Child Support Vs School

By Andrew Scott

Pocono Record Writer

May 21, 2008

EAST STROUDSBURG — A ruling that could make it harder for Pocono area school districts to stop families from sending children here to be educated has been handed down by Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court.

The ruling says a local resident raising a child is not violating state law by receiving child support from the child's parent if the parent lives outside the area. The decision stems from a 2006 case in the East Stroudsburg Area School District.

State law says a child can attend school in a district if the child lives in that district with a parent, legal guardian or caregiver raising the child "gratis" (free of compensation or personal profit), as if the child were their own. The child is ineligible to attend school in the district if the parent, legal guardian or caregiver receives compensation, the definition of which does not apply to child support.

Commonwealth Court Judge Doris Smith-Ribner said Monday that the law does not recognize child support as compensation and neither should school districts and their boards.

The East Stroudsburg Area School Board did just that when it voted in 2006 to remove student Jose Velazquez, now 17. Velazquez for most of his life has been raised in the Poconos by his grandmother, Renee Speaks-Velazquez. She has been receiving child support from his mother, who lives out of state, while his father is in prison.

Jose Velazquez was a sophomore during the 2005-06 school year when he was involved in an incident with a school resource officer. Velazquez said the officer harassed and used unnecessary excessive force to restrain him.

Monroe County Juvenile Court found Velazquez delinquent of disorderly conduct in connection with that incident and ordered him sent to a boot camp program.

The school district meanwhile learned he was being raised by his grandmother, that she is not his court-appointed guardian and that she receives child support for him. District staff advised the school board that he no longer was eligible to continue as a student and the board then voted to remove him.

Velazquez was allowed to finish out his sophomore year.

In October 2006, his grandmother filed a petition in county court to reverse the school board decision. President Judge Ronald Vican denied the petition, upholding the school board's vote, after which Speaks-Velazquez appealed in Commonwealth Court.

Meanwhile, Velazquez in December 2006 was charged with stabbing Joseph Paulino, 20, during an argument behind the East Stroudsburg Kmart. Velazquez said the stabbing was self-defense. Paulino was treated for injuries at the hospital and later released.

Velazquez turned himself in after the stabbing and was arrested and placed in Monroe County Correctional Facility to await future court proceedings. He was unable to post the required $50,000 bail and stayed in county jail for 15 months, more than the minimum amount of time to which he would have been sentenced if convicted.

He did, however, continue his high school education in jail while the appeal on his case with the school district was pending in Commonwealth Court.

He was released in March after his bail was reduced to unsecured status, which means he's free without having to post an amount as long as he shows up for all future court proceedings on the stabbing case. That case is still pending while the District Attorney's Office tries to locate Paulino, who reportedly has left the country.

Commonwealth Court on Monday ruled Vican had made "an error in law" when upholding the school board's decision to remove Velazquez.

The higher court ruled:

• The school district, school board and county court should not have viewed the child support received by Velazquez's grandmother as compensation or used that as the basis for the decision to remove him from school.
• His grandmother's failure to seek court-appointed guardianship is irrelevant since she has shown that she raised him as if he were her own child. She said she purposely exercised her right to not seek guardianship because she wants to preserve his relationship with his parents.

"This decision can have a big impact on Pennsylvania school districts," said Len Rieser, co-director of the Educational Law Center in Philadelphia. "Many districts interpret the law as East Stroudsburg did and make the error of viewing child support payments as compensation."

That error is on the side of caution in ensuring students truly are residents eligible to attend school in the district, said Eric Forsyth, director of administrative services for the East Stroudsburg Area School District.

Some parents living outside the area send their children here to live with relatives or others because they view this area's school districts as superior. But, if the people those children are sent to live with cannot prove they don't receive compensation or that they're raising the children as if they were their own, then the children are not district residents and legally cannot attend school here.

"As most people might know, the state provides less than 25 percent of the funding to educate each student in the district, with tax dollars providing the rest," said Forsyth. "Taxes continue to rise as more and more students keep coming into the district. So, yes, we do try to make sure all of our students meet the strict legal definition of being residents."

Forsyth said it's not known at this time if the school board will appeal Commonwealth Court's decision in state Supreme Court.

Calling the decision "a victory," Speaks-Velazquez said the next step at this point is getting her grandson back in school.

"Even though he's missed his junior year and most of his senior year, he should be able to graduate this year, since he's been on schedule with taking his courses," she said.

Read more...

Would a father get the same deal

MANCHESTER – A local woman was given a suspended sentence this week after admitting she did not pay $18,439.66 in court-ordered child support.

Samantha Bilodeau, 37, of Manchester was sentenced Wednesday in Hillsborough County Superior Court-Northern District. She pleaded guilty to a felony charge of criminal non-support.

Judge William J. Groff sentenced her to two to four years in prison, with all but time served - 208 days - suspended for five years.

The sentence includes five years probation, under the supervision of the state Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Child Support Services (DCSS) Legal-Criminal Enforcement Unit. Bilodeau also had to sign a waiver of extradition.

Wayne Jeffrey, DCSS program specialist/criminal investigator, said today it is "not as uncommon" as in the past to find some women not paying their court-ordered child support. Another woman, he said, currently is being held in the Valley Street jail for not paying back child support.

"We try not to use that term 'dead beat,' but there are some dead beat moms," he said.

Bilodeau’s apprehension and prosecution is the result of the combinedefforts of the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Department, the Office of theHillsborough County Attorney, and DCSS.

Read more...

What,Where and How

Read more...

Bill would lengthen child support payments

COLUMBIA, S.C. - Parents could be on the hook for child-support payments past their child's 18th birthday under a bill to be considered today in a Senate subcommittee.

That could cost a noncustodial parent an extra $3,000 if he or she was forced to pay an additional year of child support. But it would also ensure students who started school later than their peers would not have their financial support yanked while they were still in high school.

The bill says that if a child is still in high school, the parent would have to make child-support payments until the child graduated or until the youth turned 19, whichever occurred later.

The changes were proposed at the urging of South Carolina Department of Social Services officials who were beginning to see signs that more and more students were getting caught in a gap between their 18th birthday and graduation day.

"If you had a child whose birthday was in October and they turn 18 in their senior year, they are without child support for about 9 months," said Larry McKeown, director of DSS division of child support enforcement.

"This levels the playing field. There is nothing magical in the 18th birthday. The magic is in paying child support until they finish school as long as your child is making satisfactory progress," McKeown said.

Since 2003 the amount of child-support payments paid to parents caring for children has crept up steadily from $244 million to $254 million last fiscal year. The number of cases stayed about the same, while the collection amounts increased from $239 to $256 per month, according to DSS data.

The House approved the bill in February.

Read more...

the federal Bradley Amendment

the federal Bradley Amendment for child support is unconstitutional:
1. violation of due process under the 4th and 5th Amendments
2. deprival of equal protection under the law
3. violation of state sovereignty under the 10th Amendment
4. violation of natural human rights under the 9th Amendment

Write your Congress and Senate to repeal Bradley!

and more details at http://bradleyamendment.wordpress.com

---

Child Support Mess: The Bradley Amendment
Uploaded by repealbradley

Read more...

Man get CS Back.

Judge David Roper said he felt bad for Kenneth Samuels when he learned the child he had fathered for 11 years wasn't his.

Justice was also shortchanged, the judge said, because Mr. Samuels had been paying child support all of those years.

Last month, Judge Roper ruled that Jamie Hope, the child's mother, and Oba Wallace, the child's biological father, would have to repay Mr. Samuels $14,460 in child support he had paid since 1997.

Such an order is unusual, but not unique.

"We have seen it happen before," said Sandra Jarrett of the state's Child Support Recovery Unit.

Usually there is no intent to defraud, Ms. Jarrett said. Mothers who have had relationships with more than one man might not know who the biological father Is without a DNA test.
Read more here

Read more...

Dads win in new child support appeals

Finally NCp get some rights concerding thier child support case in Australia.

---

THOUSANDS of separated parents - generally fathers - are making use of new appeal rights against the Child Support Agency, with many overturning decisions on payments and income assessments.

A Daily Telegraph investigation can reveal that 1190 parents unhappy with Child Support Agency decisions lined up to use new hearing rights with the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) granted early last year.

In about half of valid appeals so far determined, Child Support Agency decisions have been modified, usually resulting in adjustments in payments.

The high number of challenges in the SSAT can be revealed as the agency begins sending out 1.5 million new payment assessments in the lead up to a new child support assessment system to take effect from July 1.

The new system is the biggest reform since the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act was passed by Federal Parliament in 1988, setting up the agency.

The existing fixed percentage payments regime will be dumped in favour of a more complex formula which takes into account both parents' incomes, higher expenses as children get older and the financial needs of children in second families.

Of the 581 valid appeals determined by the SSAT to date, about half, 280, resulted in the original Child Support Agency decision being changed. NSW parents have lodged 246 appeals with 107 decisions rebuffing the agency.

Both the Child Support Agency and the SSAT refused to state how many of the appeals were lodged by men but fathers are usually the paying parent so are more likely to lodge appeals.

Before the SSAT was given appeal powers, parents unhappy with decisions by the Child Support Agency had no recourse other than to pursue the expensive and time-consuming avenue of fighting it in the courts.

A spokesman for the Child Support Agency said the agency was prohibited by law from releasing any details on cases heard by the tribunal.

But he said more than half of all cases were disputes over assessment of child support payments, with the remaining 43 per cent concerning "care, the credit of non-agency payments and acceptance of estimated incomes".

Men's Rights Agency director Sue Price said it was good news that Child Support decisions were being successfully challenged, but she called upon the SSAT to make its decisions public.

Ms Price said present laws meant any identification of individual cases could lead to heavy fines or a jail sentence.

Read more...

Va. sues Texas collection agency over child support payments

By Elizabeth Simpson
The Virginian-Pilot
© February 9, 2008

Virginia is suing a private child-support collection agency based in Texas for interfering with the state's collection efforts.

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine and Attorney General Bob McDonnell announced the lawsuit on Friday.

In a news release, the state officials said the organization Supportkids Inc. sends wage-withholding notices to employers of parents who owe child support payments, and directs the employer to send payments directly to the company's office in Austin, Texas, rather than to Virginia's Division of Child Support Enforcement.

The private company charges parents who have custody of the children a 34 percent fee before forwarding the remainder of the payment, according to the state's news release. Under Virginia law, child support payments must be routed through the Division of Child Support Enforcement, a state agency.

Messages and e-mails to the Supportkids company asking for a response to the lawsuit were not immediately responded to on Friday.

Families typically turn to a private, for-profit child-support collection agency when the state has not been successful in collecting payments.

According to the Supportkids' Web site, the company has collected more than $360 million since 1991 on behalf of clients, making it the largest private child-support collection company in the country.

In the news release about the lawsuit, Kaine said Virginia's Child Support Enforcement agency collected more than $608 million last year for 484,000 children who are owed money.

Some parents and coalitions support the efforts of private agencies, saying they give parents more options in collecting money for their children.

Nick Young, director of the state's Child Support Enforcement agency, said the state has received complaints from employers and non-custodial parents who confuse the private company with the state support enforcement division.

He said in some cases, parents and employers are getting notices from both the state and the private agency. "Employers are calling us saying, 'Which one do we send it to?' " Young said.

Young said some child custody cases involve several children, and the private company might pursue collection for only one of the children at the expense of the others, which creates inequities. He said other attempts have been made to try to get the private companies to follow the state's legal requirements for child support payments, but this is the first time the state has filed a lawsuit.

Elizabeth Simpson, (757) 446-2635, elizabeth.simpson@pilotonline.com

Read more...

Judge dismisses suit over non-lawyers signing motions

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging the authority of non-lawyer staff members of the Division of Child Support Enforcement to sign motions to hold in contempt parents who are delinquent in their support obligations.

U.S. District Judge Glen E. Conrad ruled that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine deprives him of jurisdiction to decide the issue because the Virginia State Bar's Standing Committee on Unauthorized Practice of Law had rejected David B. Briggman's contention that the practice is the unauthorized practice of law.

The committee was acting in its judicial capacity, and, under the doctrine, a federal court has no jurisdiction to review and reject a state court judgment.

Conrad noted in Briggman v. Commonwealth (VLW 008-3-003) that Briggman still has the opportunity to challenge show cause motions and other pleadings filed by DCSE employees who are not attorneys. Briggman said he intends to refile his challenge to the practice in Rockingham Circuit Court.

Briggman contended in the
federal suit that DCSE lacks the authority to enforce thousands of such
orders because their filing by non-attorneys rendered them void ab
initio.

Kimberly J. Daniel, a juvenile and domestic relations district judge in Fairfax County, dismissed such a motion in October because it was not signed by an attorney.

Craig M. Burshem, a senior assistant attorney general who represents DCSE, said he disagrees with Daniel but does not want to run the risk that a DCSE employee could be charged criminally with the misdemeanor of practicing law without a license. One of the 45 attorneys who routinely represents the division will sign such motions, he said.

Burshem said the attorney general's office is considering its options, including submission of legislation to the General Assembly or a request for an amended rule of court, to address Briggman's argument and Daniel's ruling.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Read more...

Court: Child support must be paid if graduation delayed

PHOENIX - Parents ordered to provide child support can't escape their obligation simply because the youngster can't graduate from high school in four years, the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.

In a unanimous decision, the judges rejected the arguments by a father who said his financial responsibility ended when his youngest child should have graduated.

The father, not identified, acknowledged the requirement in state law for support through high school. But he argued that the law was not intended to provide an extra year of support for a child on the "five-year plan'' who did not graduate in four due to "failing grades and lousy attendance.''

But the judges said as long as the student appears to be making progress, the duty continues even into a fifth year of high school — and even if the student already has turned 18.

Court records show that genetic testing showed the man is the biological father of all four of the mother's children. He was ordered to pay both back support and future payments.

In 2005 the state Department of Economic Security, which is entitled to intervene in child support cases, sued for past-due support. The father disputed the amount and said he was entitled to credit for payments he made after the youngest should have graduated from high school.

State law generally ends required child support at 18. But it also says if the youngster is still attending school at that age, the obligation can continue until the youngster turns 19.

The father contends that requirement simply means the money continues if the child is a senior on his or her 18th birthday but is set to graduate that year. He said it doesn't mean taking an entire extra year to get a diploma.

Appellate Judge Philip Hall, writing for the court, said the father does have a point. He said the law does "impose some responsibility on the child to be present in class.''

But Hall pointed out the law does not impose any specific attendance requirement.

Instead, Hall said, the trial judge has to consider specific factors, including whether the youngster is regularly present in class, the reasons for the absences and whether the child is taking "affirmative steps in pursuit of an education.''

Beyond that, the judge said, state policy requires parents to support their offspring "even if those children make unwise decisions.''

In this case, Hall said, the mother acknowledged the child was "struggling'' but said he was "giving his best effort'' while moving back and forth between his parents' homes. She also said many of the days the child was listed as absent were simply days he showed up late to school.

The child did, in fact, eventually get his high school diploma.

Read more...

Contempt motion on support issue must be signed by a lawyer

For those in VA that might have been following the Briggman case over the years. I can only wonder how this decision will play out over time in Virginia

 

Judge: Contempt motion on support issue must be signed by a lawyer
By Alan Cooper

Staff members of the Virginia Division of Child Support Enforcement no longer are signing motions to hold in contempt parents who are delinquent in their support obligations.

The decision to abandon the practice was made after Kimberly J. Daniel, a juvenile and domestic relations district judge in Fairfax County, ruled that Virginia Code Sect. 8.01.271.1 requires such pleadings to be signed by an attorney.

The absence of a lawyer's signature makes such pleadings void ab initio, Daniel ruled on Oct. 30.

Craig M. Burshem, a senior assistant attorney general who represents DCSE, said he disagrees with Daniel but does not want to run the risk that a DCSE employee could be charged criminally with the misdemeanor of practicing law without a license. One of the 45 attorneys who routinely represents the division will sign such motions, he said.

John L. Bauserman Jr., the attorney who represented the father, and David B. Briggman, a father who believes he has been abused by the failure of DCSE to follow what he views as the law, contend that Burshem's change of position comes 20 years too late.

And they argue that the logical extension of their position has truly staggering consequences. They contend that the absence of a signature by an attorney on motions to establish child support, modification of existing orders and the enforcement of existing orders means that those pleadings are a legal nullity.

As a result, they contend, courts lack the authority to enforce tens of thousands of orders ostensibly obtained by DCSE over the past 20 years.

Briggman has filed a pro se complaint in U.S. District Court in Harrisonburg asking a federal judge to make such a ruling. Judge Glen A. Conrad heard arguments last month on the Virginia attorney general's office's motion to dismiss Briggman's suit.

He had asked the judge to bar non-lawyers from filing such pleadings, but an assistant attorney general told Conrad that they would no longer do so.

The AG's office contends that Code Sect. 16.1-260(A)(ii) authorizes non-lawyers to file such pleadings. A formal attorney general's opinion in 1988 reached that conclusion, but Bauserman and Briggman emphasize a significant qualification in the opinion. Filing such pleading is not the practice of law only "to the extent that the information provided by such employees is limited to facts, figures or factual conclusions and does not include legal arguments or legal conclusions."

Any motion to hold a parent in contempt is making a legal argument and asserts a legal conclusion that the parent is delinquent in his support obligations, Bauserman said.

Briggman filed a complaint with the Virginia State Bar's Standing Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law, which agreed with Briggman that completing and filing form pleadings by lay employees is the unauthorized practice of law.

But the committee found in February 2006 that Code Sect. 16.1-260(A)(ii) "authorizes the DCSE to file such pleadings on its behalf, through its lay employees and, therefore, that the conduct complained of is the authorized practice of law by such employees."

Bauserman contends that is an erroneous reading of the statute. The law requires most proceedings in juvenile court to go through an intake officer and lists three specific exceptions in which pleadings can be filed directly with the clerk: petitions from the commonwealth's attorney or county attorney, petitions by an attorney on behalf of a client, and support petitions by the Department of Social Services on its own motion.

Allowing the department to file motions with the clerk does not mean that an employee rather than a lawyer can do so, Bauserman said.

One case permitting

In what is apparently the only circuit court ruling on the point; Judge William D. Broadhurst of Roanoke interpreted the statute in September 2006 to allow employees to file pleadings on behalf of the department. Because an attorney can file pleadings under the exception that allows any attorney to file directly with the clerk, the special provision for the department would be superfluous if it needed an attorney as well, Broadhurst wrote in Commonwealth ex rel. Brazell v. Doss (VLW 007-8-274).

Bauserman is unpersuaded and says having laymen rather than lawyers investigate the basis for a pleading can have real consequences.

He cited as an example the year-long incarceration of a father on what he contends was an outdated administrative order from the department. After the mother obtained an administrative support order, the father went to court and won custody of the child. The father then obtained an amended administrative order eliminating any future support obligation and noting arrearages of less than 12 weeks.

A few months later, the mother regained custody but Bauserman contends that the amended support order was never withdrawn nor changed. Nevertheless, years later, DCSE sought and obtained a contempt citation based on the original order. Bauserman contends that a lawyer was more likely to have caught that error than a layman.

The father's attorney did not raise the issue at the contempt proceeding, and the judge ordered him to jail. The father could not appeal because he could not post a bond to cover the arrearages that the judge found to have accrued.

"On the face of it, this is not a popular group of litigants," Bauserman acknowledges.

But the law specifies that the signature of an attorney on a pleading certifies that he believes its contents to be well-ground in law and fact. When a non-lawyer is allowed to sign a pleading, no one is accountable—ethically or otherwise—for an inadequate investigation, he said.

Burshem, the DCSE attorney, said Bauserman's position is "strictly an ethical argument. … Nobody is making an allegation that the substantive law has been violated."

Bauserman responds that the law still is being violated, and "we don't get to pick and choose which laws we can follow."

Burshem said DCSE has several options to address the complaints of Bauserman and Briggman, including seeking legislation or a Supreme Court rule change to allow staff members to sign such pleadings. No decision has been made on what approach to take, he said.

 

Read more...

Contempt motion on support issue must be signed by a lawyer

Judge: Contempt motion on support issue must be signed by a lawyer
Staff members of the Virginia Division of Child Support Enforcement no longer are signing motions to hold in contempt parents who are delinquent in their support obligations. The decision to abandon the practice was made after a juvenile and domestic relations district judge in Fairfax County ruled that Virginia Code Sect. 8.01.271.1 requires such pleadings to be signed by an attorney.
Full Story

Read more...

Plundering fatherhood

By Stephen Baskerville

Fatherhood is all the rage. President Bush unveils a $315 million plan "to promote responsible fatherhood." Sen. Evan Bayh, head of the Democratic Leadership Council, hosts a televised conference on "Connecting Fathers and Families" and promises to make fatherhood a top issue. Both houses of Congress, plus the governors and mayors, create bipartisan taskforces on "fatherhood promotion" and issue resolutions affirming the importance of fathers. The National Fatherhood Initiative holds a Fatherhood Summit in Washington on June 7-8.

How, precisely, the state can promote something as personal and private as a parent's relationship with his own children (let alone whether it should) is seldom explained. But if government fatherhood programs sound somewhat nebulous, there is a more concrete side to our leaders' discovery of fatherhood. In 1998, President Clinton signed the ominously-named "Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act" and announced a "new child support crackdown ... to identify, analyze, and investigate [parents] for criminal prosecution." On the campaign trail Al Gore called for jailing more fathers.

In Virginia, a commission dominated by lawyers, judges and feminists moves to increase child-support obligations. In Alabama the government calls fathers "dogs" and announces increased measures to hunt them down.

That a crisis of fatherhood exists can hardly be denied. Forty percent of American children and 60 percent of African-American children now live without their fathers. Moreover, the social and personal pathologies directly attributable to father absence – crime, unwed motherhood, truancy, drugs and alcohol – are now too well known to belabor.

But what may be at work here is government, once again, creating a problem for itself to solve. Certainly policymakers are so intent on registering their concern that they never stop to tell us where the problem comes from in the first place. The often unspoken assumption is that these fathers have, in Clinton's words, "chosen to abandon their children." Yet there is no evidence this is true.

No academic or government study has ever demonstrated that large numbers of fathers are voluntarily abandoning their children. On the other hand, no knowledgeable policymaker or scholar denies that millions of fathers are involuntarily separated from their children by government officials.

Of the almost 1 million divorces each year involving children, at least two-thirds to three-fourths are initiated by mothers, according to Sanford Braver of Arizona State University and other scholars. In the largest federally-funded study ever undertaken on the subject, Braver confirmed previous studies showing that overwhelmingly it is mothers, not fathers, who are walking away from marriages without legal grounds. These divorcing mothers have virtual certainty of getting the children and a large portion of the father's income, regardless of any fault on their part.

What is happening in divorce courts is much more serious than gender bias against fathers. A massive divorce industry is finding it increasingly easy – and lucrative – to simply eliminate fathers from their families with no show of wrongdoing and seize control of their children. The industry consists of judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, social workers, bureaucratic police and women's groups – all of whom have one interest in common: separating as many children from their fathers as possible. A father can then be plundered for almost any amount in coerced attorneys' fees, involuntary psychotherapy, and "child support" which his children may never see. Failure to pay frequently results in incarceration without trial.

"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals," wrote Ayn Rand. "When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."

What we are seeing today is nothing less than the criminalization of fatherhood itself: criminal penalties imposed on parents who have committed no act but are made outlaws through the actions of others in ways they are powerless to avoid. Once the father is stripped of custody, his contact with his own children outside government-approved times and locations becomes a criminal act. His criminalization is further consolidated through forced legal fees and impossible child-support burdens.

Child support obligations are determined by the same enforcement personnel who collect them. Such legislating by courts and enforcement agencies raises serious questions about the separation of powers and the constitutionality of the process. Where government officials develop an interest in hunting "delinquents," it is predictable that they will create delinquents to hunt. The more onerous the child-support levels, and the more defaults and arrearages, the more demand for coercive enforcement and for the personnel and powers required.

Private collection firms, such as Policy Studies, Inc., of Denver, are also involved in setting the levels of what they collect. Not only does an obvious conflict-of-interest arise in terms of the amount to be collected, but the firms can create precisely the "delinquents" and "deadbeats" they are hired to pursue and on which their business depends.

A presumption of guilt pervades the courts themselves, where "the burden of proof may be shifted to the defendant" according to a legal analysis by the National Council of State Legislatures. In clear violation of the Constitution, courts have held that "not all child support contempt proceedings classified as criminal are entitled to a jury trial," and "even indigent obligors are not necessarily entitled to a lawyer." Thus impoverished parents who lose their children through literally "no fault" of their own are the only citizens who – when they are fortunate enough to be formally charged and tried at all, before being incarcerated – must prove their innocence without counsel and without a jury of their peers.

Rather than confronting this appalling violation of both family integrity and constitutional rights, our elected leaders are cooking up fatherhood programs that may do more harm than good. In Massachusetts, state officials have used federal money to draw up a list of "Five Principles of Fatherhood," including: "give affection to my children" and "demonstrate respect at all times to the mother of my children." One cannot help but wonder what penalties the state will bring to bear on fathers who fail to show sufficient "affection" and "respect."

In an attempt to soften its image, the National Child Support Enforcement Association declares, "Child support is more than money. Child support also is love, emotional support and responsibility." Yet there is something troubling about bureaucratic police taking it upon themselves to define and enforce a parent's love and emotional support of his own children. Is the state, with its armed agents and penal apparatus, mandated to punish fathers deemed to be delinquent on this as well?

There is nothing mutually exclusive about protecting the rights of parents and their children not to be separated without cause and enforcing child support collection on those men who truly abandon the offspring they have sired. Requiring men to accept financial responsibility for their progeny has been a matter of public policy for centuries. Forcing fathers to "finance the filching of their own children," as attorney and author Jed Abraham puts it, is a prescription for social and political destruction. Yet this is the experiment on which we are now embarked.

It might not be necessary for government to promote fatherhood if only government would stop destroying it.

---

Stephen Baskerville teaches political science at Howard University in Washington, D.C.

Read more...

Give gift of child support at holidays

Story Link here

You might believe that parents separated from their kids might do a little extra during the holidays. They'd want their offspring well fed, in warm clothes against the cold. And that either because of parental love or guilt that they're absent, the child would have plenty under the tree on Christmas.

In many cases you would be 100 percent wrong.

Instead, according to the Virginia Department of Social Services, some folks purposely skip paying child support in November and December. They know the state will intercept their tax refunds early next year. So in their selfish little minds, parents count on children getting the support. Just not now.

Merry Christmas, kid.

Veteran child support employees are familiar with the trend.

"It's a phenomenon that repeats itself every year," said Nick Young, director of child support enforcement for the DSS.

Young has heard it all: Parents get distracted. They've moved on to the second or third families and forgotten about the first.

But more than likely, the parent who has custody of the child is counting on the support to go holiday shopping.

"What are they going to do?" Young asked, "Buy them Christmas gifts in February?"

Last month, Young sent 150,434 Social Security numbers to the Internal Revenue Service and the Virginia Department of the Treasury. Updated biweekly, the numbers belong to parents who are $500 or more behind on their child support.

"If they have money coming back, we'll get it," Young said.

In 2006, "tax intercepts" collected $33 million from federal returns and $2 million from the state. The money was forwarded to the children to whom it was owed.

In a state where 484,000 children receive child support, DSS has implemented new programs and is rethinking old ones in their effort to snare support scofflaws.

Good. The state needs to use all its resources to fight for Virginia's children. If it doesn't, the debt falls to us. One-third of parents who do not receive child support end up on public assistance to meet their families' basic needs.

In the year ended June 30, Virginia collected more than $608 million in child support, a nearly 4 percent increase from the previous year. In Virginia, 88 percent of adults paying child support are men; 12 percent are women.

That sounds like a lot of money. But it's a small proportion of the total due: About 268,000 delinquent Virginia parents owe $2.4 billion in child support.

Last month, Virginia received a southern regional award for implementing a first-in-the-nation program that targets scofflaws through their cellphones. Since the state created the program two years ago, more than a dozen states have established it.

Young and his staff came up with the idea after realizing that cell-phones, which about 70 percent of Americans possess, could be a useful collections tool.

After exhausting every other method of locating a delinquent parent, the state subpoenas cell-phone companies to determine if the parent is a customer and has a billing address.

Twice a year, social services sends a list of names to the largest cell-phone companies that operate in Virginia. Officials request only an address, but some companies send the address and the person's cell-phone number. Companies do not send a list of phone numbers the person has called.

The practice has drawn rumblings in a state where people celebrate privacy. The idea of companies' releasing information for government use leaves me queasy, too.

But the idea of a parent refusing to take care of his or her child leaves me even queasier. In this case, I'm willing to ask the cell-phone company to give up the digits.

"Look, we're going to use all available means to find them," Young said last week. "I just want the address. ... I'm into, 'Where are you?' "

In addition to the cell-phone initiative, DSS began its "Early Intervention" program. That program meets with parents as soon as they receive an order to pay.

Case workers emphasize parents' responsibilities and ask if they face any issues that might hinder them from paying. For instance, if the person is jobless or underemployed, officials direct them to existing agencies in the community to help.

As young employees join the staff, child enforcement increasingly has gone high-tech. Caseworkers scope out MySpace and Facebook pages to track scofflaws.

"We've had people who say, 'I can't believe you found me off my blog,' " Young said.

Many people are familiar with the infamous "Most Wanted" deadbeat parent lists.

Just last week, Young and his staff discussed whether they will continue to use it as a poster or scrap the paper version after 19 years in favor of an online-only version.

Using the posters, the state has found 140 people, Young said.

As technology changes, Young said the state is willing to consider different ways of tracking delinquent parents.

"What we're trying to do is convince people to modify their behavior," Young said. "If you're going to live in the great state of Virginia ... we need you to take care of your kids."

Read more...

Interesting Acticle on Child Support

LOOKING FOR IDEAS
Officials nationwide are casting about for ways to update and improve their child support programs and are looking to their sister states for ideas. Many innovations are not created explicitly in law, but stem from broad statutory authority and supportive legislative oversight. Many predate the federal mandates and already have a positive track record, while others are still in their infancy. Some build upon the federal mandates, but most are entirely outside the 1996 requirements. Whatever their origin, they have one thing in common: Legislators want and need to know about them. These initiatives and others like them are sure to generate the next round of legislative reforms.

read more here

Read more...

New Mexico advocate for dads' rights takes on child support

The Belen father who founded Dads Against Discrimination and spent 15 years in New Mexico courts battling for fathers' rights has a new fight on his hands.

Don Chavez has filed a challenge to New Mexico's child support guidelines in state District Court in Albuquerque in connection with his recent divorce case.

Chavez's 16-page petition is devoted to the child support guidelines he claims are unfair.

Chavez said he is going to bat for parents who have custody of their children less than 25 percent of the time and must pay full child support to the custodial parent.

He has asked the court to develop new guidelines that will recognize that both parents must pay for the needs of the child and that their share should be based on their ability to pay.

If he is successful changing the guidelines, "tens of thousands of court-ordered child support orders in New Mexico will be rendered null and void," Chavez claims.

New Mexico collects $95 million annually in child support payments under the guidelines adopted in 1994, state officials said.

The state Human Services Department's Child Support Enforcement Division manages 60,000 cases, said Martin Eckert, Human Services Department public information officer.

Department officials said they were not aware of Chavez's petition. The department is not a party in his case, they said.

Chavez said New Mexico's child support guideline for determining payment is similar to a guideline struck down as unconstitutional in a Washington, D.C., case.

Chavez is critical of the divorce industry for not taking on this issue after the Washington court decision.

"Why has not one legally trained professional nor licensed attorney noticed the same in New Mexico?" Chavez asks in his petition. "Because this is their bread and butter."

Chavez is representing himself against his estranged wife, Quillon Dayton-Chavez of Albuquerque. She filed for divorce last month.

Chavez and Dayton-Chavez have two children, ages 3 and 6, from their seven-year marriage, his third and her second.

Chavez said he has not asked for child support from Dayton-Chavez. And she said she hasn't mentioned child support.

"I wasn't the one who brought up child support," Dayton-Chavez said. "He is acting like I asked, and I didn't."

Even if a new guideline is not developed, Chavez said he will benefit from the changes in child custody laws instigated by Dads Against Discrimination, a group he founded in New Mexico.

In 1980, when Chavez was in court fighting for joint custody of two daughters, his request was denied based on the Tender Years Doctrine, which basically said children were better off with their mother.

In today's divorce court, the law presumes that joint custody will be granted, unless a court establishes facts to support sole custody, Chavez said.

The joint custody law was passed by the Legislature in 1986.

Chavez said he has leave from his job as a school social worker to care for his two young children.

"I'm Mr. Mom," he said. "I'm the custodial parent."

Dayton-Chavez said Chavez lets her have the children three weekends a month.

"Personally, I don't see that Don's child support challenge is newsworthy," she said.

"He's trying to use the media and look very dedicated. He didn't want me to file for divorce, and this is his way to strike back."

Read more...

Fathers' group: Child-support warrants on Internet 'misguided'

By HEATHER SCOFIELD
Staff Writer

BUNNELL -- At least one national organization that champions the rights of fathers and children says there may be a down side to a new feature on the Flagler County Sheriff's Office Web site.

The agency just launched a new online database at www.myfcso.us that allows anyone to search by name or just view a list of those wanted by the Sheriff's Office. There are already more than 600 names.

The new "warrants" feature sounds like a good thing to some. But one national organization says if the new database is left as is, it could hurt children.

Why? Because parents who fail to pay child support could find their names featured on the list.

"It's a misguided activity on the part of law enforcement," said Mike McCormick of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children.

But the Sheriff's Office is not "picking and choosing" which warrants go online, spokeswoman Debra Johnson said. All warrants issued in Flagler County are going into the database. And child-support warrants are not featured on the separate portion of the Web site, which highlights several warrants weekly and includes photographs of the individuals wanted.

The Flagler Sheriff's Office appears to be the only law enforcement Web site in the area with a warrants database. Neither the Volusia County Sheriff's Office nor the Daytona Beach or DeLand police departments have a warrants database. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement's Web site has a database but child-support offenders aren't usually included, a spokeswoman said.

read more here

Read more...

Agencies partner to help Illinois collect $420,000 in past-due child support

ILLINOIS - The state's collection of past-due child-support payments increased 71 percent to $420,000 in 2007, thanks to a partnership between two state agencies seeking to crack down on delinquent parents, according to a statement released Sunday by Gov. Rod Blagojevich's office.

The state collected $245,000 in overdue child-support payments in 2006, according to the statement. But beginning this year, officials combined the services of the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, which collects child-support payments, with the Financial and Professional Regulation Department, the agency that issues state licenses for everything from public accountants to message therapists.

With this partnership, people who owe more than $1,000 in child support can be denied licenses when they are up for renewal.

Child-support payments statewide rose to $1.22 billion this year from $1.14 billion in 2006.

Read more...

Dad not guilty of felony child support charge

Jury says prosecution failed to provide enough evidence during trial

By Jameson Cook

Macomb Daily Staff Writer

A jury found a 36-year-old Eastpointe man not guilty of felony child support for late payments following a 2-day-trial in Macomb County Circuit Court.

Corey Flener wiped away tears after the jury delivered the verdict Thursday afternoon and said he felt relieved to have the burden of a potential felony conviction lifted. If convicted, he would have faced a sentence of up to four years in prison and a fine levied by Judge Tracey Yokich.

"I try too hard. I'm not a felon," Flener said following the verdict. "I can deal with owing the money."

The case was prosecuted by the state Attorney General's Office as part of its escalated campaign in recent years to crack down on parents who fail to pay child support.

Assistant Attorney General Tim Flynn pointed to five months between September 2003 and September 2006 that Flener failed to make payments to three of his children. His monthly support payments were $1,005 plus $400 for past-due bills.

Defense attorney Thomas Nunley acknowledged to jurors that while his client may not have paid those months, he overpaid other months to partially offset the arrearages. He paid most months, even if he underpaid.

The jury forewoman said outside the courtroom that the prosecution simply didn't supply sufficient evidence.

"We were all in agreement there wasn't enough information to make a (guilty) decision," she said.

Nunley said: "I'm glad the jury saw fit to see the totality of what I argued instead of the minute offenses the Attorney General was trying to convict him on."

Nunley argued that Flener actually had overpaid more than he owed during the 3-year period by about $8,000, plus $10,000 in credit for a retroactive reduction of the payment.

Flener still owes $60,000 but claims he was behind $45,000 in 2000 before he realized he owed any money because he was unaware his now ex-wife, Tammy, filed for divorce. The amount has climbed also because of accumulating interest.

Flener is self-employed, working in remodeling, so his income fluctuates, he said. Work has been spotty in recent years due to the area's lagging economy, he said.

He admitted he has only paid about $1,200 since last May and partly attributed it to bouts with depression stemming from the child-support case. He faces a Nov. 28 civil show-cause hearing in front of Yokich for failure to pay two $2,300 lump-sum payments ordered by Yokich in September.

Tammy Flener, who testified and attended the trial, said before the verdict that her ex-husband has downplayed his lack of payments and only pays when forced to do so. She said the most he has paid in one year is $14,000 and never made a $9,000 alimony payment.

"It's been a struggle," said Tammy Flener, who lives in Ithaca.

Their three children are aged 9, 11 and 13. Flener is remarried and has two other biological children, ages 5 and 7, with his second wife, plus two stepchildren, age 12 and 15, and an adopted 17-year-old daughter from a third woman.

Read more...

VA Support Fee

who is to pay, it will be paid by the ncp paying support not the cp. Nick Young is nothing more then a fucking asshole, who need to have a child by so bitch so she can do to him what he is doing to others.

New Fee for Those Getting Child Support

By KEVIN FREKING – Sep 7, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of families that turned to federal and state governments for help in collecting child support payments will now have to pay more for the service.

Beginning Oct. 1, families in several states will have to pay $25 annually when their states have collected at least $500 on their behalf. Families that previously received public assistance will be exempted.

The $25 will help reduce the federal deficit and compensate the federal government and the states for providing a child support program. Two-thirds of the fee will go the federal government; one-third to the state.

Families also pay a $25 application fee to get a state's help in obtaining child support.

For Claudia Fauntleroy of Petersburg, Va., the notice about the additional fee was akin to getting a $25 parking ticket in the mail. Her immediate reaction? "You've got to be kidding me."

Fauntleroy said she would be glad to pay the fee if it would help customers get better service, but she has spent too many hours waiting in lines for help she termed inadequate to think that will happen.

"I see this system and I really wonder why I'm paying this," Fauntleroy said.

State officials fought the assessment, which will get the federal government about $172 million over five years. Even as they lobby Congress to overturn the fee, state officials try to get parents to look on the bright side.

"The fee works out to $2 a month for those who are going to have to pay it," said Nick Young, who oversees Virginia's child support efforts. "I don't think you could hire an accountant, a lawyer, a paralegal and a caseworker to work on your child support cases for $2 a month anywhere else."

States get involved in child support cases when something has gone wrong and emotions run high - on both sides. The noncustodial parent has fallen behind in making payments, or refuses to pay child support. The state helps locate the noncustodial parent and it takes steps to ensure payment, such as by withholding money from a paycheck or an income tax refund.

"I think it's fair to say that services provided are a good buy at $25, but of course, $25 to these families are maybe milk and Pampers for a week," said Larry McKeown, who oversees South Carolina's child support program.

For poor families with one parent, child support collections amount to about a third of their income, according to the Center for Law and Social Policy, a liberal research group.

Congress approved the fee as part of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Some states have already begun collecting the fee. Several other states will begin collecting it after the new fiscal year kicks in on Oct. 1. Those states include Virginia, South Carolina, Iowa, Idaho, Washington and Oregon. Overall, the federal government estimates that about 3.8 million families will pay the $25.

States have the option of paying the costs, charging the custodial parent, or charging the noncustodial parent.

Two states Florida and West Virginia have announced they will cover the $25 cost.

The large majority of states have opted to make the custodial parent pay.

Young said that the child support owed in Virginia by the noncustodial parent averages between $6,000 and $7,000. If the state were to add the $25 fee to that tab, it would likely never collect.

"They'll say 'add it to my bill. Have a nice trip,'" Young said.

As a result, taxpayers would end up footing the bill for a program they're not directly participating in, so most states consider it more fair to assess the fee to the custodial parent, he said.

Young said that Virginia would use proceeds from the fee to improve customer service. Depending upon the size of a state's caseload, the fee will generate anywhere from a few hundred thousand dollars to several million dollars each year.

Some child support directors also say the fee creates a sense of ownership for customers, and as a result, they may be more cooperative with staff. Families also pay a $25 application fee to get a state's help in obtaining child support.

The $25 annual fee is just one of several changes that Congress approved last year for child support programs. State officials are most concerned about a change that will lower federal payments to the states by an estimated $1.6 billion over five years.

The federal government awards states that meet certain performance measures. In the past, when states spent that money on their child support programs, it generated a match from the federal government. Congress voted to no longer let states use the bonuses to leverage additional federal funding.

In comments submitted to a House Ways and Means subcommittee, state child support officials said the change "will very likely lead to a dramatic downsizing of the work force, resulting in much higher caseloads per worker and fewer cases being worked successfully."

So far, many states' governors appear intent on making up for the cut. The Lewin Group conducted a survey of 28 child support directors, and the researchers noted that 24 governors had proposed full replacement of the lost federal money. Many child support directors are worried, however, that the full replacement may not continue in future years.

Some members of Congress are also considering repealing the $1.6 billion cut. The House Ways and Means Committee scheduled a briefing for Monday to learn from child support officials about how less federal money could affect collections in individual states.

Read more...