, it’s nice to see an ad which portrays fathers not only as doting but also as caring, responsible parents.

What more accurately portrays your relationship with your daughter–“man-as-idiot” commercials or this?

To watch the ad, click here or see below.

[youtube:http://youtube.com/watch?v=vhJ8aVpu2t0]

Los Angeles, CA–In my recent blog post Dad Struggling to Pay His Child Support Finds $140,000 in Cash and Turns it in, I praised Los Angeles noncustodial father Eli Estrada (pictured) and expressed sympathy for his child support dilemma.

Six months ago Estrada opened a landscaping and artificial-grass business and is in debt and is struggling to pay his child support. I wrote:

“Estrada is an admirable gentleman. What is probably happening regarding the child support is this–Estrada’s income has dipped because he launched his new business. However, he can’t get his child support payments lowered based on the new income. He may not have even tried, since he would have to pay for legal help and might not be successful with the downward modification.

“If Estrada’s business is successful and he earns more money, he’ll immediately be hit up for more child support.

“Given how hard it is for child support obligors to get downward modifications when they experience a drop in income, if Estrada’s business fails, he may well become a ‘deadbeat dad,’ with fake child support arrearages piling up.”

Sheri, a custodial mother, disagrees with my assessment. She writes:

“This man’s income didn’t ‘go down’ by no fault of his own, folks. He started a new business of his own free will, and obviously without having a secure plan for said business. If he is in debt and the business isn’t doing well and that is affecting his child support, who is at fault? He isn’t some victim of corporate downsizing or layoffs. He could just get a regular job.

“Point is, I would LOVE to start my own business, but as a mom of 2 kids whose father doesn’t pay a dime to support them, I cannot take such a financial risk. If their dad doesn’t pay, they don’t go hungry, because I see to that by working 2 jobs at times to make ends meet. I couldn’t say to the kids, ‘Sorry guys, no water or electricity this month, the business is not doing so good’…

“If I were to leave the security of a ‘regular’ job without having substantial savings put aside with which to feed and care for my children should things not work out as planned, I’d be labeled neglectful. Why is this guy seen as a victim when his decision was borderline irresponsible in the first place?”

Brooklyn, New York–OK, bakery worker Robert Sean Myers was foolish to have six kids with at least two and possibly more women. That being said, it’s outrageous that a court obligated him to pay $2,000 a month in child support for one of the kids on an income of only $1,600 a month. Now he’s being vilified as a “deadbeat.” Gee, any idea why he’s behind on his payments?

And the media–which always seems to switch its brain off at the mere mention of the phrase “deadbeat dad”–doesn’t even seem to notice.

The story is below–thanks to Cynthia, a reader, for sending it.

Queens mom sues bakeries for failing to garnish wages for child support
BY NANCIE L. KATZ
Daily News, April 21st 2008

A Queens mom is so determined to get child support from her ex-husband that she filed a rare lawsuit against two of the world’s best-known bakeries for more than $8 million – alleging they failed to garnish his pay.

Chandra Myers will be in Brooklyn Federal Court today to face off against Sara Lee Bakeries and Bimbo Bakeries USA Inc., which distributes Thomas’ English Muffins, Entenmann’s and other treats.

Myers contends the bakery giants defied orders to garnish a total of $36,000 from Robert Sean Myers’ wages from 2001 to 2004.

“It is unfortunate in today’s society that we not only have deadbeat dads, but we have deadbeat companies,” declared Myers, who has latched onto a rarely used statute to demand a half-million dollars in penalties and interest along with the millions in damages from the firms.

Bimbo’s lawyers and Chandra Myers’ ex charge the suit is without merit. Sara Lee had no comment.

Robert Sean Myers, a Los Angeles bakery deliverer, said he has records showing that he’s attempted to meet child support demands for his 6-year-old daughter.
He insists he won’t settle the suit with his ex-wife because $611 of his $1,600 monthly income now goes to their daughter. He also has five other kids to support, he said.

But Chandra Myers has a standing order requiring him to pay $2,000 per month in support based on her expenses. Now $61,000 behind, Robert Sean Myers says he’s tried to negotiate a payment plan, but she’s intent on getting him extradited here. Under state law, if his owed child support exceeds $50,000, he loses his right to appear in court to defend himself against her charges.

The Myerses’ brief marriage ended in April 2001, when Chandra Myers was barely a month pregnant.

“I have no problem supporting my kids,” Robert Sean Myers said. “Just let me work and pay it off. She doesn’t want child support from me. She wants me to go to jail. Who benefits? Our daughter? My other five children?”…

Yesterday, Chandra Myers sent out a blast e-mail urging supporters to come to court as she “makes history” against “deadbeat” Sara Lee and Bimbo.

Robert Sean Myers said he has seen his daughter once.

“This is a woman scorned trying to find vindication,” he argued. “I welcome anybody to do an investigation. All I am trying to do is get a fair trial.”

Read the full article here.