Slavery 2.0 - Posts of family court bias

[Nutz]

If you know of an article that exemplifies how messed up the courts are with regard to family law, usually with men getting shafted, please post a link. If you have personal stories, please tell them as well. The more documentation the better. It's time we have an outlet and consolidated resource for such things.

Here's an example:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28080381/?gt1=43001

From this thread:
http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=154682

 

[Nutz]

Another interesting article from earlier in the year:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/2008-...t-on-unfair-child-support-practices-in-texas/

Antonio (not his real name) requested DNA testing. If what his relatives said was true, he argued, why should he have to support a child who wasn't biologically his? He would later learn that under Texas law, a man is presumed to be the legal father of any child born during his marriage to the child's mother, and if he questions his paternity, he has only four years to challenge it. All of Antonio's children were older than 4 by the time he and his wife went to court.

What happened next focused attention on the growing availability of DNA testing and caused a legal uproar that ricocheted from the halls of the Dallas County family courts to the Austin headquarters of Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott.

On January 14, family court Judge David Hanschen ordered Antonio and both of his daughters, ages 5 and 7, to undergo paternity testing immediately. The next day, lawyers within the attorney general's office who represent the state on behalf of the mother and children—asked the 5th Court of Appeals in Dallas for an emergency order halting the testing. These lawyers cited the four-year statute of limitations and argued that because Antonio was already the legal father, he had no grounds to request DNA testing and dispute that he was the biological father.

The Court of Appeals agreed and ordered that no testing be conducted. But it was too late: On January 16, the lab released the results, which placed the probability of Antonio fathering either of the girls at zero percent. On January 25, appeals court Justice Carolyn Wright ordered that the test results be sealed and kept from the children. This was followed in March by the court's written opinion that slapped Hanschen for ordering the testing in the first place and ordered the DNA results destroyed.

 

[Aragon034]

WhaaaaaaT?!

this is the first i hear of this! Disgusting!

ack, words do not suffice in my repugnance.

 

[Mr_rogers]

Wow... there's fairness for you.

 

[Asteconn]

Moral of the story, children will destroy you.

 

[everywomanshero]

I know some guys who have gotten the shaft big time. One of my ex wings got nailed for so much in temperary support and stuff that it actually was more than he was earning! He and his attorny pointed this out and the judge said for him to take a loan lol

Later when the case was finally settled, his 401k got raided and all kinds of things even though custody was split 50/50. My own experience was far different, I actually got paid for the house and paid not one penny myself.

A lot of this depends on the setup, if you have a traditional family with kids and the stay at home mom, then the court is going to ream you a new one in the event of a divorce. She's dependent on you for support and has no marketable skills, so says the court anyway, and so you're going to be on the hook for a long, long time.

The best way I know of to avoid this situation, short of never marrying or having kids, is to set things up where both people are contributing financially and child rearing wise to the relationship. If you sense divorce is a possibility, then all those savings, stalks, etc you have shored up during the marriage are going to be cut in half so you might as well live the good life off it while you can Prenups are a good idea if you'll be bringing a lot preexisting resources into the marriage. Also if you own your own business it is usually possible to rearrange personal vacations and such into legitimate business opportunities and such so that your salary doesn't look bigger than it truly is. For child support enforcement the situation is trickier than avoiding maintennance, as maintennance can be avoided entirely or you can even get it depending in the marriage's financial configuration and history. First of all, if you are concerned about this you need to be seeking primary custody (or at least joint custody, although I've heard some states prefer to appoint a primary custodian if both won't agree to this), Second, they are going to base the amount paid on your recent salary. Although this amount can be altered at predefined times (like say every 2 years) most people won't bother modifying the agreement, so it could behoove you to actually make less than you think possible during from the time child support can be anticipated until judgement occurs. I've never had this happen so I am not sure of the reporting process for financial changes and it probably varies a lot by state anyway. Finally, and I would never recommend someone intentionally do this, but obviously they have to know where you are in order to get a support agreement enforced. Many countries have reciprocal agreements with the US, so just because you're in France doesn't mean you can send her a postcard and not expect to have some missing figures in your next paycheck

 

[bigjohnson]

.... She's dependent on you for support and has no marketable skills, so says the court anyway, and so you're going to be on the hook for a long, long time.

This is based on the BS concept of her being "entitled" to the standard of living she's "accustomed to", which is just messed up. First, she's become used to it due to my hard work. Second I've become (in theory) accustomed to live in maid, cook, and sexual "services"; do I get to have her come provide those to me on some court mandated schedule? If not, can I deduct those expenses from her support?

Let's be fair after all.

 

[Someone Much cooler]

thats crazy. There are ways to get around divorce but child support is really unfair. check this out about this rapper, his baby moms wants $20k a month...what does junior really need $20k a month for and how can she justify needing that kinda money?
http://www.upi.com/Entertainment_Ne...zy_sued_for_child_support/UPI-48281130356928/

 

[Warrior74]

This is based on the BS concept of her being "entitled" to the standard of living she's "accustomed to", which is just messed up. First, she's become used to it due to my hard work. Second I've become (in theory) accustomed to live in maid, cook, and sexual "services"; do I get to have her come provide those to me on some court mandated schedule? If not, can I deduct those expenses from her support?

Let's be fair after all.

AMEN!

women are equal to men right? Or only at work and not in the civil/domestic arena? Cake and eating it too IMO!

 

[puma183]

I know some guys who have gotten the shaft big time. One of my ex wings got nailed for so much in temperary support and stuff that it actually was more than he was earning! He and his attorny pointed this out and the judge said for him to take a loan lol

Later when the case was finally settled, his 401k got raided and all kinds of things even though custody was split 50/50. My own experience was far different, I actually got paid for the house and paid not one penny myself.

A lot of this depends on the setup, if you have a traditional family with kids and the stay at home mom, then the court is going to ream you a new one in the event of a divorce. She's dependent on you for support and has no marketable skills, so says the court anyway, and so you're going to be on the hook for a long, long time.

The best way I know of to avoid this situation, short of never marrying or having kids, is to set things up where both people are contributing financially and child rearing wise to the relationship. If you sense divorce is a possibility, then all those savings, stalks, etc you have shored up during the marriage are going to be cut in half so you might as well live the good life off it while you can Prenups are a good idea if you'll be bringing a lot preexisting resources into the marriage. Also if you own your own business it is usually possible to rearrange personal vacations and such into legitimate business opportunities and such so that your salary doesn't look bigger than it truly is. For child support enforcement the situation is trickier than avoiding maintennance, as maintennance can be avoided entirely or you can even get it depending in the marriage's financial configuration and history. First of all, if you are concerned about this you need to be seeking primary custody (or at least joint custody, although I've heard some states prefer to appoint a primary custodian if both won't agree to this), Second, they are going to base the amount paid on your recent salary. Although this amount can be altered at predefined times (like say every 2 years) most people won't bother modifying the agreement, so it could behoove you to actually make less than you think possible during from the time child support can be anticipated until judgement occurs. I've never had this happen so I am not sure of the reporting process for financial changes and it probably varies a lot by state anyway. Finally, and I would never recommend someone intentionally do this, but obviously they have to know where you are in order to get a support agreement enforced. Many countries have reciprocal agreements with the US, so just because you're in France doesn't mean you can send her a postcard and not expect to have some missing figures in your next paycheck

Good points. Regarding the last point though, only the following countries have reciprocal agreements:

---------------------------------------------------------
http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_608.html

Q. WHAT COUNTRIES DOES THE UNITED STATES HAVE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGREEMENTS WITH AT PRESENT?

A. Currently, the U.S. has Federal reciprocal arrangements in force with Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic.
---------------------------------------------------------

You avoid the above few countries, then no one can collect from you. The world is a big place. Assuming they can find you Carmen Sandiago, they (really there is no "they"; this will have to be done by your ex-wife and her lawyer assuming she can still afford his fees) will have to start the litigation again in a local foreign court. They would have to hire local counsel and go through the local process. Many countries don't even have the concept of child-support in their laws as shared custody is the default. (and in Middle Eastern countries, the father usually ends up with the sole custody, not the mother). Assuming they can win a case against you in that foreign country, a very low probability, then many 2nd and 3rd world countries don't have the networked/matrixed online enforcement mechanisms to locate/seize/garnish assets that the US does. Hypothetically you could go to one of the 6,000 inhabited islands that make up Indonesia, and live out the rest of your life as a free man. Practice your trade, or be a farmer/fisherman.

The catch in this plan is that the State Department will not renew your passport once it expires in 10 years. So you will either have to drop off the matrix completely in your new home (i.e. become an illegal alien - oh the irony of ironies) ... or the better option is to have a 2nd passport in advance before you leave the US. If you have recently traceable European ancestry many EU countries will be glad to give you one. Furthermore, these EU countries are very protective of their citizens against foreign civil money judgements. (especially France).

To tell you the truth, my beef is not with child support. It is not a perfect system in that it gives the money to the custodial parent, and who the hell knows what she is doing with it. She could be spending it on her boobjob, using it to go on fancy dates, and take cruise vacations. The kid only benefits from a trickle down effect. But my real beef is with division of assets and alimony. Losing half your stuff, and being shackled (sometimes for life) to provide future support to a person who owes you nothing in return is really really unjust.

 

[Nutz]

Losing half your stuff, and being shackled (sometimes for life) to provide future support to a person who owes you nothing in return is really slavery.

Fixed.

 

[panormous]

I know that this isn't always true but most of the time if you try to be reasonable with the divorce settlements she will notice that and try to be reasonable as well. The problem is not that the court is unfair, but that the court is trying to settle what should be a personal dispute, and it is impossible for the judge to know what really happens. I have seen several divorces, and the only ones that went well were the ones where husband and wife sat down dispassionately and divided the property on their own terms. While it is not possible in all situations, if you can do it with your wife, you should.

 

[puma183]

Yeah this guy's wife was really reasonable:

http://www.abajournal.com/news/former_big_firm_lawyer_now_unemployed_still_on_the_hook_for_alimony/

He will be taking turns living under a bridge and living in a prison from now on. Say hi to Bubba!

Young men reading this: Don't Get Married. It's not worth it. Tedious boredom at its best, living hell at its worst. It's not your parent's/grandparent's marriage; because it's not the same laws as during their time. That's why even they will not think of warning you. New laws, new realities. Different laws, a different institution.

If you ever get the urge or social/pressure to marry, then do this instead: Find a woman you hate, and buy her a house. It will save you 20 years of misery.

 

[Nutz]

That's an excellent point, that things have changed both legally and institutionally. In neither case is it to the benefit of men.

 

[Nutz]

Some of these are pretty crappy, but it's valuable information nonetheless:

http://news.mensactivism.org/

http://www.dmoz.org/Society/People/Men/Issues/Fathers'_Rights/

http://mensnewsdaily.com/

http://www.menstuff.org/resources/resourcefiles/fathers.html

http://mens-rights.net/

http://www.angryharry.com/

http://www.nationalcenterformen.org/

http://www.themenscenter.com/National/national06.htm

http://www.abolish-alimony.org/

http://www.alimonyreform.org/

 

[Nutz]

From a similar thread:

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=2585

Female Sentencing Discount is real. It is statistically documented in category after category of crime. These are just the more visible examples. It turns out Justice has an "eject" button. Simply allege Abuse, and you are scott free. The alleged abuser doesn't even have to be your victim. It could be your long dead father, or long lost uncle, or some previous anonymous boyfriend. As long as you allege that you were once abused, you can kill anybody. This only works if you are smooth between the legs though. No Men Need Apply.

 

[puma183]

Well, here is one from Los Angeles:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/garber-court-case-2191444-partnership-domestic

Ex-wife moves in with and gets into a registered domestic partnership with her lover, but the ex-husband still has to keep paying Alimony, because she technically didn't remarry. He pays, the lovers party. All ensured by government's monopoly on using force ofcourse.

 

[Nutz]

http://www.971fmtalk.com/pages/4096.php

Check out the show title "Forced To Pay Child Support_Hr1_12-8-08"

http://www.971fmtalk.com/episode_download.php?contentType=36&contentId=3183121

 

[bigjohnson]

The whole idea that a parent who is unable to care for the children's needs is STILL somehow the best option just galls me. If they can't afford to feed the kiddies then BY DEFINITION they are not suitable. Most child support is complete bull unless the earner just flat out doesn't WANT them around. If a woman knew she would likely lose the kids and have to start working I bet she'd STFU and make the marriage work, maybe dish up a few more blowjobs.

 

[Nutz]

The whole idea that a parent who is unable to care for the children's needs is STILL somehow the best option just galls me. If they can't afford to feed the kiddies then BY DEFINITION they are not suitable. Most child support is complete bull unless the earner just flat out doesn't WANT them around. If a woman knew she would likely lose the kids and have to start working I bet she'd STFU and make the marriage work, maybe dish up a few more blowjobs.

Frakkin' word. But the feminazi's won't have that. Nope, not one bit.