Category: Blog

I am honestly surprised that they did not continue to pursue the father for the $24,000 child support arrearage. His daughter was moved out of the country against his will, he was denied a role in her life, he was charged child support, they didn’t tell him about the support for 15 years, and then hit him with the arrearage–what’s the problem? Certainly American child support enforcement agencies have no problem doing this, and probably wouldn’t have let the guy out of his arrearage. I guess the Brits are behind in this particular area of father abuse.

Father wins £16,000 case against CSA
January 03 2008
ALISON CAMPSIE

A father took on the Child Support Agency (CSA) and won by successfully challenging a £16,000 demand when a computer error left him unaware of the claim for nearly 15 years.

Colin Roberts, 52, a golf professional from Abernethy in Perthshire, said the CSA left him and his second wife “stressed and frightened”.

The bill was suddenly presented to Mr Roberts in October regarding the child maintenance of his daughter, now aged 27. She was born during his first marriage, which broke down in 1986 when his former wife left the country.

While the CSA was alerted that there might be a claim against him in 1993, the authority did not track down Mr Roberts to make an application for earnings – instead surprising him with a demand for the accumulated bill of £16,000 last November.

Mr Roberts, who has been married to his second wife Paulette for nine years, said: “When the letter suddenly dropped through the door, we were frightened. We were expecting the officials to come to the door. Every time somebody knocked for us we thought, is this it?’.

“They way it was handled by the CSA was so cold, so unemotional. It was the first I had ever heard from them and it was treated as just a matter of course for them.

“The stress that it caused for myself and Paulette was immense. We were looking into what we could sell, looking at what meagre savings we had.

“We were so low. I said to Paulette, it is just not fair, I have to fight this’.”

Mr Roberts has not seen his daughter since she was three years old, after her mother moved to Spain and he failed to win a court order to allow him to bring her up himself.

Reidar Hjermann, Norway’s ombudsman for children, is now pushing one of vindictive divorced or separated mothers’ greatest hits–that shared parenting is bad for kids because it’s “inconvenient.” According to this recent Norwegian newspaper article:

“‘Children need individually tailored solutions,’ ombudsman Reidar Hjermann told newspaper Aftenposten on Wednesday. He thinks that splitting their time between their parents’ new homes should be the exception, not the rule.

“When parents split up, Hjermann acknowledges that they have to split up everything from their shared home to the cars, TV and stereo. Their children, however, shouldn’t be part of the math.

“‘You can’t just share children in accordance with what’s right for the parents,’ he said. Spending one week living with their mother and one week with their father is too stressful for many, he claims.”

I agree that such arrangements are inconvenient for children, but losing your father or turning dad into a few days a month “visitor” is not just inconvenient–it’s very harmful. Hjermann puts it in gender neutral terms but fortunately Labour Party politician Karita Bekkemellem (pictured), Norway’s former government minister in charge of family issues, explained what the Hjermann plan really means:

“‘It’s most unfortunate that in 2008, the children’s ombudsman doesn’t equate the positions of mother and father,’ she told Aftenposten. She claims that too many fathers feel short-changed, when their wives are all too often granted custody of the children.

“Without shared living arrangements, ‘only one of the parents gets to have close contact with the children in everyday life,’ Bekkemellem said. ‘All our experience shows that it will continue to be the fathers who are discriminated against.'”

The “inconvenient” and “individually tailored solutions” arguments are frequently put forward by American feminists, including the National Organization for Women, in opposition to shared parenting. Hjermann even trots out one of the feminists’ favorite straw men–that some divorced parents want their children to attend two different schools, in order to live part-time with the mother and part-time with the father. I agree that such a suggestion is ludicrous, but I very much doubt that people suggest it.

To learn more about the arguments in favor of shared parenting, including what adult children of divorce have to say on the matter, see my co-authored column HB 5267 Will Help Michigan”s Children of Divorce (Lansing State Journal, 5/28/06). One quick excerpt:

“When Arizona State University psychology professor William Fabricius conducted a study of college students who had experienced their parents” divorces while they were children, he found that over two-thirds believed that ‘living equal amounts of time with each parent is the best arrangement for children.’ His findings were published in Family Relations in 2003.”

Norway’s ombudsman for children doesn’t think children should have to commute between their divorced parents’ homes. His opinion puts him at odds with some top politicians.
Afenposten, 1/2/08

“Children need individually tailored solutions,” ombudsman Reidar Hjermann told newspaper Aftenposten on Wednesday. He thinks that splitting their time between their parents’ new homes should be the exception, not the rule.

When parents split up, Hjermann acknowledges that they have to split up everything from their shared home to the cars, TV and stereo. Their children, however, shouldn’t be part of the math.

“You can’t just share children in accordance with what’s right for the parents,” he said. Spending one week living with their mother and one week with their father is too stressful for many, he claims.

Hjermann told Aftenposten that he’s had to deal with some parents who even want their children to attend two different schools, in order to live part-time with the mother and part-time with the father. He advises strongly against that. He concedes that some children manage to move back and forth between their parents, but he thinks that only works well when the parents live close to one another and cooperate well.

Hjermann’s recommendation against commuting children “disappoints” top Labour Party politician Karita Bekkemellem, who until recently was the government minister in charge of family issues.

“It’s most unfortunate that in 2008, the children’s ombudsman doesn’t equate the positions of mother and father,” she told Aftenposten. She claims that too many fathers feel short-changed, when their wives are all too often granted custody of the children.

Without shared living arrangements, “only one of the parents gets to have close contact with the children in everyday life,” Bekkemellem said. “All our experience shows that it will continue to be the fathers who are discriminated against.”

Below are some recent articles and items of interest from Fathers & Families’ latest News Digest.

Egypt weighs legality of divorce by text message (USA Today, 1-3-08)

Center contributing to falling divorce rate (Springfield News-Sun, 1-4-07)

Bring families together and keep them together (Woodtv.com, 1-4-08)

Lawyer: Delinquent child support online (Associated Press, 1-4-08)

Keeping joint custody cordial (KSFY.com, 1-4-08)

“I’ve lost three children. Losing another would destroy me,” says Terry Cannings (The Daily Mail, 1-5-08)

Non-custodial parent faces kidnapping charges after alleged absconding with child on Christmas (Texarkana Gazette, 1-6-08)

New year is busy time for divorce lawyers (Telegraph, 1-7-08)

Survey finds men have lost their role in society (Telegraph, 1-7-08)

Sites help smooth bumps on road to Splitsville (Palm Beach Post, 1-7-08)

From my co-authored column ‘Sperm Theft” Ruling a Step Forward for Men”s Reproductive Rights (Houston Chronicle, 3/6/05):

“All”s fair in love, war, and paternity cases. When child support is sought, there is scarcely any deceit that courts won”t push aside under the “best interests of the child’ test.

“Courts have ruled that boys who were statutorily raped by older women must pay child support. Courts have ruled that when a woman has taken the semen from a condom a man used for sex with a different woman and has inserted it in herself, the man must still pay child support. Courts have ruled that when a woman has concealed her pregnancy (denying the man the right to be a father) and then sued for child support a decade later, the man must still pay child support. Courts have ruled that when a woman has deceived her husband into believing that her baby is his child, he must still pay child support. Few if any men are relieved of child support obligations due to the circumstances of the pregnancy, no matter how bizarre or unjust.”

A good new ruling from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. From the Associated Press’ Sperm donor wins Pa. appeal to not pay child support (1/3/08):

“A woman who promised a sperm donor he would not have to pay child support cannot renege on the deal, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled (pictured).

“The 3-2 decision overturns lower court rulings under which Joel L. McKiernan had been paying up to $1,500 a month to support twin boys born in August 1994 to Ivonne V. Ferguson, his former girlfriend and co-worker…

“Ferguson and McKiernan met while working together at Pennsylvania Blue Shield in Harrisburg and had a sexual relationship that had waned before Ferguson persuaded him to donate sperm for her. Courts found that the two agreed McKiernan would not have to pay child support and would not have visitation rights, but Ferguson later changed her mind and sued. Ferguson’s lawyer has disputed that the agreement existed in the first place, but courts have agreed with McKiernan on that issue.

“Between the time of the donation and when Ferguson sought support in 1999, McKiernan moved to Pittsburgh, got married and had a child.

“A county judge called Ferguson’s actions despicable but said it was in the twins’ best interests that McKiernan be required to support them. In addition to monthly payments, McKiernan also was ordered to come up with $66,000 in back support…”

Thanks to Judge Rufus Peckham, a reader, for the story.

“Officers said that Danielle Kah chased after her child’s father’s car on Sedler Street, ramming it from behind until he stopped. When the father stopped, police said, Kah opened the door of his car and took their 4-year-old daughter, then fled into a nearby wooded area.”

A classic case of domestic violence by a woman against a man, and what do we get from the police and the media?

1) She rams his care repeatedly, endangering him and his daughter, then absconds with the girl into the forest. Yet all she is charged with is endangering a child because the girl didn’t have her jacket on.

2) No mention of whether the father was injured.

3) No mention of “domestic violence.”

4) A ludicrous $2,000 bond–far lower than what men arrested for domestic violence get, even though many of those arrests are questionable, to say the least.

What would happen if a father repeatedly rammed his ex-wife’s car while the little girl was in inside, and then absconded with her? There’d be an Amber Alert and he’d be headed to prison.

The story is below–thanks to Mike in Savannah for sending it to me.

Mother Charged After Taking Child Out In Cold
1/2/08, WLWT.com

CINCINNATI — Cincinnati police have charged a woman with child endangering after a strange incident on Tuesday afternoon.

Officers said that Danielle Kah chased after her child’s father’s car on Sedler Street, ramming it from behind until he stopped.

When the father stopped, police said, Kah opened the door of his car and took their 4-year-old daughter, then fled into a nearby wooded area.

Police said the child was not dressed for the freezing temperatures.

Officers were able to find Kah and her child and take them into custody.

The child was not seriously hurt.

Bond for Kah was set at $2,000 on Wednesday.

[Late note: Hugo, a reader, writes:

“I just called the news station and asked if they intended to do a follow-up story on this case in order to find out why the police were not charging Ms. Kah with Domestic violence, Child abduction, interfering with custody, etc.

“I was told ‘that’s a very good question. I’ll pass it along, and see if we can look into that.’

If you are curious as I was, you also may wish to call them. Their contact info is:

WLWT-TV
Main Number: (513) 412-5000
1700 Young Street
Cincinnati, Ohio. 45202]

“The children are so alienated and have been so brainwashed against me that they refuse to talk to me or even look at me. They just sit and continually ask when the session will be over. These are children that I acted as the stay at home dad as for five years…I have fought for over two years and spent my life savings and I have seen my children a total of seven hours in two years.”

Dear Mr. Sacks,

I am a father of two girls, now age eight and six. In September of 2005 my wife was caught in an extra-marital affair. She told me she would “get me, destroy me, and make a divorce as hard on me as she could’ if I tried to find out the identity of her lover.

Long story short she took out a restraining order on me one month later and then filed false sexual abuse charges against me. I totally and completely cooperated with the courts. A court appointed therapeutic team concluded that I never did anything wrong. I took and passed three polygraph tests. My wife failed one saying that she coached the children against me. This sordid tale has continued on for over two years. I spent over $400,000 in trying to get to see my children.

Finally I was allowed visitation as we came to a settlement on the divorce and she agreed to me having custody for two days out of the week.

The only problem is now I see the two girls with a court appointed psychologist. The children are so alienated and have been so brainwashed against me that they refuse to talk to me or even look at me. They just sit and continually ask when the session will be over. These are children that I acted as the stay at home dad as for five years (my ex is an attorney and I stayed home with the kids).

So now I have no more money to continue this fight. My wife was awarded the $1.5 million dollar house (it was paid for) and got almost all the other assets. I now live in a crappy one-bedroom apartment and she and her new live-in stay in my old four bedroom house.

I am giving up on ever seeing my children again. I have lost everything and no court has ever helped me out. The system is broken and fathers have no rights, at least not in the state of Hawaii.

I applaud you in trying to help other fathers stay in contact with their children. I never thought I would give up being reunited but I have fought for over two years and spent my life savings and I have seen my children a total of seven hours in two years. My ex-wife is relentless and will never give up trying to destroy me.

The drawings above were taken from Kara Bishop’s www.postcardsfromsplitsville.com. Bishop works with Children of Divorce, a class run by Tucson, Arizona-based Divorce Recovery. The class did an art project that included “sending away” the frustrations of divorce. The website is a place where Kara says “children can share their divorce-related feelings anonymously and parents can get a new perspective on how this life-changing experience impacts their children”s lives.”

To learn more, click here. Kara can be reached at Kara@PostcardsfromSplitsville.com.

Background: The recent New York Times piece A Bundle of Joy Isn”t Enough? (12/6/07) discusses “push presents”:

“In a more innocent age, new mothers generally considered their babies to be the greatest gift imaginable. Today, they are likely to want some sort of tangible bonus as well….

“That”s ‘push’ as in, ‘I the mother, having been through the wringer and pushed out this blessed event, hereby claim my reward.’ Or ‘push’ as in, ‘I”ve delivered something special and now I”m pushing you, my husband/boyfriend, to follow suit.’

“It”s more and more an expectation of moms these days that they deserve something.”

As I discussed in Some Thoughts on the ‘Push Presents’ Now Expected From Expectant Fathers (Part I), I have mixed emotions about “push presents.” I wrote:

“If this gift is about love, if it is about a man wanting to give his wife something special to show his appreciation, then I’m 100% for it. If instead the gift is yet one more obligation, another example of why she has its so hard and he has it so easy, why he could never understand how much he suffers, why she’s good and he’s bad, and dammit isn’t it the least he could do for her, well, then count me out. Men already have to deal with way too much minimization of their contributions to their families, along with exaggeration of women’s contributions. In in this particular instance, of course, the woman’s contribution is tremendous. In most cases, it is no more (and no less) than the man’s contribution.”

As one person noted in the New York Times story, I think the period right after the birth of a child is a rather poor time to choose to buy luxuries such as expensive jewelry. Unless one is rich, it is easy to become financially overwhelmed in the years after the birth of a child.

The primary caregiving parent’s income goes down, at the same time that expenses rise. It can be nerve-racking worrying if you will have the money to properly support your children. My father always said:

“People should not have children until they are sure that they can financially provide for them–but if everyone waited to have children until they were sure they could financially provide for them, nobody would have children.”

I would also argue that in many if not most cases, men very much are giving their wives the equivalent of a push present, though of course it is not acknowledged by our politically correct media. For example, it has been many years since I had a child, but thinking back to the birth of my first child, it is hard for me to see myself as a slacker. We had just bought a new house on an acre of land and at an excellent price. The downside was that the house was a disaster.

In the couple years leading up to the birth of our child and right afterwards, I was working seven days a week. During the day I would either do construction jobs or do construction work on our house, and at night I taught English and citizenship classes in South Central Los Angeles. On Saturdays I would teach, and then spend the afternoon/evening and Sunday building and fixing our house.

I ripped up our decaying old floor and installed hardwood flooring. I did numerous plumbing and electrical jobs. With the help of my father-in-law, I put a new roof on the house. I built a redwood front fence and front gate, as well as a back fence.

I cut down numerous large, diseased pine trees from our front yard, and built my son a bunk bed out of them. I cleared an enormous amount of junk out of the yard, enough to fill several huge dumpsters. If I choose to, I could walk around our house or our yard and probably find something that I did in practically every single area, while also working full time. Given everything I was doing, a “push present” would seem pretty trivial. And as I was building and fixing the things needed to make our house the wonderful home it now is, a good deal of my motivation was seeing how happy it made my wife.

(The best part of cutting down the pine trees was this–I had a chainsaw and was very, very careful to cut the tree so that it would not fall on our phone lines or on our house. I succeeded–the tree fell in exactly the opposite direction, right onto our power line. Fortunately, my wife was not home at the time. It would have been hard to explain to her that she shouldn’t worry, because cutting the tree onto our power line was, um…”all part of my plan, honey.”)