CHILD SUPPORT AND CONSEQUENCES, PART 7

As the holidays start to waft towards those who are non-custodial parents, the annual ‘guilt bags’ start to arrive on the doorstep. Yes, you have done your best to keep up your Child Support payments, regardless of the criticism levied at you by the mainstream press, the government, feminists, and custodial parent groups. However, these selfsame groups will NOT admit that you have a right to VISITATION of those children you have been paying for--even though Visitation Rights are just as much the law as Child Support payments.

Nevertheless brothers, you are still ‘bummed out’ about not being able to spend time with your children, and you are wondering what to do to get over this dark cloud on your holiday horizon.

Let this column be your guide. Because there ARE things that you can do to be with your children, regardless of what the courts, your ex, and the chorus of naysayers may spout during the holiday season.

A WISE WOMAN SPEAKS:

Regina Nicholson works as a volunteer in the courts in Atlanta, Georgia. She recently dropped a long letter into my mailbag and some of the contents were worth sharing:

“Not all women are vicious, but I'm beginning to think at least 80% of them are spiteful and I'm a woman! Women need to realize, "Okay, the relationship ended. I might not like him anymore but the children have nothing to do with our relationship." Some women think they had a "Virgin" birth without help from the father!

I think having a close relationship with my Dad and Granddad helped me to understand people are people, regardless of gender. I think of all the times my Dad had tea parties with me. He attended my pageants and my "girlie" activities. He was my first softball coach. He helped me grow into a self-reliant woman and was my football buddy along with my Granddad. My Granddad was my heart. His words of wisdom and support were insurmountable. He also supported my activities. That's why I am a strong advocate for Dads being a part of their child's life.

Why are feminists so eager to come to the aid of bad mothers who maim and kill their children but fail to rally around a good father? Children need contact with both of their parents. It is so important for their well being!

People's rights are being taken away from them, slowly but surely. It reminds me of the poem by Pastor Martin Niemöller:

They came for the communists, and I did not speak up because I wasn't a communist;

They came for the socialists, and I did not speak up because I wasn't a socialist;

They came for the union leaders, and I did not speak up because I wasn't a union leader;

They came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak up for me.

I just don't want to be guilty of not assisting those who rights have been disregarded. My paternal grandmother always told me to remember where your rights end, another's begin.”

THEY WILL SEEK YOU OUT:

For the remainder of this column, I’m going to supply a few tips to get through the holidays and into the New Year for non-custodial parents by means of action and inspiration. Please don’t think that due to a failure you are a failure. Everyone has come up short from time to time.

Stop beating up on yourself and dance with life, instead of being towed around by strife and bitterness. You can’t control what you ‘ex’ is doing. You can’t control what the courts are saying. You can’t control how your kids are reacting.

But you can control you.

The first suggestion, right off the bat, is to realize that you CAN build a legacy that your children will be proud of and share with their children, years--perhaps decades down the road.

My Pastor, the Rev. Dr. Fitzhugh L. Lyons, Sr. has been a preacher for more than 50 years. He has seen the effects of one parent keeping the children away from the other parent. “Water seeks its own level,” he likes to say, “and no matter how much the other parent may disrespect you, and try to poison your children against you, they WILL seek you out, to hear your side. Be ready with an answer when they come to see you.”

BUILDING A SPIRITUAL LEGACY:

The first legacy any non-custodial parent should seek to build for their children is a spiritual one. This simply means, if you are a Christian and attend church, you should start, continue, and consistently pray for EACH one of your children.

“Court orders” didn’t stop Job from praying for his kids, and he had ten of them the first time around. Prayer not only gets your heart ready for the good news of life, it provides that something ‘extra’ to get you through the hard times.

Build a legacy ‘kit’, full of letters, good books, and items that will show your children what kind of man you are, and how you have changed for the better, regardless of what the ‘naysayers’ would like to state. Most of all include a small Bible for each child, with an inscription concerning YOUR faith that God will lead them as he has led you.

BUILDING A HUMOR LEGACY:

What legacy kit would be complete without taking time to laugh? I’ve also packed away a few of my ‘funnies’ for my children. Yes, I have kept them ‘clean’, which is a MAJOR prerequisite for developing character and quality in my children, and their children.

Brothers, take the time to pass on funny stories. Quotes. Family happenings. Some of the things that YOU got in trouble for, when YOU were growing up. Or, your parents in their growing-up years. I will guarantee you that with each laugh, your child will be draw closer to the ‘real you’. Closer than your ‘ex’ will ever be able to drive them away.

BUILDING INSPIRATION, DREAMS, AND ECOURAGEMENT:

Possibly the most important portion of your legacy arsenal are a few items that give your children the opportunity to be themselves, and shoot for their own goals. They must discover how to use their own talents, skills, and abilities to make their way along in life. They are originals--not carbon copies.

Brothers, if YOU weren’t a ‘sports star’ when you were growing up, why put such an unrealistic expectation on your kids? There is a need for doctors, teachers, and even poets. Give your children the freedom to dream and inspire them to reach for the stars--even if the sky is overcast and dark. Give them some words and heroes that will warm them when the fires of life have gone out.

Yes, maybe your marriage ended before its time. That doesn’t mean that your children can’t have strong marriages and their own identity. Just make sure that you take the time to let them know, within your legacy kit, how much you love them…and how proud you are of them.

No court on earth can stop you from leaving that love for your children.

Mike Ramey is the author of THE MANHOOD LINE, a syndicated, monthly column written for men from a biblical, business, and common sense perspective. Emails welcome to manhoodline@yahoo.com. ©2003 Mike Ramey/Barnstorm Communications (1).

Mike Ramey ... now you know I don't mean to be difficult, but doesn't "legacy" imply after death or something similar to that?

You started this article out talking about the holidays, these current holidays soon upon us ... right?

Well, while a legacy may do much for a child after their parent has passed on, it won't do much for the child or the parent during this 2002 holiday season. If in fact legacy does relate to after someone has passed on, the Father won't be here to enjoy any of the smiles that are passed on from this legacy.

Therefore, I propose a few additions to this article. :)

Yes, I would imagine that the holiday season is tough on a non-custodial parent, especially if the custodial parent is difficult to deal with. But trust me on this fellas (and ladies if you find yourself in this position) ... children don't require a whole bunch. All they really want to know is that they are loved. So rather than packing these "legacy items" in a box, to be bequeathed to them upon your death ... put a pretty bow on these things right now and take them to your baby. Watch as they smile, quickly tearing the wrapper off the box to see what their Daddy brought to them. Yes, fill it with the things Mike has mentioned above ... but give them while there is still breath in your body, while you can see the joy on your child's face and feel the hug they'll give you after it's all said and done.

No mean mother or court system can deny a father the love of his children. A simple phone call, a card that you saw in the store that made you smile and think of them. An unexpected trip to McDonald's or the park. Eating lunch with them at school, or spending a Sunday afternoon, just the two of you. Constant reassurance that you are with them and that you love them ... in spite of financial difficulties or hard times. Children don't care about money ... they care about you. They just want you. They want to know that you're willing to weather the storm of an angry mother, a steep mountain, or anything else, just to speak to them. Talk about a legacy! This child will never let anyone keep them from their child, because they will know that nothing kept my Daddy from me! This is what they'll remember ... even though my Mommy & Daddy are angry with each other ... my Daddy still calls me every Saturday (of course you can pick whatever day is convenient for you).

Let your baby know that you don't have any extra money, if you don't have it. If you do have it, sneak them their own $50 or $100 bill! Tell them to buy what they want, or better yet, take them shopping for it ... make it a day!

It isn't about the big stuff ... it's the very small stuff that children want and need. Just a few minutes of your time to let them know, personally, that you are there for them ... love them ... and would give them the world if it were yours.

Doing this regularly, builds that legacy while at the same time, you get to enjoy it with them.

In regard to a Father not receiving visitation, if it is court-ordered and he is living up to his end of that bargain ... take her to court! No court would deny you visitation, as a matter of fact, she'll probably be held in contempt! If it isn't court ordered visitation, get the judge to order it. It's all about no mountain being too steep, that you'd not climb it for your children ... now that's a legacy!

:heart:

Destee

Now Destee, the purpose of the column is dealing with a segment of men who have been 'blocked' by the courts, their 'ex's' and even the distance of a few states or a few countries from seeing their kids.

If money were the only issue, then there would be no 'mass media displays' of rounding up folks (that's men and women) who are/have been/could be behind in their child support and tossing them into jail or prison.

No, this column goes to something deeper and it comes to my mailbag on a regular basis...How CAN I see my kids when my 'ex' is using the courts to block me at every turn? That's the message I get.

A Legacy to me is thinking for the long term. Empires are built over the long term; Dynasties are built over the long term. Legacy is thinking of your children over the long term.

You and I may not agree, but that's life and that's freedom. But that stuff about giving extra money, etc. is pretty hard for folks (and some of them are women) who are working double shifts and overtime to pay legal bills, court costs, and child support arrearrages...and in some cases their 'ex's' legal bills when their 'ex' has the resources to pay their own. The mentality of the courts is that either side can pay...and it's not neccesarily the right side!

Anyway, there ARE noncustodial parents who are going to have the blues during the upcoming holidays...for one reason or another. The holidays don't revolve around money, nor should they! In fact, some 'exes' would be the first to run back INTO court in the new year if noncustodials 'dug down' and 'gave up' some 'extra' money. The judges would ask, then mandate 'well, if you can give this much extra...you can continue to give this much extra...COURT ADJOURNED!"

Just a closing thought...children are GREAT! But they are the future of the family...not the bedrock. The BEDROCK are Mother and Father. How THEY get along will determine how ALL get along. And, if SOME marriages fail, it is STILL up to Mother and Father to leave their 'voice' to their children.

This is a great way of doing that without the 'dollar signs' that many would like to 'insert' into whether or not one is a good parent based upon the size of their wallet. Leaving something like a 'Legacy Kit' or packages doesn't mean one has to wait all their lives to get it to their kids. Prayer can be unwrapped at any time.

Mike Ramey

Originally posted by Mike Ramey
Now Destee, the purpose of the column is dealing with a segment of men who have been 'blocked' by the courts, their 'ex's' and even the distance of a few states or a few countries from seeing their kids.
What do you mean by "blocked" by the courts? The court, after reviewing the evidence decided that it would be in the best interest of the children for the Father not to be present in their lives? Regarding ex's, they certainly can make life difficult for each other, such is life. I think encouraging our young people to choose wisely their partners, teaching them (showing them) how to weather storms together, will aid in the future regarding this. Unfortunately, if we are already in a "bad ex situation" we've got to weather that storm, whether we like it or not ... such is life. It usually isn't peaches & cream for either side of a failed relationship. If the Father is miles away from their children, again, he'll have to be resourceful, coming up with ways to "communicate" with their child. They certainly aren't the first to be separated for this reason and won't be the last. The items you listed for the legacy box would be well-received via mail.
Originally posted by Mike Ramey
If money were the only issue, then there would be no 'mass media displays' of rounding up folks (that's men and women) who are/have been/could be behind in their child support and tossing them into jail or prison.
I don't understand the above Mike. Are you suggesting that it's not about the delinquent child support payments and men/women are actually being prosecuted for other reasons? The non payment of child support is just a smoke-screen?
Originally posted by Mike Ramey
No, this column goes to something deeper and it comes to my mailbag on a regular basis...How CAN I see my kids when my 'ex' is using the courts to block me at every turn? That's the message I get.
Again, how are ex's using the court against them, can you provide some examples? If a man is paying his child support it seems the court would hold her in contempt if he's not allowed visitation. As a matter of fact, even if he's not paying child support, it does not give her right to take his visitation from him. I would imagine that someone who isn't living up to their end of the court ordered agreement, would not feel real comfortable going before a judge saying someone else isn't doing what they're suppose to do. The best thing here is to do what the court requires so that when she gets beside herself a man will have a legal leg to stand on.
Originally posted by Mike Ramey
A Legacy to me is thinking for the long term. Empires are built over the long term; Dynasties are built over the long term. Legacy is thinking of your children over the long term.
Okay, thanks for the definition. I agree.
Originally posted by Mike Ramey
You and I may not agree, but that's life and that's freedom. But that stuff about giving extra money, etc. is pretty hard for folks (and some of them are women) who are working double shifts and overtime to pay legal bills, court costs, and child support arrearrages...and in some cases their 'ex's' legal bills when their 'ex' has the resources to pay their own. The mentality of the courts is that either side can pay...and it's not neccesarily the right side!
It is so okay that we don't agree! Gosh, I think it would be rather boring if everyone lived and thought the same as the next. I welcome the diversity as it provides me opportunities to learn and consider perspectives I may never have before.

The stuff about giving extra money, I did say if one has it. I also said, if you don't, tell your child that. I listed lots of things that cost no money. It's not about how much money the child gets from their non-custodial parent, it's how much love, i.e., time and attention.

In regard to who pays attorney fees ... hmmmm ... is that not negotiable (isn't that what attorney's are for)? If not, again, no one said that life would be a flowery bed of ease. Things are hard, tough, not fair, but we still must live and take care of the children, somehow shielding them from all of the animosity that develops when a relationship fails.
Originally posted by Mike Ramey
Anyway, there ARE noncustodial parents who are going to have the blues during the upcoming holidays...for one reason or another. The holidays don't revolve around money, nor should they! In fact, some 'exes' would be the first to run back INTO court in the new year if noncustodials 'dug down' and 'gave up' some 'extra' money. The judges would ask, then mandate 'well, if you can give this much extra...you can continue to give this much extra...COURT ADJOURNED!"
There are going to be custodial parents having the blues during the upcoming holidays. People in general will have the blues during these holidays ... for one reason or another. If the threat of a court, or anything, keeps a parent from doing what they can for their child, they are in much worse condition than they realize, in my opinion they have reason to have the blues. If they are doing all they can to meet their obligation to emotionally, physically, spiritually and yes, financially, care for the child they brought into the world, joy should be theirs, everyday.
Originally posted by Mike Ramey
Just a closing thought...children are GREAT! But they are the future of the family...not the bedrock. The BEDROCK are Mother and Father. How THEY get along will determine how ALL get along. And, if SOME marriages fail, it is STILL up to Mother and Father to leave their 'voice' to their children.
I do agree that it is important for the parents to get along, for the emotional, spiritual and physical well being of the child. No one said this would be easy, but it's the cup of many and they must drink it. They must challenge themselves to make the best of a bad situation, for their child's sake. It is not easy. I've been there and done it. But even if one parent is being more difficult than the other, one has to remain wise and aware of the needs of the child ... denying themselves the luxury of lashing out, becoming angry and making a bad situation worse. Unfortunately many relationships don't have a person like this in it and everyone is thinking of their own individual pain and can't see past it to look at how the children are faring, which is usually poorly.
Originally posted by Mike Ramey
This is a great way of doing that without the 'dollar signs' that many would like to 'insert' into whether or not one is a good parent based upon the size of their wallet. Leaving something like a 'Legacy Kit' or packages doesn't mean one has to wait all their lives to get it to their kids. Prayer can be unwrapped at any time.
I mentioned money only once and included "if one has it." Money seems to be the root of many men's pain when it comes to their ex's and children. I can certainly understand this, but it's life. Suck it up. It is the consequence of men who have children and don't remain with the woman that they had them with. It is also the consequence of the woman to be there 24/7, often denying herself pleasures because she now has children to raise alone. Both parents pay dearly, therefore, if you don't already have children protect yourself. If you do, love your babies and do all you can for them, including prayer, because they didn't ask to be here ... that was your choice ... or at least one willingly relinquished when you chose to engage in an act that could produce a child.

With so many young people having sex I think it would be good for us to make them aware of the very costly, long term, possibly life changing acts they are engaging in, before the child is conceived. For those of us who already have babies, it's too late, because we will be paying for a lifetime.

:heart:

Destee

I would think that it would be wise that you should write a piece on this issue from the custodial parent point of view, and post it here. That way, readers of the forum would clearly see both sides because it is an issue that is in the eye of the beholder.

As one who works in the court system, and one who has also been blessed to cover the court system, not to mention continuing to receive correspondence from those on both sides of the issue who are still entangled with the court system, I can candidly say your view of the courts is simplistic at best concerning this issue. The reality of the system is parental visitation is dictated by three things: state law, divorce decree, and whomever has the money for the best lawyer to get in front of the judge and argue their case.

If a non-custodial parent, be they male or female, is already on the hook for child support, and court expenses, and under a restraining order (which are given out quite freely, depending upon jurisdiction), along with trying to hold a job and pay expenses to avoid being homeless, then hopefully you can see what 'suck it up and be a man' says to them. It says, YOU don't have a right to live...just give everything to your kids AND GO AHEAD AND DIE!

Now, my writings are here based upon your courtesy at extending the opportunity for them to be here. I deeply appreciate any opportunity given. But I also understand that business is business. You can also withdraw that courtesy and turn off this forum, for it is getting increasingly obvious that you must need the space to dedicate to something more 'profitable' for your venture. Hey, I understand...you have bills to pay, and costs to meet. If it is more profitable to turn this section of the forum off, and you can draw other folk to a new forum of your liking, well that's life. I was successful before I came here, and I'll be successful IF I am asked to leave.

If that is your desire, then I have no bitterness towards you, which I cannot say you are not extending towards me. Whatever happened in your life did not happen in mine.

But, do you ask that your other contributors 'rewrite' items that they post after they post them? Your poets, your flow writers, and your short story creators? I realize that the forum rules have clear definitions and clear standards. I did not 'breach' those rules, based upon my reading of them. I freely posted, just like everyone else here. When Kem made the comment on one other place on the forum about you 'removing' things that you disagree with, I thought that he was kidding.

Evidently, he wasn't.

But it seems that I must have touched a nerve, and good writing is supposed to do that...make us think, and reflect. Whether or not we agree with it, or it touches a situation in our personal lives does not make good writing any less. There is freedom to disagree, not freedom to 'dis' the writer, nor the website provider, nor those who are involved in coming here to 'help out' by providing their services for free, for the joy of seeing a brother--or sister--having a dream unfold and grow.

That's why I came here, to help your dream grow, based upon your invitation...which seems that you are anxious to take back.

Evidently, I don't fit the 'unwritten criteria' which exists. And, if that be the case, you can exercise your 'editorial perrogative' and hit the delete button.

The last several postings have caused you great concern, so you may as well delete them too, and close this down...because this is what I'm getting from your last few posts. Evidently, you can make more money from someone who best fits the needs of your site. As a business owner, you have to make those calls.

I understand...cause I'm a businessman myself. I've got standards and schedules to meet.

No bitterness, and no regrets, because business is business.

Just 'suck it up', and pull the switch because you evidently need the space for alternative, and more pleasing viewpoints.

Mike Ramey

Oh Mike Ramey! I have obviously offended you and nothing could have been further from my intentions! Please, accept my apology. I meant no harm in challenging what you've shared. I invited you to join us after reading one of your articles, impressed with your writing skill and the position you took in lifting up, defending, and encouraging black men. I appreciate you accepting my invitation and all that you've shared with us in every forum. I want you with us as much now as I did then.

This is a "discussion forum" and most things included on the forum are open to discussion, pro and con. A Member may not agree with what is shared, but as long as they question, challenge, discuss respectfully, as I thought I was doing, things are usually okay.

I would never delete your articles, unless of course you asked me to. Yes, Kemetstry was kidding when he said that. Right off the top I can't think of any threads/posts that I've deleted (oh yeah, Kry's kill the white man, or something like that), but short of that, if no mistake, I've never deleted anyone's work from here. I'm sure Kemetstry will correct me if I'm wrong.

We occasionally have very heated discussions on this forum, though not nearly as often as I'd like. There are many of us with passionately different points of view, add to that the right topic, time to respond, and it's on! You and I have shared in other discussions but I guess we agreed for the most part, so there was no problem.

Mike Ramey, for the little while I've known you, it has been nothing but a pleasure. I'm really surprised at your response to my posts, as they were solely for the sake of discussion with no offense intended. Unfortunately, what just happened could easily happen again. I won't be disagreeing with you in the future (at least I'll try real hard) but another Member may, and they are entitled to that. I don't know if you are willing to remain in a community where your thoughts may be challenged, but you are most certainly welcome.

:heart:

Destee

Destee,

When a woman is in contempt of court ordered visitation, the courts and the police are reluctant to enforce it. Illinois has a statute that states if a custodial parent interferes with visitation, the parent can be charged with a misdemeanor. It is rarely enforced unless the father continues to fight for his rights. Women can lie through their teeth in court, cry a little and boom! They have sole custody!

Not all fathers choose to be apart from their children. Women also play a role in divorce and the shattering of marriages. There are a lot of cases where the wife has an affair or just decides she doesn't want to be married anymore. Gender bias against men is so prevalent in the courts, even a "crackhead" mother will be awarded the children before a good father. Most fathers fight for years and years to get access to their children.

Not all women are good and not all men are bad. Each child custody and child support case must be evaluated individually. In considering the child's best interest, the mother may not be the best choice for the custodial parent. Personally, I feel shared parenting is the best solution when both the mother and the father are suitable parents.

Peace,

Regina

Hello Regina,

Welcome and thank you for joining us.

I agree that the court system in general, favors the mother as custodial parent. It's been this way a long time, probably due to the fact that the mother is the one who carries the child for 9 months, labors with it and gives birth. She is also, historically, the one who provides the day to day care for the child. I think it is a natural assumption that she'd be better at it, but of course that is not always true. Certainly there are men willing and capable of doing the same, perhaps even better than some females.

I am not intimately familiar with domestic laws. If they are unjust then it is the judicial system at fault and not the custodial parent. If one has the wherewithal to fight and change these laws then they should do that, but until then, they are subject to and must abide by them. The law requires that a child be financially supported. In times past, the government often picked up the tab for this, but those days are long gone. Men/Women are now required to pay for the children they bring into the world.

I'm sure that having to fight for one's parental rights can be a long and arduous journey filled with disappointment, stress, high cost and exhaustion. The word "fight" implies that it will not be smooth and easy, but it is a fight worth fighting if ever there was one.

I agree too that failed relationships often leave very bitter parents, some willing to do most anything to hurt the other, even if it hurts their children. I also agree that some women are the cause of their divorce. They lie, cheat, sabotage relationships, violate trusts, etc., but so do some men.

My concern (and what prompted me to respond) is that the articles I've recently commented on seem to be coming down hard on the female, never mentioning the remote possibility that the male may have contributed to the troubled parenting or demise of the relationship in any way. It takes two. If a situation is going to be presented both sides must be given, if it is to be done fairly.

I think it's a little late to begin thinking about how terrible she is, after the child is born and you're standing before a judge. I say the same to young women. It's too late to begin thinking how terrible a man is after you've allowed him to impregnate you. At this point you are forever tied to each other. Both must "suck it up" and live with the consequences of their own decisions and care for the child they've produced. No amount of sympathy, whining, crying or blaming her, him, or the court is going to get them out of this responsibility, regardless of how difficult it may be.

With this in mind, we should encourage our young people to weigh heavily who they become involved with and consider the long term consequences of engaging in acts that produce children. Once the child is born it's too late, because they've got to pay, it's the law.

Again, thanks for joining us!

:heart:

Destee

Well, I see the lights are still on here, so I guess that this section is still up and running.

Destee...If you look carefully at other posts in other forums on this site, men are regular targets of women. What they have done, what they haven't done, and what they did and did not do.

It takes TWO to make a baby. How do TWO create life, and only ONE has a right to say anything, or make demands? How can one be 'all right' and the other be 'all wrong', yet the TWO of them laid down to create that ONE life.

If there is going to be fairness, then NEITHER side can be 'firing shots'. And, whatever was done to you, like I said, was not done to me.

Remember, a growing number of non-custodial parents are WOMEN who 'made the choice' to walk away from their men and their kids. And the courts have treated FEMALE non-custodial parents JUST AS BADLY as they have treated MALE non-custodial parents. It is JUST as wrong for a court to demand that a FEMALE non-custodial parent can't be involved in the lives of their children as is it for the same court to say that a MALE non-custodial parent can't be involved in the lives of their children.

That's right, I said 'can't be', because many custodial parents USE the courts as their 'whipping stick', the same way many schools now use their OWN police forces to either 'keep' kids in line, or haul them off to juvie or jail because of 'perceived' wrongdoing.

I'm not saying ALL, I am saying MANY in a shrinking universe.

That's why the column.

Destee, non-custodial parents LOVE their kids MORE than court-mandated support payments. THAT message never seems to make it out to the mainstream community.

Also, if I may, I know brothers who are custodial parents who are DOING THE JOB of raising their kids ALONE cause the mother or wife TOOK OFF to FIND herself. THEY live with the reality that should these sisters come back, the courts will DISREGARD the hard work these brothers have done, give the kids back to the mother, and DEMAND that the father pay child support. I also know of WOMEN who are going through the same struggle, as the brothers can come back, with a high priced lawyer, and take the kids...wiping out HER hard work.

Dr. Mary Tandy, Publisher of the Indiana Herald, who gave me my writing start when no one else would made it plain a few years back: "When a woman disrespects a man, she is also disrespecting another woman...that man's MOTHER. And, SHE is just as much a woman as the woman throwing the shots!"

Mike Ramey:love:

Hey Mike, glad to see you're willing to stay, if it gets to be more than you can handle, just let me know.

You've mentioned a couple of times "whatever was done to me, was not done to you." What was done to me? I'm kinda lost on those comments.

The main point I've tried to make in all that I've said is that once the child is born, it's too late to be crying foul. Makes no difference what follows the birth of the child ... it could be ...

judges
courts
laws
bitter ex's
life long child support
shattered dreams
broken hearts
loss of personal freedom
economic hardship
raising children alone
fighting to see your children
sick children
big hospital bills
insurance
kid on drugs
kid in jail
kid pregnant
college tuition
the list goes on and on ...

All of these things are a direct result of putting a penis in a vagina ... or allowing a penis in a vagina ... and making a baby.

Males and females have complete control prior to that one sexual act and should not partake in it, if they don't want to find themselves possibly experiencing any of the above.

If you have sex and produce a child ... you're subject to WHATEVER comes. Period. The choice is/was yours.

In regard to men being targets on this site, you'll have to show me those threads. I'd be surprised if you can present any where men are downed and there's not at least one post in it, lifting them back up. Yeah ... just show me.

:heart:

Destee

You need to quit lying Kemetstry! The women in this forum are very loving and submissive, doing all we can to make every man's life comfortable and easy! Would you like another slice of sweet potato pie Sweetie ... :)

Who invited you to this thread anyway ... they need to be :smash:

For the record, the anthology has not been deleted, just put out of sight, so it can hopefully be out of mind till it's time. :)

Trust me Mike, if I've not deleted and banned Kemetstry's male chauvinistic posts and rants ... every male in the world should feel confident that they have a forum where their views can be expressed (but they will be challenged if necessary).

:heart:

Destee

:lol: ... you're krazee

Oh, the lights are STILL on...

Anyway, no...no....no....I must have offended you, Destee, but I also have enough sense to know two things:

1) You asked me up in here.

2) You can unask me up in here, and I wouldn't be bitter about it in the least.

It's still your call, because this is your dream and your business.

However, this issue must have opened up some areas of the Web that needed some healing and addressing. Judging by the posts, there are those who are trying to turn this into a shouting match.

Nothing can be further from the truth.

I will say again that brothers and sisters BOTH have their share of 'dirt' that they have done in wrecking some homes...and some relationships. Would take too long to go into detail. But, if brothers have to be held accountable, sisters have to be held accountable, too.

Besides this...there ARE sisters, like Miss Nicholson stated, who "won't tell the truth and shame the devil". They, like the woman in the Book of Proverbs, use and abuse men, kick them to the curb, shed a few 'crocodile tears', wipe their mouths and say: "Moi?" THEN go out and repeat the pattern again.

"Samson laid in Delilah's lap by choice;
soothed by the honey in her voice,
swayed by her many, many tears;
intoxicated by her beauty,
forgot his duty,
And was blinded--for many years!"

It's not about 'getting even', but stating truth. And, if you got everyone up in here who had been 'burned' in a relationship, you would get differing views as to who was at fault.

I don't know what your situation was, Destee, but I pray that the brother who done you wrong and you have keep the lines of communications open, if possible. Plus, forgiveness is tough, but must be extended.

As I said before, I'll be on the boards on this forum until you decide to pull the plug.

But I find it interesting that some folk 'go it alone' as if it is a badge of honor. The 'I don't need a man' mentaility is gradually going down in popularity.

You can't get that 'next' relationship, until you bury the hurt from the former one. However, you CAN use that hurt to help others heal. God wouldn't allow you to go through something that you couldn't use to help someone else who is in need.

The holidays are coming, and some non-custodials are hurting. That's whom I was addressing...male and female. There are some custodials who are hurting as well, but they weren't my assignment in my column. That's someone else's assignment to address.

Any takers to write that point of view, Destee?

Mike Ramey

Originally posted by Mike Ramey
I don't know what your situation was, Destee, but I pray that the brother who done you wrong ...The above is way out of line. You know nothing about any man in my life.

Don't let this happen again.

Destee

Mike, my view is quite different. i'd like to see those threads in which the men are being downed. i have participated in a few discussions and it is mostly the woman (black woman) who takes the hits. we get called derogatory names and the like, sometimes even by other women.

i've skimmed the above articles and i too think they are one-sided. you say you've received letters and calls on both side of the issue, yet you've seen to only have posted the "abusers" of the system.

The brotherhood, for the most part, just like the sisterhood, for the most part, is about taking the high road. No disrespect, and no threats.

Some folk are always going to take issue with issues. Which is their right and their sight. Like the old folk used to say, "We agree to disagree!"

But...not all the posts in the discussion forum are complimentary to the brotherhood. Do I 'make threats' about those posts? Not in the least, because the writers have the right to express themselves out of their perception, their POV, and their life experiences. Have I 'hinted' that they should be remove, or not have a right to their say? Not in the least. I, like others of the brotherhood, just post a response if it is right to respond.

There are always going to be hot button topics that hit close to home. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But, I have read on this site...and others...where the sisterhood seem perfectly content to 'bash' the brotherhood, THEN wonder why brothers don't want to participate, nor have any comment, nor want to talk to them either on line, or off line. Kem and Rich, my older brothers here on line, have pointed out a few things from time to time, only to be 'rebuked' for taking a stand, or expressing themselves.

The proof is in the posts.

We can't succeed as a people if we don't see both sides of the equation. Nor can we succeed if we don't understand that not everyone is going to see eye to eye on things. Like some of the previous posters mentioned, and have highlighted, that folk do have a right to their opinions...whether or not they agree with them.

Folks 'claim' their want dialogue, until the dialogue hits too close to home. THEN, the water gets hot, and the tempers flare, and the air gets thin. Check out the recent elections. Folks who don't vote, or voted and had their candidates lose look at President Bush and the Repubican party as the 'enemy'. Meanwhile, they 'claim' they want dialogue...but the reality is that they only want dialogue that they can agree with.

Where is that anchored in reality?

Like I said before, Destee, you asked me up in here to contribute.
This is 'your thang'. I was successful when I got here, and I'll still be successful should you make the decision, for whatever reason turn off and delete this forum and boot me out. I'm just wondering what could happen to the next person who posts something that hits close to home. Will they be shown the door as well?

And, as I said before, I won't be bitter about it. Bitterness is bitterness, but Business is business. I've met some great people here in the Fam. Both folk with whom I agree, and with whom I disagree. The reality is the world is full of people. We are not going to agree with all of them. Whether it be Story, or Thand, or Nia, or Rich, or Kem. Everybody has a place at the table. Whether the topic is homosexuality, or lesbianism, or church, or money, or noncustodial parents, or reparations.

Noncustodial parents DO exist...males and females. To infer that their plight is 'not worth hearing about' is the utmost in disrespect and downright hostility and hipocrisy (sp). They have a right to be heard, they spend money, they breathe, they have pain, and they do have a say at the table.

And, they also have computers.

And, they also exist among black folk...OUR people. Their ranks cut across racial and socioeconomic lines. They also exist in our own families, as pointed out by Ms. Nicholson.

It's all about truth.


Mike Ramey

Look Mike ... only you have brought up this notion of being kicked off the forum or not allowed to post or lights turned out or whatever ... and you continue to whine about it ... if you want to leave ... leave.

Don't keep begging me to kick you out because you can't respond directly to challenges presented and need a woman to provide an escape for you.

May I chime in on this? After viewing the bantering back and forth...I believe the title of the actual thread that we are in is called"For the Noncustodial parent of the house". In all fairness to Mike, He did mention that the noncustodial parent could be male or female, bottom line many times they get shafted regardless of gender. Let's stop making this a male vs female discussion because it isn't. Its about parents who love their children and the hurt that they can get from their ex again regardless of gender. He just happen to deliver it from a male point of view because of some letters...Never did he blame the women solely....he blames the ex again regardless of gender of using the courts as their personal whipping sticks...
Now we also must remember every case is different, some cases are about money, some are not. Some parents are trifling (male and female) then you have those ex's that can get along. I've known people on both sides of the coin. male noncustidial parents and female noncustodial parents...In the case of the male, his ex didn't want to stay with him...he did everything to change her mind...mind you he was a good husband, he provided for the family, he came home at night he cooked cleaned he wen to the kids games and plays he took his wife on romantic vacations, yet she told him she no longer loved him. She filed for divorce....yet when she got the kids, she asked the courts to limit his visitations which floored him...because they did without reason...she went off with her boyfriend with the kids to another state..which the court allowed. He's been fighting this thing in court for 2 years trying to amend the custody procedures....then on the flip side there was a woman who got divorced cause her husbadn was cheating..because he made more money and had a good lawyer he got the kids..SOLE CUSTODY!!!! again this is regardless of gender.....bottomline this is not a perfect world, and Mike has pointed out some problems...but let's not cloud this severe problemn of society by arguing if the forum is pro-male or pro-female.

Peace

kemestry i already no your positions. in fact i was referring to you when i spoke of the negativity us black women receive from you.

you are always the first one, well one of the first ones, to throw stones. i have know problem acknowledging the wrongs women do. in your positions, you tend to think that women are responsible for the wrongs of men. that's is why i challenge you.

not double teaming, Mike. you pointed out that he has received letters from both views. however, those posted here seem alittle biased.

i will, i think others women admit that their are some women who abuse the system, use the children as leverage against men, who ain't taking care of business, not doing all they could for their children. we have never denied that. however, we also want you all to realized that part of the other involved - the man, the father of the child, the one who alot of times than most, walk away from their children. it's when they have to start paying child support that they starting "whining". i won't say this is true about all men. but often times and from the letters posted by Mike, women seem to be the only root of the problem.

Mike being a columnists, i guess i was looking for a little less bias.


btw, Mike glad to see you're still around, too. i know how you feel, trust me i know. Kemestry can really work a nerve sometimes. (but because i know that what he wants, i don't let him get to me.)

Oh, LOTS of traffic through the beltway on this post today!

Bishop and Kem and Destee and Thand, y'all been slamming them over the center field wall. I've enjoyed the dialogue. But I don't whine! I'll be the first to submit that it's NOT a perfect world.

Bishop, I love the example you put forth! That made my case right there, because state by state, and even county by county, judges and magistrates and commissioners DO view each case differently, and filter the law through their own experiences.

Some of the filters they use are suspect, but Bishop...I see that you've been getting the same kind of mail that I've been getting.

And, since I don't react to tears, and there are no tear stains on my copy, Destee, I don't 'whine'. Like the proverbial umpire at home plate, I call em like I sees em.

Judging by the responses, and how fast the word is getting around the fam on this issue, looks like this one is going to be alive for a little while longer. It was never about 'male vs. female', it was about 'noncustodials vs custodials'. There are a lot of noncustodials who wish that a lot of the custodial parents in the house would 'suck it up' and stop using the courts as a 'whipping stick' to keep them from their kids.

Bishop pointed out dynamically that this does happen...so where two or three are gathered...you have witnesses that are very much alive. If we REALLY talked with our family and friends, each one who has been through a divorce, or a custody battle, would be more than happy to provide their own picture of justice.

In the case of noncustodial parents who enter courtrooms, I harken back to some sage words of Richard Pryor. "It's JUST US!"

In our modern courts, the following is true...a jury trial is not about justice...it's about who had the better lawyer. NO ONE should enter a court of law WITHOUT a lawyer. One of the 'dirty little secrets of the Child Support system that fails to make its way to the light of day...if a noncustodial parent can't afford a lawyer, they have the right to a Public Defender!

I know a FEW judges don't like to read the law on this, but this is a truth that exists. AND more noncustodial parents need to know this.

Bias, like justice, is in the eye of the beholder. I've seen bias in the news industry, and the entertainment industry, and even in our own race. But, the hope is that we can still take the upper road.

That's my hope, anyway.

Mike Ramey

My sisters seem to turn everything into a match between men and women. Why does it seem that Black women have this love/hate thing for Black men? Also, a person can't make the next person do the time for a crime they didn't commit. Each person should be measured by their own character. Black women don't like to be stereotyped and Black men don't like it either.

Please open your eyes and try to find out about why so many of our brothers are in trouble over the child support issue. It is found that if a man has access to his children, he is more likely to pay his child support. Also, did you know child support can be set according to what the court thinks a man should make if they feel he is underemployed? Do you know that interest rates of up to 12% are tacked on to late child support payments starting after just one month? Do you know that family law is big business and the high child support awards are set to increase the profitability of the corporations who go after the so-called "deadbeat dads"?

I am not accusing mothers of doing wrong just noting that there are two sides to every story.

It could easily be said that black men have a love/hate thing for black women, but what would it prove? And just because it's said, or that it is someone's observation, does it make it true? Will those words aid us in fighting this unjust court system? I don't think so. Nor do I think it helps prove that courts are unjust to black folk in general and men fighting domestic court cases in particular, to say that black women have a love/hate thing toward black men.

You (and everyone) are entitled to approach and deal with situations the best way you know how, trust that I'm not trying to deny you that. I hope that your efforts are fruitful. It's just that whatever issues we black folk face, we will probably be able to overcome them better if we are not fighting and blaming each other, but standing together focusing on our positives, while all the time trying to overcome our negatives with patience and understanding.

The established media highlight our negatives for the world to see every night on the evening news. We don't have to do that to ourselves, but of course many will, and they are entitled to that. This is what they want, us fighting and blaming each other when few if any black men or women have significant control over any of these court procedures. If we focus on fighting and blaming each other, we will spend less time looking at them ... those who are actually in control of unjust judicial systems.

:heart:

Destee

Greetings Destee,

There is no placing blame on anyone, just acknowledgement that men get the short end of the stick also. May I emphasize again, the better parent is not necessarily the female parent. The courts should be open to unbiased evaluation of the family situation.

I want what's best for the children. Children deserve time and attention from both parents, whether the parents marriage survives or doesn't survive. No one, male or female, deserves to have their life ruined because of a bitter spouse.

Greetings Regina,

I agree with all you've said. Black men have gotten the short end of most every stick known to mankind. Women are not necessarily better at parenting than men. The courts should be unbiased. Children deserve time and attention from both parents and no one's life should be ruined by a bitter spouse.

I do agree.

:heart:

Destee

Thanks for putting this on the page--men need to be invlved in their children's lives--paying child support is just a small portion--we must be involved--as you point out that is sometimes easier said than done--to often old baggage derails the father child relationship--what goes on with the father and what goes on with the mother are now secondary, unless it is injurious to the child--it doesn't matter that mamma doesn't like the woman dday is seeing--it doesn't matter that daddy doesn't like the man mamma is seeing--what matters is doing what is best for the child--for those who have never been separated from their children this may seem difficult to absorb, but as Mike has pointed out--vindictiveness is not inappropriate but acutaully can be counter productive--a day will come when children will be able to make up their own minds and if you have done anything to paint a picture that isn't real--you will be the one who suffers ultimately--Thank Mike

Amun-Ra

:heart:

Kem, you know nothing about me but continue to think you know the truth. stop passing your bullschit off as a gourment meal. thing is some people may not stop and smell before eating what you have to offer.

my statements and beliefs go more in line with what Ra has stated.

btw, you always have a way to taking the thread off course. my replies and what i've read of destee's posts are that we didn't see any balance in the letter mike posted.

and as we all know, mothers are usually and most likely the custodial problems, that is why these conversations always become women against men.

i am a single parent and know others. not one of us use "old baggage" to keep them away from their children.

are child support law unfair to fathers. well in my state the amount is based on the father's salary. however what men forget is that the woman's salary also goes towards maintaining the household. i don't drive no big fancy car, nor do i wear high priced or designer clothing. so are child support laws unfair? not in my case. and for the record, the father willingly, and without question signed the recognition of parentage. he was also there in the county attorney's office with me to fill the child support papers. the one thing i can say about the process, it took about two years before they started the collection process, but his costs had already started to stack up.

if he had been the custodial parent, then i would expect to be not only paying child support but also part of our son's life.

actually the mom never wins. she gets blamed for everything. first for having the child the man didn't want. then we the man isn't around, she gets blamed for any problems the child may have. then she is called unfit or deemed shiety because the man no longer wants to pay or feels he's paying too much child support.

i repeat, i do agree that there are people who abuse the system. but the majority of us, are not. from the letters posted, it was unbalanced. that is what i was speaking on.

wonder why we never hear about the good things single mother have done? hmmmmmmmmm....

Kemetstry ... you are so wrong for that comment. With so many women raising children alone, so many that have done it in years past ... if there is only ONE thing that comes from it ... that that child knows they were wanted and loved, that someone, at least one of their parents was willing to stay with them, go through with them, sacrifice their life for them (when they could have left the child too) ... makes a lie out of your comment that "very few good things" come from being a single mom ... because this ONE thing is the foundation that MANY good things are built on.

:heart:

Destee

Kemetstry..

I think that comment is just such an unfair thing to say....

admittedly there are single mothers out there who do what you claim they do ( or should I say what statistics claim they do ) but there are so many single mothers out there doing a **** good job..and they should be recognised for it not critisized...

you can throw all the statistics you want at me and I will still say as I have before that love is the most important gift you can give a child..how can you slam all single mothers because of what a select few do....

there is a positive and a negative to all things in life....in this case you are only focusing on the negatives....

Is the glass always half empty for you???????

K

If I may borrow Amun-Ra's words from a different thread ... I am weary of the unworthy skirmish
and would rather expend my energies in other areas.Though I do appreciate the opportunity Kemetstry.

:heart:

Destee

Well I'm weary of banging my head against a brick wall too but I'm still going to have my say.....

Kemetstry...from what STATISTICS and data I have read, there has been a huge increase in single parent families lead by the female.....there's also been huge increases in just about every other category known to man as well....

I found it interesting that among the information I read, it stated that one of the leading causes of single parent female households is their unwillingness to marry jobless males....they would rather go it alone than have a husband who does not work...also there were many reasons stated as to why there has been such a huge increase....social, financial and educational disadvantages among them.....not once did it state that the increase was due to SKANKS SPREADING THEIR LEGS AND LETTING THEMSELVES BE IMPREGNATED BY SOME POOR INNOCENT DEFENCELESS MALE AND THEN SHE NOT ONLY DECIDES TO KEEP THE CHILD (GOD FORBID) BUT WILL ALSO NOT LET THE SAME SAID POOR DEFENCELESS MALE HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CHILD, SHE JUST EXPECTS HIM TO PAY FOR IT....

and while we are on the subject of put up or shut up....please feel free to tell us where all the data is that you get your statistics from, so we can all have a read....your good at quoting it, not so good at providing the information though...just your version of it.....

K

I don't want to discuss your comments...I want you to tell me where you get your statistics from...where's the data to support your words...let me read it....

K

Man, I leave the room for a few and it gets tight!

Maybe THIS part of the discussion needs to move into a bigger forum that can do the job right. Perhaps a single parents forum.

The reality is that Kem DOES have the stats! So do I. So do ALL of us. But that's not what is on the table at the present.

It's about NONCUSTODIAL parents. Parents who, for one reason or another DON'T have access to their kids for the holidays...or other times during the year. Now, if this 'upsets' some folks, well, that's the truth. Now, if we wanted to get into a 'stats brawl' it would make for filling the forum, but not filling our minds. Folk are going to stand where they want to stand...based upon the circumstances of their lives.

Mike Ramey

I am well aware of what the original topic was and where it is located.

If you'll look back one page you will see that I , along with Destee, replied to a comment posted by Kemetstry on the 11/23/2002 at 8:08.

In his return comment he brought up the issue of data (statistics), and my reply to him was based on that comment...

I am not upset at the topic here or the content of it, it's a fact and it happens.. and I am also well aware of the negatives of being a single parent, however you can not group all single mothers into the same category based on the doings of some... and I am not getting into a stats brawl as you term it...I merely ask Kemetstry to tell us where the stats he so often refers to, are available to read so we/I can have a look at them...

as for veering away from the original question, I realise the last few posts are not directly speaking of non-custodial parents, we were however discussing single parents, female, some of whom are non-custodial parents....so although we are not climbing the same tree, we are still sitting on one of the main branches...

K

Originally posted by Mike Ramey
Maybe THIS part of the discussion needs to move into a bigger forum that can do the job right ... But that's not what is on the table at the present.Mike ... many threads throughout the forum start a discussion about one thing and end up discussing many others. Look at any discussion thread with 3+ pages and you'll find comments that could be considered "off-topic." If a Member feels it's related (even remotely) and they want to say it, they get to do that.

Each forum is easily able to hold whatever is contributed to it and we encourage those contributions.

:heart:

Destee

Destee: I know how the forums work, as you have been kind enough to show me in our conversations on line. However, it never hurts to remind folk where the 'start' is on the starting line, as I've seen other web moderators...and others...point out from time to time.

Just trying to help out.

By the way, Kem, a GREAT article that just came out in the Washington Times proves one of your thoughts. It seems that many of the reservists who are going to be called up into the military have to contend with out-of-wack Child Support laws that don't take into account the fact that there will be a pay 'change' by moving from a civillian job, into a military one for national security. Thus, men (and women) who go to fight for America CAN face jail time when they get back, simply because some book keepers were too lazy to temporarily reduce the support amount.

I've got a copy of it that I can give you the link to check out. Buzz me here for the location of it.

Mike Ramey:toast:

Some statistics....

"Ninety percent of divorced fathers have less than full custody of their children." Jonathan M. Honeycutt, Ph.D.(c), M.P.A., M.A., I.P.C. Director of Research, Clinical & Consulting Psychotherapist, National Institute for Divorce Research, Panama City, Florida.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Children from fatherless homes account for:
63% of youth suicides. (Source: US Dept. of Health & Human Services, Bureau of the Census).
71% of pregnant teenagers. (Source: US Dept. of Health & Human Services)
90% of all homeless and runaway children.
70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders. (Source: Center for Disease Control).
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger. (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26, 1978).
71% of all high school dropouts. (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools).
75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers. (Source: Rainbows for all God`s Children).
85% of all youths sitting in prisons. (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The State of Fatherhood
37.9% of fathers have no access/visitation rights. (Source: p.6, col.II, para. 6, lines 4 & 5, Census Bureau P-60, #173, Sept 1991.)
"40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the non-custodial father's visitation on at least one occasion, to punish the ex-spouse." (Source: p. 449, col. II, lines 3-6, (citing Fulton) Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of Orthopsychiatry, 1991.)
"Overall, approximately 50% of mothers "see no value in the father`s continued contact with his children...." (Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith Wallerstein, p. 125)
Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated 16%.(Source: EDK Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November 1994, p. 36)
"The former spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent contact with the children." (Source: Increasing our understanding of fathers who have infrequent contact with their children, James Dudley, Family Relations, Vol. 4, p. 281, July 1991.)
"A clear majority (70%) of fathers felt that they had too little time with their children." (Source: Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Mary Ann Kock & Carol Lowery, Journal of Divorce, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 54, Winter 1984.)
"Very few of the children were satisfied with the amount of contact with their fathers, after divorce." (Source: Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Koch & Lowery, Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 50, Winter 1984.)
"Feelings of anger towards their former spouses hindered effective involvement on the part of fathers; angry mothers would sometimes sabotage father's efforts to visit their children." (Source: Ahrons and Miller, Am. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 63. p. 442, July `93.)
"Mothers may prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their marital or post-marital relationship." (Source: Seltzer, Shaeffer & Charing, Journal of Marriage & the Family, Vol. 51, p. 1015, November 1989.)
In a study: "Visitational Interference - A National Study" by Ms. J Annette Vanini, M.S.W. and Edward Nichols, M.S.W., it was found that 77% of non-custodial fathers are NOT able to "visit" their children, as ordered by the court, as a result of "visitation interference" perpetuated by the custodial parent. In other words, non-compliance with court ordered visitation is three times the problem of non-compliance with court ordered child support and impacts the children of divorce even more. Originally published Sept. 1992

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Child Support
Information from multiple sources shows that only 10% of all noncustodial fathers fit the "deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of those with NO visitation rights still financially support their children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).
Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because they lack the financial resources to pay (Source: GAO report: GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).
The Poverty Studies Institute at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, discovered in 1993 that 52% of fathers who owe child support earn less than $6,155 per year.
66% of single mothers work less than full time while only 10% of fathers fall into this category. In addition, almost 47% of non-custodial mothers default on support compared with the 27% of fathers who default. (Source: Garansky and Meyer, DHHS Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, 1991).
Total Custodial Mothers: 11,268,000. Total Custodial Fathers 2,907,000 (Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 458, 1991).
66% of all support not paid by non-custodial fathers is due to inability to pay. (Source: U.S. General Accounting Office Report, GAO/HRD-92-39FS January 1992).
The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, Oct. 1991, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.

Custodial mothers who receive a support award: 79.6%
Custodial fathers who receive a support award: 29.9%
Non-custodial mothers who totally default on support: 46.9%
Non-custodial fathers who totally default on support: 26.9%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More Risk Statistics -- Children with only one parent in their lives
Youth Suicide and Divorce/ Single parent Homes:

"In a study of 146 adolescent friends of 26 adolescent suicide victims, teens living in single-parent families are not only more likely to commit suicide but also more likely to suffer from psychological disorders, when compared to teens living in intact families." Source: David A. Brent, (et. al.) "Post-traumatic Stress Disorders in Peers of Adolescent Suicide Victims: Predisposing Factors and Phenomenology." Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 34 (1995): 209-215.
"Fatherless children are at dramatically greater risk of suicide." Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, D.C., 1993.
"Three out of four teenage suicides occur in households where a parent has been absent." Source: Jean Beth Eshtain, "Family Matters: The Plight of America's Children." The Christian Century (July 1993): 14-21.
"A family structure index -- a composite index based on the annual rate of children involved in divorce and the percentage of families with children present that are female-headed - is a strong predictor of suicide among young adult and adolescent white males." Source: Patricia L. McCall and Kenneth C. Land, "Trends in White Male Adolescent, Young-Adult, and Elderly Suicide: Are There Common Underlying Structural Factors?" Social Science Research 23 (1994): 57-81
=========================================

Effects on children of removing a father from the life of a child.
"Based on our clinical experience with a number of latency aged and adolescent girls whose parents divorced during their oedipal years, we postulate that particular coping patterns emerge in response to the absence of the father, which may complicate the consolidation of positive feminine identification in many female children, and is observable during the latency years. We illustrate both the existence of these phenomena and implications for treatment:

intensified separation anxiety
denial and avoidance of feelings associated with loss of father
identification with the lost object
object hunger for males."
"In an earlier study by Kalter and Rembar at [Children's Psychiatric Hospital, University of Michigan], a sample of 144 child and adolescent patients, whose parents had divorced, presented [for evaluation and treatment] with three most commonly occurring problems:

63% Subjective psychological problem (defined as anxiety, sadness, pronounced moodiness, phobias, and depression)

56% Poor grades or grades substantially below ability and/or recent past performance

43% Aggression toward parents

Important features of the subgroup of 32 latency aged girls were in the same order:

69% indicating subjective psychological distress 47% academic problems 41% aggression toward pa ts.

Clinical Observations on Interferences of Early Father Absence in the Achievement of Femininity by R. Lohr, C. g, A. Mendell and B. Riemer, Clinical Social Work Journal, V. 17, #4, Winter, 1989

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"In summary, 30% of the children in the present study experienced a marked decrease in their academic performance following parental separation, and this was evident three years later. Access to both parents seemed to be the most protective factor, in that it was associated with better academic adjustment...Moreover, data revealed that noncustodial parents (mostly fathers) were very influential in their children's development...These data also support the interpretation that the more time a child spends with the noncustodial noncustodial parent the better the overall adjustment of the child."

Factors Associated with Academic Achievement in Children Following Parental Separation, L. Bisnaire, PhD; P. Firestone, PhD; D. Rynard, MA Sc American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 60(1), January, 1990

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"While in most instances adolescents from recently disrupted household were more negatively affected by their parents' divorce, some findings did identify long-term effects of earlier disruption. Adolescent girls who had experienced parental divorce when they were younger than six or between six and nine years old reported becoming involved with alcohol or drugs in proportions higher than did girls from intact families. Adolescent girls whose experience of divorce occurred before they were six more frequently reported skipping school than did girls from intact families or girls whose parents divorced when they were between the ages of six and nine."

"These findings underscore the vulnerability of adolescents whose parents have divorced within the last five years. The impact of the marital disruption was most pronounced among girls, who skipped school more frequently, reported more depress ehavior, and described social support in more negative terms than did boys from recently disrupted homes."

The Effects of Marital Disruption on Adolescents: Time as a Dynamic A. Frost, PhD; B. Pakiz, EdM, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 60(4), October, 1990

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Among teenage and adult populations of females, parental divorce has been associated with lower self-esteem, precocious sexual activity, greater delinquent-like behavior, and more difficulty establishing gratifying, lasting adult heterosexual relationships. It is especially intriguing to note that, in these studies, the parental divorce typically occurred years before any difficulties were observed..

"At the time of the marital separation, when (as is typical) father leaves the family home and becomes progressively less involved with his children over the ensuing years, it appears that young girls experience the emotional loss of father egocentrically as a rejection of them. While more common among preschool and early elementary school girls, we have observed this phenomenon clinically in later elementary school and young adolescent children. Here the continued lack of involvement is experienced as an ongoing rejection by him. Many girls attribute this rejection to their not being pretty enough, affectionate enough, athletic enough, or smart enough to please father and engage him in regular, frequent contacts".

"Finally, girls whose parents divorce may grow up without the day to day experience of interacting with a man who is attentive, caring and loving. The continuous sense of being valued and loved as a female seems an especially key element in the development of the conviction that one is indeed femininely lovable. Without this regular source of nourishment, a girl's sense of being valued as a female does not seem to thrive."

Long-Term Effects of Divorce on Children: A Developmental Vulnerability Model Neil Kalter, Ph.D., University of Michigan, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57(4), October, 1987

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"....when the non-custodial parent is perceived as "lost," the young adult is more depressed. When a divorce occurs, the perception of the non-custodial father has been shown to change in a negative direction, while the perception of the mother (whether custodon-custodial) remains relatively stable. "

"Because divorce is a process, not an isolated event, the effects of the divorce may be cumulative and early intervention would therefore be beneficial.

The continued involvement of the non- custodial parent in the child's life appears crucial in preventing an intense sense of loss in the child.... The importance of the relationship with the non-custodial parent may also have implications for the legal issues of custodial arrangements and visitation. The results of this study indicate that arrangements where both parents are equally involved with the child are optimal. When this type of arrangement is not possible, the child's continued relationship with the non-custodial parent remains essential."

Young Adult Children of Divorced Parents: Depression and the Perception of Loss, Rebecca L. Drill, Ph.D., Harvard University. Journal of Divorce, V. 10, #1/2, Fall/Winter 1986

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The impact of parental divorce and subsequent father absence in the wake of this event has long been thought to affect children quite negatively. For instance, parental divorce and father loss has been associated with difficulties in school adjustment (e.g. Felner, Ginter, Boike, & Cowen), Social Adjustment (e.g. Fry & Grover) and personal adjustment (e.g. Covell & Turnbull)..."

"The results of the present study suggest that father loss through divorce is associated with diminished self-concepts in children...at least for this sample of children from the midwestern United States."

Children's Self Concepts: Are They Affected by Parental Divorce and Remarriage Thomas S. Parish, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 1987, V 2, #4, 559-562

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It is ironic, and of some interest, that we have subjected joint custody to a level and intensity of scrutiny that was never directed towa the traditional post-divorce arrangement (sole legal and physical custody to the mother and two weekends each month of visiting to the father.) Developmental and relationship theory should have alerted the mental health field to the potential immediate and long range consequences for the child of only seeing a parent four days each month. And yet until recently, there was no particular challenge to this traditional post-divorce parenting arrangement, despite growing evidence that such post-divorce relationships were not sufficiently nurturing or stabilizing for many children and parents."

"There is some evidence that in our well-meaning efforts to save children in the immediate post-separation period from anxiety, confusion, and the normative divorce-engendered conflict, we have set the stage in the longer run for the more ominous symptoms of anger, depression, and a deep sense of loss by depriving the child of the opportunity to maintain a full relationship with each parent."

Examining Resistance to Joint Custody, Monograph by Joan Kelly, Ph.D. (associate of Judith Wallerstein, Ph.D) From the 1991 Book Joint Custody and Shared Parenting, second edition, Guilford Press, 1991.

=========================================

Effects of Fatherlessness (US Data)
1) BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS/ RUNAWAYS/ HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS/CHEMICAL ABUSERS/ SUICIDES

85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control)
90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.)
75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all God's Children.)
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
2) JUVENILE DELINQUENCY/ CRIME/ GANGS

80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26, 1978)
70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)
California has the nation's highest juvenile incarceration rate and the nation's highest juvenile unemployment rate. Vincent Schiraldi, Executive Director, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, "What Hallinan's Victory Means," San Francisco Chronicle (12/28/95).
These statistics translate to mean that children from a fatherless home are:

5 times more likely to commit suicide.
32 times more likely to run away.
20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders.
14 times more likely to commit rape
9 times more likely to drop out of high school.
10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances.
9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution.
20 times more likely to end up in prison.

Juveniles have become the driving force behind the nation's alarming increases in violent crime, with juvenile arrests for murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault growing sharply in the past decade as pistols and drugs became more available, and expected to continue at the same alarming rate during the next decade. "Justice Dept. Issues Scary Report on Juvenile Crime," San Francisco Chronicle (9/8/95). "Crime Wave Forecast With Teenager Boom," San Francisco Chronicle (2/15/95).
Criminal behavior experts and social scientists are finding intriguing evidence that the epidemic of youth violence and gangs is related to the breakdown of the two-parent family. "New Evidence That Quayle Was Right: Young Offenders Tell What Went Wrong at Home," San Francisco Chronicle (12/9/94).
3) TEENAGE PREGNANCY

"Daughters of single parents are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a premarital birth, and 92% more likely to dissolve their own marriages. All these intergenerational consequences of single motherhood increase the likelihood of chronic welfare dependency." Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Atlantic Monthly (April 1993).
Daughters of single parents are 2.1 times more likely to have children during their teenage years than are daughters from intact families. The Good Family Man, David Blankenhorn.
71% of teenage pregnancies are to children of single parents. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.
4) CHILD ABUSE

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that there were more than 1,000,000 documented child abuse cases in 1990. In 1983, it found that 60% of perpetrators were women with sole custody. Shared parenting can significantly reduce the stress associated with sole custody, and reduce the isolation of children in abusive situations by allowing both parents' to monitor the children's health and welfare and to protect them.
5) POVERTY

"The National Fatherhood Institute reports that 18 million children live in single-parent homes. Nearly 75% of American children living in single-parent families will experience poverty before they turn 11. Only 20% in two-parent families will experience poverty." Melinda Sacks, "Fatherhood in the 90's: Kids of absent fathers more "at risk"," San Jose Mercury News (10/29/95).
"The feminization of poverty is linked to the feminization of custody, as well as linked to lower earnings for women. Greater opportunity for education and jobs through shared parenting can help break the cycle." David Levy, Ed., The Best Parent is Both Parents (1993).
6) KIDNAPPING

Family abductions were 163,200 compared to non-family abductions of 200-300. The parental abductions were attributed to the parents' disenchantment with the legal system. David Levy, Ed., The Best Parent is Both Parents (1993), citing a report from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice (May 1990).

Child support is another can of worms...

It actually condones women having children by different men!

Some women have children by different men because they have learned the system. They can get more child support if they have multiple children by different men than if they had multiple children by one man.

Child support is broken down in percentages of the non-custodial parent's income (which is typically the man).

For example, in the state of Georgia, Child Support (CS) for one child is 17-23% of the non-custodial parents "Gross" income. Most judges award CS at the mid-range of 20%. For two children, the CS would be 23-28%, with most CS set at 25%.

Therefore, if a woman had two children by the same man, she would only get 25% of his gross income for CS.

If a woman had a child by one man getting 20% of his gross income and another child by another man getting 20% of his Gross income, she comes out better financially.

I don't think all women are devious just like I don't think all men are devious. I just think we should be well-informed and see both sides of an issue.

As I stated before, children "NEED" both parents in their lives. Both parents "SHOULD" be financially responsible for their children.

...Bonds digs in. 3-2 pitch coming in from the mound. The swing. The ball is rising. Center fielder is going back, back, back....and its over the wall! Good night, everybody!

Mike Ramey:heart:

the only thing wrong with this homerun was that you sent somebody else into bat..and it still wasn't good enough to win the game....

K

Facts are facts...
And you can't change that...

Have a Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

I am aware that there is no changing the facts...in fact all the information you have supplied, I was already aware of....were you aware that these facts were not the point I was having a difference of opinion, with Kemetstry about....

K

while the facts which have been stated paint a very bleak picture on the whole, I will still argue my first point, which was, not all single mothers can be put into the same category....

there is not 100% OF CHILDREN BEING RAISED BY SINGLE MOTHERS WHO ARE COMMITTTING CRIMES, DYSFUNCTIONAL, VIOLENT ETC......therefore that percent left over, however small it may be, are raised with love and care and good values.....and do not grow up to become any of the above....

if you look for the negative in anything, chances are you will find it, but it can't be all bad, which is/was my point....


when a single mother does do her best, some of the positives can be.....

:less tension caused by two parents who are not getting along
( not in love, don't want to be in the marriage, domestic violence)

:greater flexibility planning their time spent with children
(because they do not work their plans around another adult)

: more interdependence, and mother and child can have more one on one discussions

:both parent and child can develop stronger characters while learning new skills to cope with their family situation

:children are influenced greater by the parent raising them, because they only have the input of one adult

:children can feel more needed as a part of the household as they are given responsibility in that household

just to name a few of the positives of being a single parent...

K

oh and btw Kemetstry...

thanks for the lesson on co-operation ( team player and all that)


K

nowhere did I state that you said 100% of children raised by single mothers are committing crimes etc....

I made the point that according to statistics, a majority of people committing these crimes are from sinlge parent homes, but the percentage left over, however small, are not...which was my original point...not all children raised by single parents grow up to commit crimes etc....

I agree with you on the information supplied, it's a fact....my disagreement with you was, that not all single mothers are doing a bad job of raising their kids alone, some make it work....and not all are single mothers because they had unprotected sex with the so called Mookie....some are single mothers due to other circumstances, some of which are beyond their control......


K

Kitana,

There are some single moms who do a great job, however I must address your positives of being a single mom...

======
when a single mother does do her best, some of the positives can be.....

:less tension caused by two parents who are not getting along
( not in love, don't want to be in the marriage, domestic violence)

---Marriage is work and a lot of marriages could be saved if the two people work together. However, if one of the partners (male or female) is violent, it is best to part ways.

:greater flexibility planning their time spent with children
(because they do not work their plans around another adult)

---A lot of single moms do not have a lot of flexible time depending on their work schedule. With a husband or the father's child in his/her life, the mom has more time to devote to raising the child.

: more interdependence, and mother and child can have more one on one discussions

---This can cause too much interdependence if a single mother tends to treat the child like an adult. It is not fair to the child and very confusing to the child. When the adult then tries to discipline the child, the child thinks of himself/herself as an equal to the adult.

:both parent and child can develop stronger characters while learning new skills to cope with their family situation

---Yes, hard work builds character but a child shouldn't worry about adult issues while still a child. And some of those new skills learned are how to beat the system...

:children are influenced greater by the parent raising them, because they only have the input of one adult

---I beg to differ. A child should have the influence of many adults, both parents and extended family.

:children can feel more needed as a part of the household as they are given responsibility in that household

---Children are given responsibilities in two parent households also. Some boy children are thrust into the man of the house role by single moms as a substitute for not having a husband. Girl children are thrust into a "Best girlfriend" role for the mother.

Kemetstry..

don't patronise me...

and don't turn my words around to make yours sound good....in case you don't comprehend the written word, you might like to take a look back and you will see that I agreed with your statistics, but pointed out that not 100% of children raised by single mothers turn into criminals etc...which means somewhere out there some single mothers are doing a **** good job of raising their children.....get back to me if you still don't understand what I'm saying.....

K

Regina..

my first point meant exactly that...if two people are only creating a negative environment for themselves and the children then maybe it's better that they do not live together...

I agree that with two parents the children may benefit from having a mother who can stay at home and spend more time...however in a single parent family which is what I'm talking about, there is only one parent, and the flexibility was in regard to the mother only having to worry about satisfying the needs of the children, not a husband or partner as well...

what if the mother does not treat the child as an adult, just makes the child more responsible for itself, and the child is given set boundaries as to discipline and rules...

new skills such as being responsible for their own rooms, cleaning the bathroom, taking out the trash, etc...never hurt any child, that is not giving them too much responsibility, that is teaching them to take care of their own mess and co-operate as part of a family, and learning that they each have responsibilities within their home...

The input of one adult was meant to mean in the immediate household environment, obviously they would have outside influence from the other parent and both sides of the family....

as for the last comment it's a case of "what if this happens"....in a lot of single parent households I have seen, this does not happen..I'm not saying it doesn't happen at all, but I am saying it would not be the case in every circumstance...

if we lived in an ideal world then every family could have a mother, father and children and everyone could be happy, healthy and fully functional as a unit...however we do not live in an ideal world....so we have to make the best of it...and that's what a lot of single mothers are trying to do....

K

Kemetstry ... you have major issues and I suggest you seek counseling ... right away. I'm no therapist but to have these issues is one thing ... to display them for the world to see is another ... seek help my friend ... :nuts:

:heart:

Destee

Kemetstry...

my point was/still is/always will be, that not all single mothers are raising children in a negative light....

any issue involving a male/female relationship with you is a non issue as far as you are concerned because from my experience on this and other forums, you have in the past/are doing so in the present/and most probably will in the future, have a negative attitude to anything a female does or does not do.....

the idea of a debate forum is to discuss ideas/topics and support it with data if need be...or maybe you can just have a general friendly discusssion, you are not supposed to bring personal issues/feelings into it....but you continually do which means that all discussions with you have to be limited because of your narrowmindedness and negative attitude toward anything female...

K

i didn't wanna say anything Kitana ... but what's wrong with our Brother?

Some terrible childhood experience you suppose?

We love you anyway Kemetstry ... just get some help boo ... :lol:

:heart:

Destee

Destee....

I've said before that there needs to be a smilie on here showing you throwing your hands in the air in complete exasperation...:x: ..because that's how I feel sometimes when I'm having these discussions with Kemetstry...completely exasperated..but I won't give in to him either..
;)

K

Kemetstry....

Bite Me!!!!!!!

K

tsk, tsk, tsk... Kem you want me dontcha? i can be no where near a discussion but you just have to keep my name in your mouth.

so ladies, i'm not the only one who's noticed kem's "facts" and "truth" being based on his own personal experiences. i'm sorry your experiences which women have been negative. really i am.

seem you'll never find the beauty in us because you ain't looking for it.

not so my dear Kemetstry...

Kitana is not drawing from personal experience at all...but she does know that not every single person in a like situation can not be grouped into one category...you ought to use the word SOME..sometimes...because your words always imply ALL..

and you did not quote the statistics quite as clearly as Regina did..

and only a male chauvanist would imply that ALL men are good....and ALL women are bad....

and if I wanted to say you are bitter..I would come out and say.."Kemetstry, you are bitter"...until then don't put words in my mouth...what you think I say and what I actually do say are two very different things...but thats your way of heating up the discussion isn't it Kem...

K

see again, WRONG, W_R_O_N_G!

i'm not drawing from personal experience, however we did find out some things about you (child support thread).

i take no stock in regina stats, for one, she didn't provide us with the link. that way we could see for ourselves. but as i keep telling you, i don't need statistic to validate my opinion. you can look at these stats but they still only tell part of the story. in all of your posts, you do seem to have a problem with black women and IT SHOWS QUITE CLEARLY. so yes, it leads me to believe that you are indeed bitter. i however, can look around me and see that what you say is not a clear picture of us or our community. you way can be equated with ronald reagan and his re-elction campaign his willie lynch and welfare mothers platform. he painted us all as either criminals or welfare mothers.

i challenge you to do some research and re educate yourself and the contributions of african amercian women and even the men, because i know there are many who came from female headed households. there are alot of success stories. and from your stats and regina's "stats" every single mother is raising a future criminal. you might as well be working for armstrong williams and larry elders.

and to regina, i don't know your status as far as your personal life, but don't believe the hype. if you are married and have children then i hope you never divorce. why, because you have already set yourself up for failure by believing in those stats.

and yes kem, stats do lie. they can say whatever the presenter wants them to. you should know that.

you must be stupid and just can't read. as i keep stating. i don't need statistics to validate my opinions.

i use my and the people around me as my basis. and again, you are either ignorant or just refuse to think. all statistics can be manipulated to fits one's purpose. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

and you call yourself a scientist. you probably lied about that too, just to give yourself more credibility. :rolleyes:

and to those who have a problem with the 20 - 23% of a man's paycheck going for child support.

how much of the woman's paycheck do you think is going toward's the child support/welfare. unequivocally, more than 20 percent.

and p.s. some of your best friends are black women. hmmmm, you sound like those bigoted white folx. do you black women friends know you have such a little opinion of black women, in general.

and if this is true, that you have alot of black women as friends, you must not have many friends. :-D

and because you are scared and intimated by black women, i guess you come here to find some masculinity by always bashing black women.

Greetings Thandiwe, :teach:

Kemestry is correct when he states, why would someone go thru the trouble of making up false stats on those topics? No, the statistics are not made up; neither are the statistics a lot of fluff. By facing the truth, we can prevent the consequences of children from single parent homes and broken families from becoming a reality. I don't have a problem with men supporting their children. I have a problem with good fathers being kept from interacting and parenting their children. Mothers and Fathers should "both" be financially accountable for their children.

I am not setting myself up for failure in a relationship because I am a realist. I don't have superficial values. I demand respect in a relationship and I in kind give respect. Borrowing from Stevie Wonder, "I don't use my love to make him weak, I use love to keep him strong."

I speak from personal experience. I grew up with a father and a stepfather. I was truly blessed to have not one, but two good fathers. When my mother married my stepfather, my father was not forced out of my life. Everyone had a good relationship with each other because there was no bitterness. They chose to put their love for their child, me, first and foremost. I was never forced to choose between any of my parents. In fact, my mother and my stepmother C. still send each other Christmas cards. That is the mature way to handle life.

Many, many Black women are bitter. Being a Black woman, I fully understand the reasons for the bitterness. However, Black women and Black men must release themselves from the pain. We must do what we can to improve life for the Black family, those intact and those not intact. The beginning of the healing process is accepting the truth.

Because Black women and Black men are so busy bickering about who caused the collapse of the relationship our children are suffering! There are a lot of women and men who are lousy in relationships with the opposite sex, but who are wonderful mothers and fathers.

Mothers usually get custody because it has been historically that way. It does not necessarily mean the mother is the better parent. May I reiterate, if both parents are good parents, they should not be separated from their children. Women, more often than not, use their children to control the father or pay him back for not staying in the relationship, etc. Men, get frustrated and are forced out of their children's lives.

As far as the comment about you don't need statistics, you know what you see around you. I see a lot of manipulative women taking advantage of men with the courts permission. Because of course, women can't be vindictive! Do you know most of the children who die of abuse die at the hands of their mother or by the boyfriend of their mother? If not, I will personally send you the pictures of those innocent children from the state of Georgia.

Before I end this post, may I ask this question of you? Are you one of the women who went to the Million Man March yelling sexism? On that day, I took a vacation day, stayed at home and let the men be men.

Peace,

Regina

ahem.....Can't we all just get along?;)

I am very glad to assist others in seeing the light...

you are so funny, and i decided it's a waste of time to even try to have a discussion with you.

and it is you who has been caught in lies here. i've pointed them out to you. i have no reason or purpose in lying or trying to granduerized (sp) myself.

and from the comments and your viewpoints, it is you who lives in the hood, or under one.

now as i said, it would be stupid for me to even try to have a decent conversation with you, so peace to you...

regina said:

Kemestry is correct when he states, why would someone go thru the trouble of making up false stats on those topics? No, the statistics are not made up; neither are the statistics a lot of fluff.

thandi says:

let me clarify. i didn't mean to insinuate that you would make up the stats. but yes the surveyors of polls and statistics usually are looking for prove to back their beliefs.

remember reagan had everyone thinking black woman were welfare mothers and black men, all criminals. you say it enough times and it becomes truth. or that what people start to believe and see.

i don't disagre with your other points. i too have stated, both men and women need to be responsible for their children. that includes men who are not in the home. i've never had a problem with that.

and don't make assumptions about me. i fully supported the million man march. in fact, i'm a videographer and did alot of taping of the local events here in MN. i also was at home, watching from my tv set, supporting my brothers.

and the march was all about men repenting, taking responsiblities, doing the right thing. but from the remarks here made by a few, men are just being force by black women to have children, manipulated by the women and the courts and bitter women. :rolleyes:

the problem i have with this thread is that it is biased. it is only showing the negative stories. if you truly believe that both should be responsible then you would have noted that discrepancy here. this is what me, destee and others have spoken about.

it makes all women, single mothers to be golddigging, irresponsible, criminal-raising, bitter women. and this is a false image.

peace to you as well!

however, i noticed you didn't address my question about the mother's income. if the men are being forced to give 20 - 23% of their income, how much of the mother's salary do you think goes to support her children?

but then again, i guess you all are only talking about "ghetto mothers who have multiple children by several men". which too, is a false image. because not all single mothers fit into that mold.

In the state of Georgia, the child support is only based on the obligor's gross income (which is usually the male). In metro Atlanta, a lot of Black professional couples have the same income. In fact, a lot of Black women make more than their husbands. The woman's income is not taken into account when Child support is awarded. As Blacks and women, we have often fought the fight for equality. That fight for equality extends to gender also. We can't stomp on the rights of others (our brothers) to get what we perceive as our rights. It takes two to make a baby. It takes two to care for a baby.

You must remember, both parents have to set up a household suitable for the children. It is difficult for the father to do so if a large portion of his income is going to the mother who makes just as much or more than him. If a mother makes a lot less than the father, of course he should contribute a suitable amount of money to care for the children. If you familiarize yourself with the various state Child support guidelines, you will find the majority of the guidelines are unfairly written. When the mother is the obligor, the authorities do not hold her as accountable as they would the father.

We all make assumptions about people. We must look beyond that to make sound, logical decisions. Kudos to you for covering the Million Man March!

Morals, honesty and character are not confined to education level and/or economic situation. Neither are bitterness, vengeful and golddigger tendencies confined to just one category of people.

kem, as i stated, there is no use in trying to have a open discussion with you. you are closed minded and i no longer waste my time with you.

regina, i'll ask this question again. how much of the custodial parent's (usually the mother) salary do you think goes toward maintaining the household for her child(ren)? i can tell you that it takes more than the percentages you presented.

and let's account for the time and energy she spend for and with the child. that is not accounted for.

and yes i did enjoy covering the million man march. however, i did have one concern about it being for men only. i have a son. i'm a single mother, so if my son was old enough i would have taken him myself. thing is, our communities can not be restored by just one sex. it's gonna take the whole community, even single mothers. :)

You know I don't chime in that often....I usually like to see Keme got at it...and say to myself this brotha got some balls to take on the ladies...and he does well at holding his own. and Thandi girl you are the perfect adversary for Keme...but watching you two going back and forth over this has given me this revelation....you both sound like a couple in divorce court haggling over why things just didn't work out....in other words this is what some children see happening between custodial and non custidial parents(notice i said some....don't want to get pulled into this by either of you...so remember i said SOME!!!). You guys have went from women being golddiggers to men making excuses for not paying or crying about how much they had to pay. I believe Mike classified non custodial as men and women....how did this get to be men vs. women? we must keep in mind there are various reason for couple splitting up...it's not always where the man wants to get out, increasingly in this day and time it's the woman who wants to get out....now let me give a shout to both sides of the coin...here's one for the men...Yes there are some women who are vindictive and try to use the system to bleed the guy...I have an uncle who was paying child support..faithfully and was even paying more than the court told him to pay...why because his daughter was worth it...However when he remarried and had other children his ex got upset, and went to court saying she needed more money...He was already paying $2000 more a month than was stated in the divorce decree....She wanted the court to grant her $1500 more a month of course the courts refused, realizing that he has another family to supprt as well.

Now one for the women...Yes a lot of brothas are trifiling....they make a baby and expect the woman to do all the work..they shirk their responsibilities and won't even visit their child. They walk out on you because they don't want to be married or in the relationship anymore....you ending up paying most if not everything for the child...you realize its not the ideal way to raise the child, but you are left without alternatives.....yes you have a right to be angry. What I am saying is that this is not a war between the genders....this is a problem that is growing in spite of the gender. This not about the who went to the million man march but its about the kids getting the love they need. I believe Mike started out by trying to give tips to non-custodial parents who may be feeling the blues over the holidays...Yes they will spend time with their kids but eventually they have to say goodbye for the evening....their don't have that 24/7 relationship with the child as the custodial parent does. And I understand about the custodial parent has the blues as well especially having to be there 24/7 with that child raising that child alone or with limited help. even though there's a monthly check from the ex does little to make you feel better. I am a product of this type of upbringing...and by the way KEME...I and my sister turned out fine....none of us are in jail, and my mother is not a vampire trying to bleed my father dry....Yet my father has been a great part of my life being there when I needed him to be....
and Thandi allow me to say the million man march's purpose was for the awakening of the mentality for the brothas....Sometimes the only advice a man will take is from a man...this was a time in which men were reminded of their proper role in the home and in society. it was a wake up call...don't feel bad because they didn't allow women...the things that went on applied to the men only. I understand that you wanted to take your son, so he can be inspired, but this was one of those times when this was strictly a call for men to be men.
Now I'm done....and i've been enjoying this...but mama thandi and daddy Keme you two need to either work it out or divorce cause us children don't know who we gonna end up with...but you got to realize we will love you both...

Peace
Bishop

Thandiwe,

Both parents, custodial and non-custodial have to set up a household suitable for the children. Remember, when the non-custodial parent has the children, they have to pay for food, shelter, etc. for the children.

The non-custodial parent should pay the custodial parent adequate child support but each situation should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

There are single moms who pay a large portion of their salary to care for their children just as there are single moms who don't. I have an uncle whose ex-wife uses the child support to pay her luxury car payment and car insurance. Then, she is always complaining that their child doesn't have adequate clothing and money for extracurricular activities. I also have an aunt whose ex-husband didn't pay child support (He is now deceased). So, her salary went to raising her children.

There are single moms/dads who are struggling because the non-custodial parent isn't financially contributing to their children. On the other hand, there are single moms/dads (mostly moms) who are making out like bandits because the child support awards are set too high. If child support awards were set at a reasonable level, there would be less defaults in child support payments.

Many women are upset when the father of their child moves on, so they try to punish him by demanding more money. They see it as a personal rejection.

:grouphug: Bishop, you and your sister turned out well because your parents, although not together, worked together in your upbringing. You said it all, your father was a viable part of your life just as your mother was a viable part of your life.

:cry: It's all about the children...they "deserve" both parents being a part of their life. They do not deserve being set up as "bargaining chips" between the custodial parent and the non-custodial parent.

Ok Keme...Thanks for the clarification...

bishop, i understand the purpose of mike's original post. however, as i and others have stated, it is unbalanced reporting. he, you and others say that the noncustodial parents can be both men and women. however, the negative letters he posted were degrading to women only. this lead to the men vs. women.

and the millions man march, i don't have any hard feelings. like i said, i supported the brothers, know quite a few who attended in my area. and from the speeches i heard from Louis farrakhan - the march was about atonement. atonement to our communities, their children, the black women, etc, and becoming responsible. i also feel many men may have gone for their own reasons and purpose.

and in case you all have missed it AGAIN, it is about the children. i've never spoke against that. in fact, if you have read any of my posts, you can see that i am an advocate of it. i'm not for "trifling" women denying their children access to their fathers nor am i for men who find it so easy, and so easily find excuses not to be fathers to their children.

regina, again you keep talking about how women take advantage but many non-custodial parents get off not paying child support. and since you have stated that women usually get custody, then let's just say, alot of men get off not paying child support.

Thandiwe,

Actually, men do not get away with not paying child support. Child Support Enforcement is big business. CSE really goes after Dads who don't pay child support.

There are many issues why men don't pay child support, ranging from the CS being set too high to some men don't want to pay. There are a variety of reasons. One of the main reasons, and I'm not saying it is right, is because the mother is withholding visitation from the father. So, the father withholds the child support. Child support and visitation are supposed to be independent of each other.

Did you know child support can be set according to the salary a judge thinks the man should make and not what he is actually making? This is not an issue that is so simple. That is why each individual case must be evaluated independently.

I'm only stating that one must look at the total picture and see each side of the situation.

regina, you said it, "I'm only stating that one must look at the total picture and see each side of the situation." this letters mike posted on this thread does not represent the total picture.

and there are lots of fathers who don't pay child support. i know alot of women who would prefer not to even try to get support from their children's fathers. i also know of many men who do not hold steady employment and therefore, are exempt from child support.

why do you feel that women are most likely to be custody of the children? could it be that SOME fathers do not try to get joint custody?

and men can challenge the court for the amount of child support they pay. if any man feels he is being cheated, unfairly being forced to pay large amounts of child support then they need to challenge the judgments.

i also noticed you didn't comment on the amount of a woman's salary that goes for the support of the child. i KNOW most of her paycheck is going toward the maintaining the household and supporting her child(ren).

also if you don't believe my last statement, ask the people here how much their mother worked or struggled to provide them with a good home.

also ask them how much their father tried to build or continue a relationship with them after the parents separated.

i'm sure someone will try to use the excuse that the mother made it hard for them to see their children. but then again, that's what the courts are for. so if a man isn't willing to put in the effort to support, and help raise his children, then he has no reason to complain.

and these are my last comments on this issue.

Thandiwe,

Kemestry is correct in stating courts usually award the mother custody "even when a man fights for his children in the court system". As for rebutting child support awards, the courts very rarely deviate from the percentages set up by law. Do you realize that the divorce industry and the child support industry is "big business". Lawyers and companies are getting rich off people who can't handle their business through mediation.

You didn't read my message thoroughly. Both parents need to set up a household for the children, so both their salaries go to setting up their respective households. Just as the mother has to pay electric/gas, food, housing, etc., the father has to also. Both parents have to be financially responsible for their children not just one parent.

False allegations are alive and real and nothing is done for perjury. I have seen many men break down and cry because they have been accused and can't see their children. If the courts held women as accountable as they do men, then we would see more cooperation between parents.

Kem,
I read about the study. They stated one of the factors is income. But even in the case of single parent homes with adequate income, it was the same situation.

The article also stated it could be due to poor parenting. That's why children need parents.

I also wanted to add this info on how custodial parents benefit. Most fathers pay child support. For those who can't pay the whole amount, they pay what they can afford since the guidelines are set so high.

Below compares how some women benefit from child support and how the guidelines are set too high in some states. The example below is based on the state of Georgia with both parents making the same salary.

If this isn't an incentive for women to have babies or to get out of their marriage, I don't what is...

Two Children

Non-Custodial Parent

$70,000 Gross and adjusted gross
-14,400 Federal income tax (based on 1998 taxes)
- 3,713 Georgia income tax
- 4,340 Social Security tax
- 1,015 Medicare tax
$46,532 After-tax income
-$17,500 Child support received ($1,458/month)
$29,032 After-tax, after-CS payment

Custodial Parent

$70,000 Gross and adjusted gross
-14,400 Federal income tax (based on 1998 taxes)
- 3,713 Georgia income tax
- 4,340 Social Security tax
- 1,015 Medicare tax
$46,532 After-tax income
-$17,500 Child support payment ($1,458/month)
$64,032 After-tax, after-CS income

Non-custodial parent

Presumptive child support award
of 25 percent of Non-custodial parent's gross income*
(2 children = 23% - 28%)
$4,250 Fed. standard deduction
$2,700 Federal personal exemption
$0 child exemption
$63,050 Federal taxable income
$0 Federal child tax credit

Custodial parent

$6,250 Fed. standard deduction
(Head of Household)
$2,700 Federal personal exemption
$2,700 child exemption (for each child)
$63,050 Federal taxable income
$400 Federal child tax credit (for each child)

The figures above don't include medical expenses or life insurance. If the custodial parent is supposed to support the child just as the non-custodial parent, the custodial parent should be contributing 25% of gross income to support their child.

The custodial parent receives the children's tax exemption, tax deduction, related tax credits, and lower tax rates as head of household.

Many women feel it is beneficial to them financially to not have the father in their child's life. Plus, they have complete control over the children's lives.

Originally posted by kemetstry
:cool:

Another study came out recently, showing that mental illness is now a result of a single parent home. hmmmm ... nawwww ... i won't say it ... your secret is safe with me :kiss:

:lol: @ destee

"kemestry" posted:
Another study came out recently, showing that mental illness is now a result of a single parent home.

thandi says:

i know this is you. can't be nobody else. ;)

The state of Georgia is addressing the issue of non-custodial parents rights through three bills in the legislature. All three bills are currently in committee to be reviewed. If passed, the income of the custodial parent will be taken into consideration along with other factors when determining child support. The child custody bill seeks to give the non-custodial parent more input (move-aways, etc.)

HB 149 - Cost Shares Child Support bill

SB 16 - Child Custody bill
SB 17 - Cost Shares Child Support bill

Georgia House Bill 149
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2003_04/fulltext/hb149.htm

Georgia Senate Bill 16
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2003_04/fulltext/sb16.htm

Georgia Senate Bill 17
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2003_04/fulltext/sb17.htm