[protected]Federal Corruption of Child Support
Men are unhappy. Women should be unhappy too. Child Support has degenerated into a system of Child Support Agencies that benefit from using fraud and corruption to extract money from innocent males. The federal child support system is forcing males to pay child support for children they are not related to or the father of, even if there is DNA evidence presented that proves the man in question is not the biological father. The majority of females who refuse to pay child support are given impunity from the law system to a large degree, while males who fail to pay child support are punished severely, even if they do not have the financial resources to be able to make child support payments. These unconstitutional rulings violate human rights and civil rights.
State and Federal Corruption Of Child Support Agencies
Child Support Agencies are producing corrupt and fraudulent rulings is because:
1. Child Support Agencies and the State Government profit from it financially.
2. Child Support Agencies aren’t legally required to offer any proof to substantiate rulings.
The Child Support Agencies rarely investigate the accusations made by the mother and any physical evidence that would prove the mother’s accusation is fraudulent. Mothers are assumed to be innocent until proved guilty. Men are assumed guilty until proved innocent. If the man in question obtains a DNA test that proves he is not the biological father of the child he is accused of fathering, this evidence is considered irrelevant. If the father had a vasectomy that left him with a zero sperm count prior to the birth of the child, this evidence is considered irrelevant.
Child Support Agencies are permitted to hide such evidence so that it cannot be used in defense of the man accused of being the father. The Child Support Agencies will send the order of Child Support to an invalid address, as the man accused is therefore unable to respond to the claim during the allotted time he has to respond, as he is unaware of the claim made against him. In this situation he is therefore forced to pay otherwise he is placed in jail and cannot argue against the claim.
* 90% of Non-Custodial fathers Pay Child Support.
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)
* 90% of Fathers With Joint Custody Pay Child Support.
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)
* Fathers With Visitation Rights Pay 79.1%
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)
* 44.5% of Non-Custodial Fathers Still Financially Support Their Children.
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)
* 66% of Fathers Not Paying Child Support Are Unable Due To Lack of Financial Resources. (Source: GAO report: GAO/HRD-92-39 FS)
* 52% of Fathers Who Owe Child Support Earn Less Than $6,155 Per Year According To The Poverty Studies Institute.
* 47% of Non-Custodial Mothers Default on Child Support.
(Source: Garansky and Meyer, DHHS Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, 1991)
* 27% of Non-Custodial Fathers Default Child Support.
(Source: Garansky and Meyer, DHHS Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, 1991)
* Total Custodial Mothers: 11,268,000.
(Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 458, 1991)
* Total Custodial Fathers: 2,907,000.
(Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 458, 1991)
* 66% of Non-Custodial Fathers Do Not Pay Child Support Due To An Inability To Pay. (Source: U.S. General Accounting Office Report, GAO/HRD-92-39FS January 1992)
* Custodial Mothers Who Receive a Support Award: 79.6%
(Source: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, Oct. 1991, Authors: Meyer and Garansky)
Comment? Make your comments on this article. Comments are closed below.
[/protected]
fugitivenation 
Comments on: "Government Corruption and Child Support" (101)
will,
i,m not sure.but let me know if you hear anything on this. and “god bless those protesters” we have been pushed enough.i went to my bank today and they told me there was at least 300 new customers. i don,y know if you follow politics,but big banks are in troble.anyway thanks for your reply.
keep the faith
denny
http://www.childsup.ca.gov/Payments/CompromiseofArrearsProgram.aspx
HERE IS A INTERESTING SITE TO EXAMINE. IT MIGHT HELP SOMEONE SO I AM PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
ALSO HERE ARE SOME FIGHTING TERMS TO LOOK INTO TO FOR A PRESEDENCE.
REVERSE PROGRESS AS IN PAYING FOR A MAN’S FREEDOM
FRAUDULENT CALCULATIONS AS IN HOW DO WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW OR WHO ADDS UP OUR DEBTS CORRECTLY.
FULL DISCLOSURE OF HOW HUMAN SERVICES OBTAIN INFORMATION WHICH IS ALWAYS EVOLVING.
LACK OF TRANSPARENCY WHICH KEEP A DEBTOR OUTSIDE THE POLICIES OF THE LAW UNTIL IT IS TOO LATE.
The amendment, named for former Sen. Bill Bradley, New Jersey Democrat, says that once a child-support obligation has been established, it can’t be retroactively reduced or forgiven by a judge.
The amendment was enacted in 1986 to stop parents from running up huge child-support debts and getting a sympathetic judge to erase them..
Twelve years later, however, the unintended consequences of the Bradley amendment have become clearer, and a growing number of people are calling for the law to be repealed or at least modified.
According to the reformers, the Bradley amendment:
* All but ensures that any parent who has a dip in cash flow will be buried under a debt that cannot be legally escaped.
* Helps chase poor men into illegal activities or the underground economy, away from “mainstream” jobs and their children.
Reformers are having some success arguing their case on Capitol Hill, but admit that their battle is uphill: Members of Congress are loath to do anything that might be seen as going soft on child-support enforcement.
However, reformers say, they have a powerful incentive for change in the way the Bradley amendment keeps low-income fathers trapped in child-support debt.
The truth is that this is all about money today rather than any sense of justice or rightness. Each state gets paid in federal credits for every dollar collected. Children are a cash cow for the state. ~ E.M.
more from the by Wei Liu
(Kansas, United States)
Child Support Contradicts the Constitution and Should be Abolished
The child support has already caused so much tension and problems among people and in the country. The divorced two dislike each other and are likely to form family respectively in a couple of years. It is truly not the government/court?s right to force any relationship including the financial one between the two. As I learn, about 50% of the non-custody parents cannot pay the child support. And some of them judged willfully doing so and get put in jail. In a southern state, there are 500 parents in jail just for failing to pay the child support. This is slavery. In America, I do not see people fighting or robbing one time in a year on average, but surprisingly in about 2008, there are 2 million people in the prison in America. Many innocent people including those fail to pay the child support get sent into prison. This is absolutely persecution and human rights disaster. Today in 2011, I see 58% of American people agree with me that the child support should be abolished.
Some people say, ?Then who is going to raise the child?? Upon divorce, whoever expresses that he/she is willing to take care of the child completely including financially, whoever gets the custody of the child. If both sides want or neither side wants, then draw a lot to decide. If the two agree that each contribute to raising the child, which is the child support way, then that?s up to them. But the law shall never force people to do something together.
As a social institution, upon divorce, the government/court should only concerns, ?Who?s going to take care of the child?? And this is easy to solve if we conform the Constitution, basically respect people?s choice/liberty. I know the mind of those who make and enforce the child support law. They just want the family to have more money, but this is the job of business, not the job of law or government. They also say the best interest of the child. We adults even often do not know what is the best interest for ourselves, what is the best for a country. And the government is judging what is the best interest for a child, ridiculous.
The government is not a place for those whose major concern is money, but for those whose major concern is fairness and human rights. Those whose major concern is money no matter for themselves or for the country should enter the business world. Right now the child support has unconstitutionally brought heavy burden upon the divorce people, upon the society and upon the government, has caused massive human rights disaster, and should be abolished. One thing more, those who are judged willfully failed to pay the child support and sent to prison are actually the best lovable people in America because when many people walk away from the Constitution, they are defending it. They are not willing to be a slave. I?m not a slave either. America should be a land of free. Divorce should be free.
Child Support Contradicts the Constitution and Should be Abolished
by Wei Liu
(Kansas, United States)
Child Support Contradicts the Constitution and Should be Abolished
Wei Liu 2011
Recently I find the child support upon divorce contradicts the Constitution and should be abolished. The Preamble of the Constitution says, ?We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.? It is all right/free for any one to publish my article anywhere. And if you agree with me, please spread the idea of the essay around to make America a better country. I will also publish and post the essay elsewhere.
The general welfare now includes housing, food, education and medical care. The land is not made by the government/official, but made by God. Since the government holds the land made by God for people to live, the government is obliged to provide people with the basic living welfares. Now most governments in the world give every citizen there these welfares. Even in India, people going to school and seeing a doctor is free. I, as an adult who consume more than a child, have lived in Minnesota for years without any income. Today over 10% of Americans do not have any income and still live and raise their children. That?s how America is a fair and great nation. In fact, just for materials, raising one or two children is a one-person job.
Actually after divorce, there are at least five options to raise the child: ?1 solely by the father?s welfare 2 solely by the father?s income 3 solely by the mother?s welfare 4 solely by the mother?s income 5 the two raise the child together if the both agreed? These five options are people?s rights/liberty, and the Preamble of the Constitution says ?We the People of the United States??secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.?
The state makes the family law that includes the child support. The child support forces one side to pay another and preclude people?s options/liberty to raise their children, which contradicts the Preamble of the Constitution.
Amendment 10 of the Constitution?Powers of the States and People says, ?The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.? Does the state law prohibit a person raising a child by himself/herself or by welfare? No, then those powers/rights are reserved to the people. Here the child support precludes people?s liberty/rights of how to raise the child and it contradicts Amendment 10 of the Constitution.
Amendment 14?Citizenship Rights says, ?No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.? It is nothing wrong for a person to raise a child by himself/herself or by welfare, and the child support abridges people of these immunities. It contradicts amendment 14 of the Constitution.
Amendment 13?Slavery Abolished says, ?Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.? Divorce is not a crime, but normal life. The child support is forcing one side to pay another of the divorced two. Forcing someone to make money for another is involuntary servitude. No one including the spouse and the baby is slaver. Even within the marriage, no one is obliged to give any family member a penny, and the family law acknowledges that. Now the divorced two should have none or much less relationship than the marriage, and the government says one has to pay another certain amount of money every month, which does not make any sense at all. The child support contradicts Amendment 13.
Now we see the child support contradicts the Preamble, Amendment 10, 13, 14 of the Constitution of the United States and should be abolished.
I was just making a copy of ‘bradley amendment’ and I am passing along some info to you. When a past due child support is owed to the state as a result of welfare paid out to the state is ‘free’ to forgive some or all of it under what is known as an “offer of compromise.” I hope this is helpful to you.anyway, I’m waiting to hear from two members of Congress I wrote last week [i know!!lots of luck] but i won,t give up. Keep on trudging that road…
denny
YES DENNY I SAW THAT TOO. BUT AIN’T THERE A LOT OF CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO A COMPROMISE. ONE IS YOU MUST BE OUT OF WORK COMPLETELY. OR YOU HAVE BEING IN A COMA FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS. AND IN MY CASE THE STATE NEVER HELPED MY KIDS AS FAR AS I KNOW. SO THE MONEY THEY ARE TRYING TO RECOVER NEVER GOT PAID OUT. SOO DOES COMPROMISE APPLY TO ME. IT IS A GOOD AVENUE TO EXAMINE. THANKS
WILL
http://ancpr.com/bradleywtarticle.htm
THIS IS A LINK TO ANOTHER SITE WHICH HAS A LOT OF INFOMATION ON QUESTIONING THE BRADLEY AMENDMENT WHICH BECAME LAW IN 1986 CAUSING MANY MEN TO BE DRAGGED BACK INTO CHILD SUPPORT ARREARS. THE LAW SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED A AMNESTY PERIOD BECAUSE ALL DEBTS IN A NON-COMPUTERIZED WORLD USE TO HAVE A RECOMMENED SHELF-LIFE OF NO LESS THAN SEVEN YEARS.
10-1-11
I Willie J. Willis, hereby dispute and object to this notice of expectation of payment to your organization. It is a misrepresentation of the calculation of my obligation. It represent a lack of compromise considering the age of these allegations.
I see flags of character assassination and defamation. I see horrible tyranny in the forms of deprivation of privileges and citizen rights. I am not a literal dead beat. You have taken money from my salary on an ongoing basis every payday for years. You have taken monies blindly from my bank account without warning. You have taken all extra income from stimulus checks and IRS refunds. You have harassed and hounded me with threat, letters, and surrender procedures. You have did everything to me except try to understand my circumstances. You have no idea why my situation is in front of you with a ancient date of 1981.
If I am a deadbeat DAD, does that make me a deadbeat SON, deadbeat uncle, deadbeat citizen, deadbeat employee, deadbeat consumer, deadbeat taxpayer, deadbeat adult, deadbeat person? Does it even matter how many other things in my life I routinely conform to while paying my bills, my taxes, my interest rates, my fees and penalties? Does it matter how I handle rules, laws, licenses, and the rights of others? You leave me not choice but to seek bankruptcy.
I believe men and women are beginning to feel the heavy-handedness of your authority. All I ask is for a reasonable plan to pay my basic debt. A fair-minded negotiation will yield a greater outcome for everyone.
Peacefully,
Willie j. Willis
Hi Guys!
Sorry I haven’t been on in a while, I have finally received a letter from the Minister of Justice and Attorney Gerneral’s office of Canada, it wasn’t even a form letter! I explained our frustrating experiance with the “family” justice system and how it does in fact leave us in poverty, not only us but every child support payer every where! These laws have not been reviewed in Canada for a long time and he assures me they will look into it……I will not hold my breath! I also have the attention of our member of parliment and with our up comming court date I am to keep her informed! I never thought I would get this far, I will keep pushing!
Keep up the good work. Encourage others in your locale to do the same! This will grab the attention of those that have influence, the lawmakers. ~ E.M.
10-22-11
HELLO LISA MADIGAN,
I AM A NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT. BLUNTLY, I WANT TO GET OFF YOU HUMAN SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT SHIT LIST. I INTEND TO SEND OF COPY OF THIS VERY NOTICE TO MY LOCAL NEWS CASTERS. I AM 63 YEARS OLD AND MY SON IS 38. SOME YEARS AGO I ENDED A 12 YEAR RELATIONSHIP WITH MY FIRST WIFE. I WAS TAKING CARE OF THREE CHILDREN THEN. QUICKLY, YOU SHOULD KNOW ONLY ONE OF THOSE CHILDREN WAS PATERNALLY MY OWN.
AFTER I WENT THROUGH SOME THOUGH YEARS AND FINALLY GOT BACK IN THE MAIN PAY STREAM THE CHILD SUPPORT AGENCY CAME AFTER ME FOR BACK CHILD SUPPORT. THEY GARNISH MY INCOME FROM MY JOB. I HAVE SUFFERED ALL THE INDIGNITIES OF BEING STRIPPED OF VARIOUS PRIVILEGES THAT COME TO THOSE PARENTS WHO DO NOT PAY, WHILE I WAS PAYING.
YOU HAVE A WHOLE ARSENAL OF WAYS TO CUT A PERSON DOWN TO PRESSURE THEM FOR MONEY THEY CAN’T EARN BECAUSE YOU TAKE AWAY ALL THEIR CAPABILITIES, LIKE THE LICENSE TO DRIVE. A SAFE PLACE TO SAVE MONEY ETC. IT IS IRONIC YOU CALL YOURSELVES HUMAN SERVICES LIKE YOU TREAT ALL PARTIES INVOLVE LIKE THEY WERE HUMAN. WHEN REALLY THE ORGANIZATION IS INSENSITIVELY INHUMANE TO ALL MALES AND NON-PAYING PEOPLE.
ANYWAY I HAVE BEEN PUSHED OVER MY LIMIT AND I WOULD LIKE SOME SENSIBLE NEGOTIATIONS TO BEGIN WHICH WILL GET MY ACCOUNT CLEARED UP AND MAYBE SOME NEW RECOMMENDATIONS TO HELP OTHER FATHERS WHO YOU HAVE SCARED THE HELL OUT OF AND INTO HIDING. I DON’T SEE THE NATURE OF YOUR BUSINESS BEING SO CRUELLY EXTREME TO THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO PRODUCED THE VERY PRODUCT YOU ARE MAKING A FUSS AND A PROFIT OFF OF WHILE CARRYING OUT THESE PROCESSES.
I REALIZE THE WORLD IS GOING MAD AND I DO NOT CARE TO GO MAD TOO. MY SON IS GROWN UP AND WELL ON HIS OWN. I BET MANY OF THE MEN YOUR AGENCY TORTURE HAVE SIMILAR SITUATIONS. YOU THINK THIS IS THE WAY TO SEND MESSAGES TO MEN AND WOMEN. I DOUBT IT. THIS THING ABOUT INTEREST IS CRAZY. IT REALLY MAKES HUMAN SERVICES LOOK LIKE THEY ARE IN THIS BUSINESS FOR THE MONEY. I CAN’T BELIEVE FOR ONE SECOND YOU ARE REALLY TRYING TO HELP ANYBODY. IF THE AGENCY WANTS TO HELP CHILDREN, THEN IT SHOULD HELP CHILDREN BUT SOME OF US ARE FAR PAST THAT AGE AND TIME OF LIFE. AT SOME POINT YOUR INTEREST SHOULD BE DROPPED.
WILLIE J. WILLIS
CHICAGO, IL
the state and assisted governments are using current technology i.e. 21st century on cases which should have reached a shelf-life in 1997 when the statute of limitation on arreared child support was modified. If your case goes back that far then your obligation should have been allowed amnesty. The attorney general oversees a corrupt organization which is all dollars and cents not human interest. It seeks to embarass the poor American taxpayer over incidents that may or may not have happened 4 decades ago. I can’t help but suspect fraud and corporate engineering to breed the situation which makes money machines out of the struggling and damaged persons trying to avert the system’s impending record-on-the-WEB-pervileges- revoked rollercoaster.
good information for U.S. citizens ~ E.M.
8-13-11
My name is Willie J. Willis and I am a tax-paying American citizen. I live in Chicago, IL. As it is well known Illinois treats it taxpayers worst than most the States in the United States. It uses many laws to defraud its people of money much like the racketeers and mobsters.
The corruption in the State of Illinois has left it broke. They say they can not pay its government workers. These workers are the same people who carry out the laws that exploit other innocent citizens. They dream up schemes which create inescapable crisis for people like me. I have unwittingly become a victim of their child support system which takes all of ones dignity without consent.
The healthcare and child support service pretend to care. They actually cause havoc when they invade a family. Domestic cases turn into state and federal by virtue of a alleged court order. Their practice is to harass a man who is behind to pay up. They don’t consider any circumstances. They act as if every person who owns is a criminal with no rights. They proceed as though he must have money somewhere. If he does they will seize it and leave him desperate at the same time.
How can an Administration fault a man when they have such creepy and underhanded polices to disgrace one’s name, character, and hard earned reputations. They are just wrong when they burglarize a bank account. They are out of line when they believe a offspring is a commodity on the open market and interest on support is fair trade. My blood is was never up for sale.
The State has intentionally distributed my name and number to many other agencies who are all helping to make a fool out of me by making me pay of die. I am asking where is the real law. My case has circumstances way beyond the norm. I am 63 years old now, no children and in my 45 years of paying this state and federal government huge sums in taxes this is my reward. Is this some new way to exile people because they can change the status anytime they please. Are citizens losing ethical protections just because they failed as parents.
If I am to be the example of what a good citizens will face at the end of their working years then I say to everyone I meet or who will read my story, beware. The state is not well.
WILLIE WILLIS
How can this unjust currupt system take place legally? Something needs to be done by the people agains a degenerate incompitent goverment..but no body takes action they just complain!
Greg
What would you propose? Attorneys are uninterested because their bread is buttered in the system. You cannot deal with the system without an attorney. Most cannot afford an attorney to have the simplest of work done and pro bono legal assistance won’t touch family law. You can get involved in legal round robins with the State and child support agencies, with appeals, etc., but the result is rarely of benefit to the complainant. The system prevails by sheer “bully tactics.” You can write your Congressman or State Rep. If enough citizens do this is a given area, you might garner some attention. Many of us have tried to battle the system internally with no success because most people this involves are disconnected and disenfranchised, broken, homeless and even in jail. Politicians won’t touch this issue as a rule. A uprising similar to the Occupy Wall Street movement is the only option, or something greater. This issue is attached to many of the troubles of the folks protesting, but I haven’t heard a thing about child support and joblessness in the movement. So there you have it. For the moment, we (collectively) have each other, which is more than what you probably had yesterday. You are not alone. We do not live in a free society, that is only a myth. We can dismiss wishful thinking and look for opportunities to banish this oppression. ~E.M.
hi greg, i hear you. u.s. congressman are so busy creating delay and waste right now. i need to find out who exactly is my congressman. it is very hard to have a say-so when we are so small. but i seen to remember a little fellow name DAVID and his foe Goliath. until that day i like what you said about collectively we have each other.
This link can be found on our home page under “Write Your Lawmaker.” ~ E.J.
just found this web site. c.s. has literally destroyed me financially.
I’m going to be homeless soon if I can’t put a stop to this. In which case I will go and camp out on the c.s. doorstep. I need help or some advice or direction on this so if there is anyone reading this that has any in put at all it would be extremely helpful. i live in So. Ca. and I intend to sue child services for the crimes they have been committing on me for years. The systemic way they levy my bank account, the excessive c.s. they set in 1994 and have absolutley refused to modify no matter what my employment status is or was at a given time, taking money out of my unemployment (25%) and checking and refusing to tell me where that money is going, to keep enforcing max. c.s. after the mom had closed the case and forgiven all past due support. My youngest is 21. I can’t afford an attorney due to my failing financial situation so I need to start this on my own before I become homeless and even less able. Where do I start? I’m very familiar with courts and how to prepare legal motions and documents i just don’t know where or how to start. So any help would be very much appreciated, Thanks, Steve
of course, and the worst is the bradley amendment. it,s disregarding the consitution,the laws are made for the politcians not for the american people.im left with 291 dollars after they get thier money.and im on social security[66years old}thank god for family.
hi denny,
one guy said all we have is each other. i am 63 and i want to say that what is happeining to you shows how inhumane these vampires are that have taken over these organzations that were meant for social assistance not a blade of persecution for the less forturnate. the suffering will turn on them soon enough.
I know you are right about the Russian system. Do you know about No-Fault Marrage. That is how this child support BS came into play. That divorce system originated in Russia as well. Welcome to the USSA. I just bonded out of incarceration from Indiana,s Socialist program. I live in Texas. My son bonded me out. They say I owe 40000$. I was placed out of work in June of 2010 due to severe high blood pressure. I also have shortness of breath after 10 minutes of physical activity, all supported by my doctor and employer. Why did I GO TO JAIL? The system is out of control. Even Indiana,s Constitution says you cannot be jailed for a debt. The judge took an OATH and the persecutor took an OATH. For the record I drive a commercial vehicle. 395 part of the federal regulation says if your blood pressure is above a certain level, you are disqualified to drive. So Basicly I was arrested for getting sick. These SOB,S are out of control.
Hi guys! when I found out a few months ago my funding for my severly disabled son was being cut off because of our “high income” I wrote to many MLA’s, the Ministry of Justice and Attorney General’s office etc, etc, etc I also wrote to the major newspaper in Saskatoon. You see there is an income cap on services and funding for special needs children here in Saskatchewan, and they are refusing to deduct child support payments off of my husband’s income. Before deductions my husbands gross income is quite high, after deductions and child support we are left with $25000 per year for a family of 3.Don’t forget we need to feed and have clothing for my step children when they are here, and my son needs diapers, medication, nutritional supplements etc. etc. etc. The majority of the people ask me why, if my husband makes so much money, I have to work. My usual response is child support payments have to be made, most people still don’t understand. As a matter of fact when I first contacted the newspaper the guy I talked to didn’t want to do the story because he didn’t understand the problem, he figured there was lots of money to go around! After much research on the child support guidelines, the model itself I wrote this reporter again last night. I explained in full detail how the guidelines work, how it is based on many assumptions like the support payer is assumed to have no expenses on the children, like the payer and recipient are both single, and how here in Canada after a man makes $10382 base personal amount every dollar earned after that 65% is subject to child support and deductions (this is for 2 children). The federal child support guidelines also states that there has to be allowances for more complex family situations, which is often ignored by family courts today. Leaving the support payer with little money left to support themselves which then results in homelessness, job loss, lose their licenses, being jailed for arrears, and eventually in a lot of cases suicide. After I explained all of the child support shit I then explained that the provincial government is refusing to deduct these absurd child support payments which without my income forces us into poverty. I have a meeting with the reporter next week. Human Rights as well as the ombudsman’s office are now actively looking at my case, trying to reinstate my funding but it’s been over a month and I am growing impatient.
This is good, but don’t grow impatient. You will need it and every bit of canniness in your mind and heart. Keep up the good work and congratulations! ~ E.M.
Thank you for contacting the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General Hotline. It has been determined that your concern does not fall under the jurisdiction of the US Postal Service. Rather, your concern involves the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services Office of Inspector General, who can be located either online or with an 800 phone number in your local telephone book.
Readers – Here is the link to file any mail fraud complaint with the USPS: https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/forms/mailfraudcomplaint.aspx ~E.M.
From: OIG_Website@uspsoig.gov [mailto:OIG_Website@uspsoig.gov]
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 4:03 PM
To: Hotline Mailbox
Subject: Online – New Complaint Submission for Hotline
* Online – New Complaint Submission for Hotline *
Form submitted via website: 08/12/2011
Type of Complainant
NON – USPS EMPLOYEE
How did you hear about us?
USPS or OIG Inspection Service Website
Other Description
Who committed the alleged misconduct/wrongdoing?
Cabinet for Health and Family Services Office of Administrative and Technology Services Frank Lassiter, Executive Director 275 E. Main St. 4W-A Frankfort, KY 40621 Phone: (502) 564-0105 Fax: (502) 564-0302
What are the facts, what caused the problem, and what are the results of the problem?
KASES federal registry IV-D#0001295436 PHI and accounting disclosures, failure to comply with Federal Child Support Handbook. PHI that has been entered into the KASES system with the intent to commit Fraud. Title 18 USC sec.1030 violation
When did the misconduct/wrongdoing occur?
time frame entered into the system 1986 thru 8/12/2011
Where did the misconduct/wrongdoing occur?
Jefferson County Attorneys Office contracted by the Ky CHFS
How was the misconduct/wrongdoing committed?
Using the KASES to commit Fraud in regards to Federally Funded Child Support Obligations. The Administering of Child Support Obligations by the CHFS are in failure to comply with the Federal Child Support Handbook. Violation of Title 18 USC sec.1030
Do you have first hand knowledge of the misconduct/wrongdoing?
Yes I have several copies of PHI and accounting disclosures statement that is not full or complete. Dealing with PHI I am entitled to a full and complete accounting disclosure statement. The statement needs to reflect all CHILD SUPPORT HANDBOOK activities pertaining to PHI and accounting disclosures according to the Child Support Handbook.
Where can we obtain additional information concerning the misconduct/wrongdoing?
The KENTUCKY CHILD SUPPORT HANDBOOK 9.010 AUTHORITY The laws and regulations related to Establishment are: THE OMNIBUS BUDGET RECONCILIATION ACT of 1993 (OBRA ’93): Section 13623. 205.712 Division of Child Support — Duties — Cabinet to process child support payments — State disbursement unit — Cabinet’s cooperation with courts and officials — Reporting of obligors — Denial, suspension, and revocation of licenses — Data match system — Subpoenas — Distribution of child support program information. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND WORK OPPORTUNITY RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1996 (PRWORA), PUBLIC LAW (P.L.) 104-193: Sections 304, 317 and 382. CHILD SUPPORT PERFORMANCE AND INCENTIVES ACT of 1998 (CSPIA): Section 401. UNIFORM INTERSTATE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT (1996) UIFSA. SOCIAL SECURITY ACT (SSA): Title IV Part D, Sections 454, 459A, 466 and 1908A. UNITED STATES CODE (U.S.C.): Title 42 U.S.C., Chapter 7, Sections 654, 659a and 666. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR): 45 CFR Parts 302 and 303. KENTUCKY REVISED STATUTES (KRS): Chapters 205, 403, 405, 406, 407, 452 and 454. KENTUCKY ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS (KAR): 921 KAR Chapters 1:380, 1:400, 1:410 and 2:016; and 922 KAR 1:130. 6.010 AUTHORITY The laws and regulations related to Confidentiality and Safeguarding Records are: UNITED STATES CODE (USC): USC, Title 15, Chapter 41, Subchapter III, Section 1681 et seq. (and the sections that follow); USC, Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 61, Subchapter B, Section 6103; USC, Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 75, Subchapter A, Part I, Sections 7213 and 7213A; and USC, Title 42, Chapter 7, Subchapter IV, Part D, Section 654. SOCIAL SECURITY ACT (SSA): Title IV, Part D, Sections 453, 454, 463, 464, and 466. NOTE: USC contains the information that is in SSA. The difference in section cites for USC and SSA is the first digit of the section number. USC section cites begin with a “6” and SSA section cites begin with a “4.” PUBLIC LAW (PL): PL 104-191. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR): Title 45, Volume 1, Chapter I, Parts 160, and 164; and Title 45, Volume 2, Chapter III, Parts 302, 303, and 307. KENTUCKY REVISED STATUTES (KRS): Chapters 61, 131, 194B, 205, 403, 405, 406, and 434. KENTUCKY ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS (KAR): Title 921 1:020. 6.010 AUTHORITY The laws and regulations related to Confidentiality and Safeguarding Records are: UNITED STATES CODE (USC): USC, Title 15, Chapter 41, Subchapter III, Section 1681 et seq. (and the sections that follow); USC, Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 61, Subchapter B, Section 6103; USC, Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 75, Subchapter A, Part I, Sections 7213 and 7213A; and USC, Title 42, Chapter 7, Subchapter IV, Part D, Section 654. SOCIAL SECURITY ACT (SSA): Title IV, Part D, Sections 453, 454, 463, 464, and 466. NOTE: USC contains the information that is in SSA. The difference in section cites for USC and SSA is the first digit of the section number. USC section cites begin with a “6” and SSA section cites begin with a “4.” PUBLIC LAW (PL): PL 104-191. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR): Title 45, Volume 1, Chapter I, Parts 160, and 164; and Title 45, Volume 2, Chapter III, Parts 302, 303, and 307. KENTUCKY REVISED STATUTES (KRS): Chapters 61, 131, 194B, 205, 403, 405, 406, and 434. KENTUCKY ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS (KAR): Title 921 1:020. 5.010 AUTHORITY The laws and regulations related to Alleged Fraud are: SOCIAL SECURITY ACT (SSA): Title IV, Part D, Section 466. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR): Title 45, Volume 2, Chapter III, Part 302. KENTUCKY REVISED STATUTES (KRS): Chapters 194A, 194B, 205, and 405. 5.020 ALLEGED FRAUD CRITERIA AND DOCUMENTATION Authority: KRS 205 and 405 5.030 IV-D ALLEGED FRAUD Authority: SSA 466 and KRS 405. NOTE: A prima facie case is a case that will be won unless the other side presents evidence that disputes the indication of fraud. 6.010 AUTHORITY The laws and regulations related to Confidentiality and Safeguarding Records are: UNITED STATES CODE (USC): USC, Title 15, Chapter 41, Subchapter III, Section 1681 et seq. (and the sections that follow); USC, Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 61, Subchapter B, Section 6103; USC, Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 75, Subchapter A, Part I, Sections 7213 and 7213A; and USC, Title 42, Chapter 7, Subchapter IV, Part D, Section 654. SOCIAL SECURITY ACT (SSA): Title IV, Part D, Sections 453, 454, 463, 464, and 466. NOTE: USC contains the information that is in SSA. The difference in section cites for USC and SSA is the first digit of the section number. USC section cites begin with a “6” and SSA section cites begin with a “4.” PUBLIC LAW (PL): PL 104-191. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR): Title 45, Volume 1, Chapter I, Parts 160, and 164; and Title 45, Volume 2, Chapter III, Parts 302, 303, and 307. KENTUCKY REVISED STATUTES (KRS): Chapters 61, 131, 194B, 205, 403, 405, 406, and 434. KENTUCKY ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS (KAR): Title 921 1:020. 6.070 SAFEGUARDING AUTOMATED SYSTEM INFORMATION 6.020 THE KENTUCKY OPEN RECORDS ACT 6.050 RELEASE OF CASE INFORMATION 205.712 Division of Child Support — Duties — Cabinet to process child support payments — State disbursement unit — Cabinet’s cooperation with courts and officials — Reporting of obligors — Denial, suspension, and revocation of licenses — Data match system — Subpoenas — Distribution of child support program information. (i) Establish child support obligations and seek modification of judicially or administratively established child support obligations in accordance with the child support guidelines of the Commonwealth of Kentucky as provided under KRS 403.212; (j) Administratively establish child support orders which shall have the same force and effect of law
Who else might be aware of the misconduct/wrongdoing?
Division of Audits And Investigations (Lee Guice, Director) Phone: (502) 564-2815 Fraud, abuse and other misconduct by CHFS employees and contractors. As necessary, staff provides assistance to the Kentucky Office of Attorney General, U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Compliance Branch contains three investigative sections: the Determining Eligibility Through Extensive Review (DETER), Recipient Fraud and Special Investigations. The primary goals of this branch are to prevent and stop waste, fraud and abuse of public assistance programs and conduct special investigations into matters related to the Cabinet, such as employee malfeasance. The DETER program is a collaborative effort between the Office of Inspector General and the Department for Community Based Services (DCBS). The DETER program staff helps DCBS staff by investigating the accuracy of information used to determine eligibility for food stamps, Medicaid, the Kentucky Transitional Assistance Program and child care assistance programs. While the DETER program focuses primarily on preventing fraudulent receipt of benefits, DETER staff also may investigate active cases when information is questionable or suspect. DETER investigators conduct field investigations to verify eligibility factors not routinely available to eligibility workers. These investigations are completed within 15 days to provide DCBS staff the information needed to process benefits accurately and promptly. The Recipient Fraud Section staff detects, reviews and investigates fraud and abuse by recipients of state welfare, food stamp, child care and Medicaid assistance programs; establishes claims due the commonwealth; and refers cases for criminal prosecution and administrative collection. Section staff also operates the Medicaid and Welfare Fraud and Abuse Hotlinem, processes and reviews complaints received on the hotline and from other sources and investigates vendors participating in the WIC Program. Special investigations are conducted at the request of the Cabinet secretary or agency office heads into such matters as fraud and abuse by Cabinet contractors and vendors, as well as Cabinet personnel investigations. Phone: (502) 564-2815 Fax: (502) 564-7876
Do you want to remain anonymous?
No
If no, do you want confidentiality?
No
Are you willing to be interviewed?
Yes
Every State that is an Administrator of Child Support there is a Child Support Handbook that is implemented through a system. It is a Federally funded Child Support Enforcement System. There are two sides of this Handbook, Judicial and Administrative both have the same effect of Law. You have a judicial Obligation judgement and an Administrative Order. These Guidelines are very strict in compliance Laws,Statutes and Administrative Regulations. Each Participate when entered into this system receives a Federal IV-D #. This number opens a case in this Enforcement system. A caseworker is assigned a case and he or she is in charge of this case and has the responsibility of making sure that all the correct information is entered into the system. This is were the problem first comes into play. You have uneducated individuals trying to manage a very complex and integrated system. By Statute each State is responsible for the education of caseworkers and information that is entered. What is happening at first initiation of a recorded activity reflected in this system which is called Protected Health Information or better known as disclosures the information which is mandated by each Child Support Handbook for each State is not in Compliance with the Handbook it is better known as HIPAA. Define Disclosure ” to reveal” . Each Handbook is very clear about PHI and accounting disclosures. This terminology you will not see at the county level or even State level even though there are numerous Statutes and regulations at the State level and county level. Statutes handled by the State, Administrative Regulations by the State and the County together. It is all in the Child Support Handbooks of each individual State. One of the best things we can do as far as combating this type of Administrative Federally funded entity is seek resolve of issues out of court. We are not aware of the Administrative side of this beast that is sucking the very life from our Families and children. Remember that Administrative Orders has the same effect as Law. But we are not being told this. It is like the counties are doing the dirty work while the State sits back and enjoys the monetary benefits. They have made the enforcement so convenient with the counties, they are experts at ENFORCEMENT. With every CS-73 Withholding Order their is a small print about the obligations being questioned its called a mistake of fact, they send to our employers and we are entitled to an Administrative Hearing to Question the obligation. But in BIG BOLD print quotes Statutes about the penalties for non-compliance to our employers. This already has a negative reflection on us to our employers and of course we don’t see the Withholding Order and of course our employer, their main concern is COMPLIANCE. They automatically assume we are in arrears because of BIG BOLD print about what they are going to do if they don’t comply. If we do go to court a request for a jury needs to be our resolve in these matters taking it out of the hands of a Corrupt Judge’s. We as noncustodial parents got to beware that we a have right to know our monthly child support /obligation according to the Child Support Handbook they have to match dollar for dollar. Without Obligation there is no Support. Our credit card company’s are not allowed to make False accusations about our charges but we allow this Bias-Child support enforcement system to get away with it. We are uneducated and to trustworthy of a system that really is a fail safe system. Every time someone goes to Court we need to learn more about the Law and bring it before a JURY. They will be a lot more easy to persuade with nothing but cut and dry plain written Law. Then we won’t hear about interpretation of the Law. In closing even though I could write for days about this issue. Their is one thing all IV-D #’s have in common, that is their is a caseworker sitting behind a screen of a PHI computer that is property of the U.S.Federal Government when the case opens the Introduction screen will have a warning from the IRS WARNING BANNER it WARNS ” This system may contain Government information, which is restricted to authorized users ONLY. Unauthorized access, use, misuse or modification of this system or of the data contained herein or in transit to/from this system constitutes a violation of Title18, United States Code, Section 1030, and may subject the individual to Criminal and Civil penalties pursuant to Title 26, United States Code, Sections 7213(a), 7213 (the Taxpayer Browsing Protection Act), and 7431. This system and equipment are subject to monitoring to ensure proper performance of applicable security features or procedures. Such monitoring may result in the acquisition, recording and analysis of data being communicated, transmitted, processed or stored in this system by a user. If monitoring reveals possible evidence of criminal activity, such evidence may be provided to Law Enforce Personnel”. ANYONE USING THIS SYSTEM EXPRESSLY CONSENTS TO SUCH MONITORING. Everyone that is entered into this system is entitled to a full and complete PHI and accounting disclosure statement it is a free and public document.
It’s so tyrannical. They take 80% of my check between insurance that I have to provide for them and child support and I still have to pay the co-pays. My cars been repossessed. I got evicted. I sleep in my friends basement and that welcome is wearing out. I have to find under the table work, break the law, just to eat. Its so corrupt. You can only back a dog in a corner so far before you get bit. Take that how you want it. But hey…its in the best interest of the child. Riiiiight. More like the magistrate wants a new desk.
I’ve worked hard my entire life since i can remember always striving to make a fair and decent living. My ex-wife has literally been profiting from my hard work since the day I proposed 11 years ago. She made off like a bandit with the divorce. Saying my children were accustomed to a wealthy life even though neither of us came from any money and i had only made a sizeable income for about three years. Since the recession my income has dropped by 40% and she does not believe it. I tried to lower my child support from 2050 a month to 1400 a month to a just a fair level and she hired an expensive lawyer to block it. Now she and her lawyer want to increase my child support from 2050 to almost 4000 a month. Practically forcing me into bankruptcy and probably being close to homeless. All i wanted to do was to lower the child support to a level that is fair so i can eventually save some money for retirement. Instead she is trying to financially cripple me for her gain. I’m a kind, rational, honest, individual but its enough to make me want to jump off a bridge. The system is vile and disgusting. For my children i think i can hold on. But a grown man that makes $75,000 a year shouldn’t feel like suicide every day. I would understand if she had special needs. But my children are healthy and smart, and she makes about the same income i do and she lives with a rich boyfriend. She says my children are suffering but I have paid over $120,000 in the past five years. how much suffering are they really experiencing? Im pretty sure the real story is that her diamond allowance and retirement accounts are not as big as she would like them to be.
Look into your States Child Handbook. We need to know all 50 States Handbooks and compare from State to State. Focus on the Ombudsman Office at the State level enter all complaints online every thing is recorded and acknowledged In the Handbook there is a EEO Compliance Officer. Also look for Division of Health Services the Manager, make open records request in regards to your Protected Health Information . Make sure your Obligation is Established according to FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT HANDBOOK.
US Department of Education
Office for Civil Rights
600 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC 20202-1100
1-800-421-3481
US Department of Labor
Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Atlanta Federal Center, Room 7B75
100 Alabama Street SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
404-562-2424
US Department of Justice
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
PO Box 65808
Washington, DC 20035-5808
202-514-2151
I have finally gotten a response from the Ministry of Justice and Attorney General’s office of Saskatchewan, this is all they said:
The court usually does not deviate from the Child Support Guidelines.
They do not differentiate between those that are in new second families
and those that are single. The rationale behind this is that if you are
in a new second family, you will have additional expenses, but you will
also get additional benefits from being able to split your new household
expenses. Another reason for the guidelines to be so rigid is that it
makes the outcome predictable. If more factors were introduced in child
support calculation, people would have difficulty in reaching their own
agreements, and it would complicate court procedures, especially for
people who are representing themselves.
Every province has adopted the Federal Child Support Guideline regime,
and usually, exceptions are only granted in situations where one of the
parties is able to prove an undue hardship claim, which is often
difficult to do.
Do they REALLY think these women would actually agree to less money?? I know my husband’s ex wouldn’t, I tried to explain our situation and she pretty much laughed! have sent ANOTHER email the attorney general’s office
In accordance with Federal law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) policy, this institution is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. Under the Food Stamp Act and USDA policy, discrimination is also prohibited on the basis of religion or political beliefs.
To file a complaint with USDA or HHS:
Write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD).
Write U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Region IV Office for Civil Rights, 61 Forsyth Street, SW. – Suite 3B70, Atlanta, GA 30323 or call (404) 562-7886 (voice) or (404) 331-2867 (TDD).
USDA and HHS are equal opportunity providers and employers.
I may have spoke too soon!
Heard from Statistics Canada, my email has been “forwarded onto the responsible division for consideration” the number that came with the reply is #428752…I don’t know if that is a case number or what, but I think it will take more than just one person to make this happen….Stats Canada has never done this before, so I would like to push for this to actually work. The email for stats can is…infostats@statcan.gc.ca
a note to all of ‘the faithful’ out there, your actions always take some time. Don’t give in or give up! The USA needs to get more active in protecting personal rights violations. What have you done today? ~ E.M.
My pleas so far have fallen on deaf ears…No one from the federal government has replied….I don’t know if stats canada will do a survey or not……I HAVE EMAILED THE UNITED NATIONS. I gave them full details of our story including details of how 3 years ago my son almost died….he develped scurvy(kids withautism have eating disorderes as well) it took months to diagnose, and a full year to recover during this time I couldn’t work. The ex-wife took us to court, we treid to claim undue hardship and lost. “second families are no excuse to lower payment” the judge ordered $13000 in arrears and on going support….we did get the arrears lowered my husband was paying the whole time just not the table amount. My son almost died and our hardship claim was denied!! What the hell! His ex-wife and spouse make great money!! Yes fathers should pay for their children, but not at the expense of another child. The children should be treated equal.
Remember that politicians in the “free world” are afraid for their jobs. Enough stink and you will get results. It’s time to stink! Repeal Bradley and abominable child support law in the USA (or wherever it lives!)~ E.M.
Get a shovel out and dig,this enforcement system can be conquered, we are all a part of an ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM that we know very little about, lets educate ourselves to help everyone understand how and why this is happening completely know the rules and play to win, this Enforcement is about Protected Public Health and we are entitled to a full and complete PHI and Accounting Disclosures that is Administered by the State. This a free and public document ask for one at the State level and research every possible website that deals with
Open Records Requests, Records Management, and lets not let them get away with US Postal Service Fraud. Lets ENFORCE this ENFORCEMENT system, They are covered entities under the Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act better known as HIPAA.
US Department of Education
Office for Civil Rights
600 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC 20202-1100
1-800-421-3481
US Department of Labor
Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Atlanta Federal Center, Room 7B75
100 Alabama Street SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
404-562-2424
US Department of Justice
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
PO Box 65808
Washington, DC 20035-5808
202-514-2151
I have contacted statistics canada and have asked them to do a national survey on the affects of the federal child support guidelines and the affects on the children and families of the “second” family. I don’t know if it would do any good, or even if they are willing to do it. I also contacted the federal government, the “team” who came up these excessive guidelines and told them our situtaion….I have asked them for a reply and made them aware that I will contact the united nations….we will see what happends now!
You have done what many have not thought to do or cared to do. Don’t give up! You are making a difference! – E.J.
I dont even want to give you a laugh, i would like to be contacted on the matter because if the gov… can RoB! then what should we do…..? i make close to $1100.00 a mo and the gov…takes $752.00 how can i pay bills , buy food, pay rent, buy gas,and have pocket chain for lunch,But im a (ARM SECURITY OFFICER) and you aspect me to protect people with money : ) OK!!!! then go to child support court and listen to those lady talk sh.t! to me with no Respect 23 YEARS OF PUTTING MY LIFE ON THE LINE FOR WHAT EVEN SECURED BANKS now may have to FLIP!!! i have to live for me now RELEASED A BEAST!!!!!: (.
Hi we live in Saskatchewan Canada, my husband and I have been married for 8 years. He has 4 children from a previous marriage and I have one from a previous marriage. My son is severly disabled he is 14, non verbal, not toilet trained, doesn’t sleep through the night. I don’t receive child support, my son’s father died, there are no suvivour benefits either. I was receiving help from the saskatchewan government to pay for respite services which I used to pay for child care while I worked. The saskatchewan government cut us off these services, I am filing a complaint with the human rights commission to restore these very crucial services. In the mean time my husbands shrew of an ex-wife is filing with the court for MORE money, after bills and child support we are left with $500 for gas for our vehical, diapers, nutrition supplements for my son, and groceries. I worked to put food on the table for our family, no without my income we are in huge trouble, is the children in our home not entitled to have the same standard of living as the children in her home??? By the way the ex-wife lives with her boyfriend of 6 years they both have good incomes, as a matter of fact they both have decided to take the summer off of work…..any idea’s??
set a trend and petition the United Nations, get some international attention and create an embarassment factor. ~ E.M.
I am not very good at computer stuff and don’t really know where to start, or how do do a petition….any pointer would be great, thanks Crystal
I would like to send a proposal via e-mail to the Secretary-General. What is his e-mail address?
A: E-mails addressed to the Secretary-General should be sent through this form. Proposals can only be taken up by the United Nations when presented by an official representative of a Member State and after being duly inscribed on the agenda of the Organization and voted on by its members. Contact your representative for your nation. You could also start a page on Care2.com to solicit support. Human Rights and the U.N.
US Department of Education
Office for Civil Rights
600 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC 20202-1100
1-800-421-3481
US Department of Labor
Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Atlanta Federal Center, Room 7B75
100 Alabama Street SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
404-562-2424
US Department of Justice
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
PO Box 65808
Washington, DC 20035-5808
202-514-2151
I am sorry to hear what you have been going through. I have been on disability for around 2 years for heart problems. When I applied for disability I was not able to work and had to prove not on only to disability that I was ill but the child support court. My ex wife who makes over $60,000 a year not including her husband that makes around $75,000 a year wanted more money from me for college of my two kids. My current wife went through hell she had to give the courts all her financial information to prove that she was not hiding money for me. During the child support hearing I collapsed and they had to call an ambulance for me. I notice as I was being wheeled out on the stretcher that my ex wife was holding the door open for them. How nice She told the court that it was all an act I was putting on .My heart surgery is this week .Maybe my ex still believe it’s an act. I don’t have enough memory in my computer to tell you all the stories of hell I went through. , you will never win. I was always honest and always got screwed for it. The government and are states are only in for the money. Good luck
Do not ever give up if we do that really makes us deadbeats, Department of Civil Rights, find out what region you are in ask for a OCR complaint form,
US Department of Education
Office for Civil Rights
600 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC 20202-1100
1-800-421-3481
US Department of Labor
Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Atlanta Federal Center, Room 7B75
100 Alabama Street SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
404-562-2424
US Department of Justice
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
PO Box 65808
Washington, DC 20035-5808
202-514-2151
OK… I have 100% proof that I am not the biological father, and never consented to the former wife did to have the children (she got away with it once, so twice was easier). She testified during the divorce trial that I am not the biological father, she requested 100% legal custody (the court simply gave that to her, and my attorney did not put that forth… because the children were not mine), the GAL said that my involvement is a determent to the children’s well-being. There was testimony that I actually refused to adopt the children by the mother (now why would I adopt children that I did not create… sometimes the logic fails me to understand). The court found that I am not the biological father, not the adoptive father, not the legal father, not the defacto father, not the presumed father….. BUT I am the father for the purposes of child support. The appeals court didn’t hear the case. Oh and Massachusetts requires support through age 23 because unlike married males a college education is requried for children from a single divorced mother getting “help” from the child support. I was told that I could send cards through the US Mail if I wanted… so I took them up on that offer and sent a card with “Happy Birthday” and nothing of any sort that was harmful and received a Abuse Protection Order in return, because I might, possibly send another card through the mail, however, its perfectly acceptable that I am garnished every week through age 23 and pay for college.
US Department of Education
Office for Civil Rights
600 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC 20202-1100
1-800-421-3481
US Department of Labor
Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Atlanta Federal Center, Room 7B75
100 Alabama Street SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
404-562-2424
US Department of Justice
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
PO Box 65808
Washington, DC 20035-5808
202-514-2151
Child Support Guidelines
Child Support Guidelines effective Jan. 1, 2009, Mass. Trial Court. “These guidelines apply to cases involving children entitled to support from ages 0-18 and children over 18 who are still attending high school. In establishing support orders for children over age 18, to the extent permitted by law, the Court shall exercise its discretion…”
Thomas Sharp
Portland, ME 04103
Tom-Sharp@hotmail.com
December 30th, 2009
Honorable Susan Collins
413 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20150
Dear Senator Susan Collins,
I am writing to you with concerns about the practices that the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) employ to collect child support payments from the Non-Custodial Parent (NCP).
My nightmare, with this child support issue, started when I was deployed to Iraq in 2004 for a 13 month tour. While deployed, Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) made an error with my court ordered child support payments. While going on my 3rd month in Iraq, I received a letter from my former wife that payments were not being sent. However, my monthly statements indicated child support payments were garnished from my pay. After I exhausted all measures available to me while in Iraq to correct DFAS error and finding that all efforts were futile, my wife started mailing payments direct to my former wife. This however was not in accordance with the court order. During the 3 month period I accrued arrears with my child support payments.
When I returned from Iraq in February of 2005 I contacted DHHS to make arrangements to pay down the arrears. DHHS agreed that I could pay an additional weekly amount until the arrears were paid. I complied with the agreement reached with DHHS. However, this did not stop DHHS form intercepting my Income Tax Return, and providing notice (threatening) me with the following; Revoking my Drivers License, any Professional License(s) I hold, revoking my Passport, freeze my Bank Account and put liens on my property. I explained to DHHS that the arrears were caused by DFAS’s error and by no fault of my own. DHHS’s reply was and I will quote “It’s the Law”. This was a nice Welcome Home from Iraq reception from DHHS. In August of 2005 I retired from the Army National Guard.
Since I returned from Iraq, re-adjustment has not been easy and finding and keeping steady employment has been difficult. This brings me to the present day nightmare with the child support issue once more. With my lack of full time gainful employment, I have accrued arrears with child support payments. These arrears are caused, not by my unwillingness to pay but my lack of sufficient income to even pay my basic living expenses. In March of 2009 I applied for a job with Lockheed Martin as a Security Guard at Brunswick Naval Air Station. Having met all the requirements as a Veteran and with my Disabled Veteran Status, I was selected for the job. However, during the hiring process I received in the mail from DHHS a Notice to Revoke my Drivers License. Informing Lockheed Martin of the notice this disqualified me from the job. Lockheed Martin had to fill the position immediately and could not wait for me to resolve the issue with my driver’s license. How is taking my drivers license helping me resolve the issue with child support payments one may ask. I see no clear logic in DHHS action in this case.
Watching one of my best chances for gainful employment slip away due to DHHS collection tactics, I revisited the Career Center in Portland to start the job search all over again. While at the Career Center, I discovered the Maine Enterprise Option Program (MEO). The MEO Program provides a gateway for Mainers to start there own business. Taking full advantage of this opportunity, my Wife and I diligently worked on starting our own business. While going through the MEO Program I was allowed to draw unemployment compensation. Additionally, child support payments were garnished from my unemployment compensation to meet my obligation. While working with the Veteran Counselors at the Career Center, I was informed about Executive Order 13360 and Public Law 106-50 concerning the government contracting with Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB). In October of 2009 my Wife and I officially went in to business for ourselves. The business is Steam Technologies – A Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business.
Now that my Wife and I were in business for ourselves we could finally see light at the end of the tunnel. However, the light at the end of the tunnel was a DHHS Fright Train. When we went in to business for ourselves the unemployment compensation stopped coming in, as it should. This also stops child support payments. I was securing jobs and the company was starting to see cash flow. Based on the jobs scheduled, by January of 2010 we would be able to meet our entire financial obligations to include my child support obligation. Now here comes the DHHS Fright Train. Because there is still accrued arrears in my child support payments DHHS froze my bank accounts to include both personal and business accounts to collect the arrears. I explained to DHHS that this will only make the situation worse. With their apathy attitude their reply was, and let me quote them again, “It’s the Law”. After months of hard work digging ourselves out of financial hardship and trying to live the American Dream, DHHS not only shut our business down they also are preventing us from meeting our basic living expenses. I will be on the streets in less than a month. This is the second time DHHS (MY GOVERNMENT) has compounded the problem and prevented me form meeting my child support obligation and basic living expenses for my family.
During the time frame mentioned above, based on the recommendation from DHHS, I filed a Motion to Modify Child Support based on the significant decrease in my income. This would help reduce the severity of any arrears. When I tried to have my former wife served in April 2009 in North Carolina through registered mail the motion was returned undeliverable. My former wife moved with my daughter and left no forwarding address. This is a blatant violation of our Court Order. I informed DHHS in writing via registered mail that I can not have my former wife served because she moved. I requested a hearing with DHHS to resolve the issue. A hearing was held on May 28th, 2009. During the hearing DHHS stated that they had the address where my former wife and daughter live. However, they would not provide the address to me so I could file the motion that DHHS recommended. After the hearing in May of 2009 the chain of events occurred as follows;
1 On June 11th, 2009 I filed a motion with the Portland District Court with a cover letter stating the Defendant moved with no forwarding address and asking DHHS to provide current address.
2 On June 12th, 2009 the Magistrate ordered DHHS to provide the current address to the Court on or before July 5th, 2009 providing DHHS had no objections.
3 On July 13th, 2009 the Magistrate having heard no objection ordered DHHS to provide the current address to the courts. The courts would file the motion on my behalf. Please keep in mind that I have no restraining orders against me from preventing me from seeing my daughter. However, DHHS and the Courts continue to keep my daughter from me. My former wife is in Contempt of Court and yet DHHS and the Courts, who both know this, allow this direct and willful Contempt to go unpunished.
4 From July 2009 until November 2009 I tried contacting DHHS to inquire about my Motion. I called DHHS and was sent to voice mail with no return call, then when I actually spoke with someone they stated, I do not handle your case and would pass the message on.
5 On December 16th, 2009 I received Notice to Withhold and Deliver from DHHS and all my bank accounts were frozen. Now that my accounts were frozen DHHS answered my calls. I inquired about my motion and DHHS stated that they have not heard from the Magistrate, when In fact, DHHS did. DHHS never provided the address to the Courts so the motion could be served.
6 On December 17th, 2009 I have concluded that the DHHS and the Courts (MY GOVERNMENT) through there error, have again compounded the problem. Because of this grave error my child support arrears will be astronomically higher. Due to the error on behalf of DHHS and the Courts, I, the Non-Custodial Parent and child will pay the price in more ways than one.
Senator Collins there is more to this story (Injustice) I would like to point out the common denominator(s) with this issue and some other underlying facts.
As soon as you are labeled a Non-Custodial Parent (NCP) your name is sent to the Federal Case Registry (FCR). The FCR contains state Child Support Enforcement (IV-D) and non IV-D case data and serves as a pointer system to help locate NCP across state lines. NCP data in the FCR are matched daily against employment data in the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH) and sent to states to facilitate case processing and increase collections, especially through automated income withholding. Additionally, matches are sent to states to inform them if an IV-D case participant in their state appears as a participant in a IV-D or non IV-D case in another state. The FCR also serves as the conduit for matching against the following sources: Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), National Security Agency (NSA) and Social Security Administration (SSA). Matches made through the Multi-state Financial Institution Data Match (MSFIDM) are returned to states through the FCR.
As soon as you are labeled a Non-Custodial Parent (NCP) you are, for all intent and purposes, put on probation and treated like a criminal. For any reason you can not pay your child support payments your case worker (Probation Officer) will always threaten you with the following; Drivers License Revoke, Professional Licenses Revoked, Non Renewal of Hunting or Fishing License, Passport Revoked, Bank accounts Frozen, Liens Placed on your Property, Intercept Income Tax Returns, Place your Child Support Arrears Dollar Amount on your Credit Report, and Countless More.
As soon as you are labeled a Non-Custodial Parent (NCP), the Courts, through Court Orders, dictate when you see your child and for how long. For example weekend and alternate holidays. No more or no less or you will be violating a Court Order. Courts determine how much Child Support you will pay. As the NCP don’t miss a payment or you will have to see your Case Worker (Probation Officer). If the Custodial Parent (CP) prevents you from seeing your child…well the NCP and the child lose.
As soon as you are labeled a Non-Custodial Parent (NCP) you are subject to Code of Federal Regulation Title 45 Chapter 3, Office of Child Support Enforcement (45 CFR). Because the NCP is subject to 45 CFR, I as well as many NCP and those for Child Support Reform believe that 45 CFR violates the Constitutional Rights of the NCP. Furthermore, 45 CFR dose not serve the “Best Interest of the Child” but in itself is serving the Best Interest of States Financial Wealth”. I submit the follow findings for your review;
1 H.R. 3130 – Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998
The Administration supports H.R. 3130, which would spur States’ compliance with the current-law requirement for federally certified automated child support enforcement systems by imposing automatic and escalating penalties for those that fail to meet statutory deadlines. In addition, H.R. 3130 would reform the current incentive funding system to encourage States to operate more effective child support enforcement programs.
2 Note: In effect this equates to, the more child support dollars collected, the more federal dollars are provided to the States through the incentive part of H.R.3130, because Federal Government provides incentives (or Dictates) to the States on how to collect child support under 45 CFR, this in itself creates a conflict of interest. After reviewing Parts 305.33 and 305.34 of 45 CFR concerning Percentage Based on Performance Levels and Incentives for Collection of Child Support, it reads like a bonus program for a sales company. Article I of the Constitution of the United States grants exclusive power to the legislature to enact laws. Section 8 broadens the powers of the legislative branch, but it also limits those powers not explicitly granted under Section 8. Section 9 enumerates limits of legislative authority. Under Article I of the Constitution, Congress lacks authority to “delegate” its exclusive legislative power to either the judicial or legislative branches of government. Federal agencies, primarily functions of the executive branch, promulgate “regulations” having the effect of “statute” or “law” where no constitutional delegation of authority empowers them to act. These promulgations, must as a minimum, pass “Constitutional” muster. 45 CFR does not.
In closing I want to make the following points;
If parents have a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the care, custody and control of their children, then surely, DHHS and the Courts DO NOT; and neither does Congress.
Code of Federal Regulation Title 45 Chapter 3, Office of Child Support Enforcement unlawfully impinge upon fundamental rights of a NCP and deprives the NCP of due process and equal protection under the law. This is a violation of the 4th and 10th Amendment. I base this on the following:
1 The “rebuttable presumption” that guideline amounts of Child Support are correct, violate the “presumption of innocence”
2 Federal subsidizing of the Title IV-D attorney (“prosecutor”) create an “appearance of impropriety” due to “susceptibility of prejudice” to deprive NCP of “due process” in State court.
3 Incarceration for non-payment of child support under the Code of Federal Regulation Title 45 Chapter 3, Office of Child Support Enforcement establish a “debtor’s prison”.
4 The Child Support Enforcement Program, Title 45 Chapter 3, Office of Child Support Enforcement, is an unconstitutional exercise of power by an administrative agency of the federal government. The power to impose and to enforce child support is not expressly granted to the federal government and therefore the DHHS acts without a valid congressional [constitutional] delegation of authority to promulgate, enact, or otherwise compel compliance by the States, or to distribute “financial incentives” for compliance.
5 Federal financial incentives to the States [in excess of Billions per year] create under the color of law a “conflict of interest” by inviting the States to deprive NCP of fundamental rights.
6 Under the Tenth Amendment, the Federal Government (United States) has no power or authority to deprive any citizen of their parental rights to rear their children. These powers are reserved to the States, or to We the People. Courts [the State] may intervene only upon a showing of imminent harm to the child.
7 The Federal Government has no authority to create a “legal” duty for a parent to support their children. The alleged DUTY created under 45 CFR is a nullity, VOID for lack of jurisdiction. Support of one’s children is a “moral” obligation outside the parameters of Congressional review or action.
8 It follows that Congress is PROHIBITED from delegating authority to any federal agency, executive or judicial, to promulgate or otherwise establish a DUTY upon, which an individual may be held accountable or prosecuted, whether or not the DUTY CREATED infringes on a fundamental right of the individual.
Senator Collins, I am not against paying Child Support. However, I can not nor will I accept the tactics employed by DHHS in collecting Child Support from the NCP. These tactics only further alienate the NCP from their children. The System, in its present form, also serves the Custodial Parent with the tools for personal gain under the illusion it is in the best interest of the child. I have been an under-employed Father, not a criminal. I have endured DHHS collection tactics since I returned from Iraq. This has put a major toll on my mental health, has caused more friction on an already rocky relationship with my Daughter, and caused marital distress between my Wife and I.
I SPENT 25 YEARS SUPPORTING AND DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC. NOW I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CONSTITUTION WORK FOR ME.
Senator Collins I am asking for your help with this issue. I am not only asking for me, I am asking for all the NCP and the children that are adversely affected by the Code of Federal Regulation Title 45 Chapter 3, Office of Child Support Enforcement.
I would like to schedule a meeting with you at your earliest convenience. In the interim, should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Respectfully,
Thomas Sharp
Cc: Senator John McCain
Representative Chellie Pingree
Secretary Erik Shinseki, Department of Veterans Affairs
Governor John Baldacci, State of Maine
Thomas Tradewell, Commander in Chief, Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW)
Mike Barber, State Commander, Department of Texas VFW
Ronald Hornsby, Past State Commander, Department of Texas VFW
Roberto Barrera, National Commander, Disabled American Veterans (DAV)
Clarence Hill, National Commander, American Legion
Col. David Hunt, US Army Retired, Fox News
Bill O’ Reilly, The O’Reilly Factor, Fox News
Glenn Beck, The Glenn Beck Show, Fox News
Cheryl King, Portland, ME, Veteran Center
Texas threatened me to sign a doc that was not required in the court order and the case had two case numbers. They manupulated the amount owed according to my divorce decree. Then they refused the full amount owed in the divorce decree and ordered 400 per mo. Then the judge and attorney laughed at me. Then my ex called and bragged about how I was going to owe her for the rest of my life. The state insured that they could refuse the payoff in full so they could collect 66 cents on the dollar for every dollar they could collect from me for the rest of my life. That is 660 dollars for every 1000 they get out of me. Federal taxpayer sub money going to corrupt fradulent cases manipulated by corrupt texas child support agency lawyers who are members of the same bar that hillery clinton is a member of through the ABA and the foreign owner bar in london england. International bar.
I, like any dad, LOVE my boy more than life itself. He is my Hero. However, a C.S. agency is stealing the livelihood of both he and myself. Being that they’ve already taken everything but my plasma, and continue to do so, I cannot afford an attorney. I need info for my arsenal. Please Help: moore.brenden@yahoo.com
They are seeing to it that you pay with your life. You need more than information. You need precedent because that is all that the national legal system looks for. What the nation needs is a giant lawsuit to put the nation back to the Constitution and Bill of Rights.~E.M.
Apathy is our greatest enemy, people and that is generated by ignorance and ignorance is fueled by the idea that “I’m O.K., so I don’t care. Sucks to be you!!” or, as the Bible says “He who is at ease holds calamity in contempt as prepared for those whose feet slip.” or simply stated, those who are not experiencing this kind of oppression are under the entirely FALSE impression that it could never happen to them… so they don’t do anything about it.
ALSO IF YOU ARE HAVING ISSUES WITH YOUR COURT, HAVE YOUR ATTORNEY (OR USE YOURSELF) THE BELOW AS REFERENCE.
CUYAHOGA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
DOMESTIC REALTIONS DIVISION
CLEVELAND, OHIO
Paul Neumann )
24243 Lebern Drive )
North Olmsted, OH 44070 )
)
Paul Neumann, on behalf of his minor )
child, Grace Neumann )
PLAINTIFFS )
)
) CASE NO.
vs. ) Judge
)
The State of Ohio )
c/o Nancy Rogers, Attorney General )
30 East Broad Street, 17th Floor )
Columbus, Ohio 43215, ) Jury Trial Endorsed Hereon
)
Pamela Neumann )
27668 B Caroline Circle )
Westlake, OH 44145 )
)
Cuyahoga County Common )
Pleas Court )
1200 Ontario Street )
Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1678 )
)
Judge Cheryl S Karner )
c/o Cuyahoga County Common )
Pleas Court )
Domestic Relations Division )
One West Lakeside Avenue )
Cleveland, Ohio 44113 )
)
Heather Corso )
1220 West 6th Street, Suite 502 )
The Bradley Building )
Cleveland, Ohio 44113 )
)
Cuyahoga County CSEA )
1640 Superior Ave. East )
P.O. Box 93318 )
Cleveland, Ohio 44101 )
)
DEFENDANTS, et al. )
2
COMPLAINT
FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
JURISDICTION
1. The jurisdiction of the Court is invoked pursuant to applicable sections of Ohio
Revised Code §2721.01 – §2721.16, which provide declaratory judgment for persons
affected by the declaration.
2. The jurisdiction of the Court is invoked pursuant to applicable sections of Ohio
Revised Code §2721.01 – §2721.16 which provide declaratory judgment of the
validity of a statute and/or procedural rule that impinges upon fundamental rights and
is alleged to be unconstitutional; where a copy of the complaint shall be served upon
the Attorney General.
3. An adequate state remedy requires that in order to be effective, time is of the
essence and prompt judicial action is essential.
4. Ohio Civil Rule of Procedure 57 provides for the Court to advance the hearing of an
action for a declaratory judgment on the trial list.
5. Plaintiff Neumann filed a Motion to Advance this action on the trial list on March 26,
2010.
6. The jurisdiction of the Court is invoked where Ohio Revised Code §3109.04; Ohio
Revised Code §3109.043; and Ohio Rule of Civil Procedure 75(N) {hereinafter
“Ohio’s statutory scheme”}; jointly, severally and in pari material, caused, and
continues to cause, Plaintiff Paul Neumann and Plaintiff Grace Neumann born May
5, 2005 {hereinafter “Plaintiffs”} irreparable harm and the denial and deprivation of
his fundamental parental and due process rights.
3
7. Plaintiffs rights, privileges, and immunities implicated under Ohio’s statutory scheme
are fundamental rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the Constitution of the
United States and the Constitution of the State of Ohio, and specifically; the right to
“freedom of association” pursuant to the First Amendment; the right to “autonomy
and privacy” pursuant to the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments; and the protection
of privileges and immunities, due process, and equal protection pursuant to the Fifth
and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States of America.
8. The jurisdiction of the Court is invoked pursuant to the Supremacy Clause, Article IV
of the U.S. Constitution, where Ohio’s statutory scheme: must comport with federal
law; must contain express requirements of due process that are constitutionally
compliant with federal law and precedent, and where state law must be narrowly
construed on its face to protect unconstitutional deprivations of fundamental parental
rights.
9. R.C. §2721.07 is not applicable where declaratory judgment of Ohio’s statutory
scheme will terminate the controversy giving rise to this action.
PARTIES
10. Plaintiff Paul Neumann is an individual, whose legal mailing address is 24243 Lebern
Drive, North Olmsted, OH 44070; a resident of Cuyahoga County, Ohio; and a citizen
of Ohio; and the legal parent of Grace Neumann and the defendant in a pending
divorce action in Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court; Case No. DR-09-
328194, Neumann v Neumann.
11. Plaintiff Grace Neumann is the minor child of Plaintiff Paul Neumann and Defendant
Pamela Neumann.
4
12. The State of Ohio exercises sovereign authority in the enactment and enforcement of
the Ohio Revised Code and the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure.
13. Defendant Pamela Neumann is an individual, whose last known address is 27668 B
Caroline Circle, Westlake, OH 44145, a citizen of Ohio; and the legal parent of Grace
Neumann. Defendant Neumann’s fundamental rights are also implicated under
Ohio’s statutory scheme.
14. Defendant State of Ohio has conspired to deprive the Plaintiff Paul Neumann of his
constitutional right to custody, free association with his child, equal custody and “to
financially enrich themselves and the state” under color of law by coercion, extortion,
and perjury.
15. Defendant Cuyahoga County Court of Common pleas has conspired to deprive the
Plaintiff Paul Neumann of his constitutional right to custody, free association with his
child, equal custody and “to financially enrich themselves and the state” under color
of law by coercion, extortion, and perjury.
16. Defendant Judge Cheryl S. Karner has conspired to deprive the Plaintiff Paul
Neumann of his constitutional right to custody, free association with his child, equal
custody and “to financially enrich themselves and the state” under color of law by
coercion, extortion, and perjury.
17. Defendant Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency has conspired to
deprive the Plaintiff Paul Neumann of his constitutional right to custody, free
association with his child, equal custody and “to financially enrich themselves and
the state” under color of law by coercion, extortion, and perjury.
18. Defendant Pamela Neumann has conspired to deprive the Plaintiff Paul Neumann of
his constitutional right to custody, free association with his child, equal custody and
“to financially enrich herself “ under color of law by coercion, extortion, and perjury.
5
19. Defendant Heather Corso has conspired to deprive the Plaintiff Paul Neumann of his
constitutional right to custody, free association with his child, equal custody and “to
financially enrich herself” under color of law by coercion, extortion, and perjury.
RELEVANT RIGHTS
20. Parental rights are inherent and fundamentally protected by the U.S. Constitution.
21. Defendant State of Ohio’s enforcement of state-enacted legislation cannot abridge
federal privileges and immunities conferred by the U.S. Constitution.
22. The right to conceive, raise, and retain custody, care, and companionship of one’s
child is a right deemed precious, essential, inherent, and is fundamentally protected.
23. The freedom of personal choice in matters of custody, companionship, marriage,
procreation, individual parental autonomy, family life, the right to raise and care for
one’s child, and the child’s reciprocal right to an autonomous parental relationship,
are fundamental privacy and liberty rights protected by the First, Ninth and
Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
24. Individual autonomy is recognized in privacy, where the roots of the privacy right
exists in the First Amendment; in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments; in the
penumbras of the Bill of Rights; in the Ninth Amendment; in the concept of liberty
guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment; and in the equal application and
protection of the law guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.
25. Freedom of association derives from the First Amendment and protects the
unencumbered right of a parent and child to a reciprocal associational relationship
free from interference.
6
26. Due Process protections, where loss of property is involved, are inherent and
fundamentally protected by the U.S. Constitution.
27. The Supremacy Clause; Article IV, provides that state interference of federal rights
cannot be compromised by improper state actions.
28. Where fundamental rights are secured by the U.S. Constitution, the Supremacy
Clause requires that state law comport with federal law.
29. The fundamental presumption of a parent’s right to legal custody, care, and
association, and companionship of minor children is constitutionally protected.
30. Ohio’s statutory scheme must be construed under federal law where fundamental
parental rights are implicated.
31. Ohio’s statutory scheme must be construed under federal law where fundamental
due process rights are implicated.
32. Ohio’s statutory scheme must be narrowly construed on its face to protect
unconstitutional deprivations of fundamental parental rights.
33. Ohio’s statutory scheme must be narrowly construed on its face to protect
unconstitutional deprivations of fundamental due process rights and protections in
the loss of property.
34. Ohio’s statutory scheme must contain express requirements of due process that are
constitutionally compliant with federal law and precedent.
35. Parenthood is an inherent right of surpassing value and is protected from deprivation
without due process of law.
36. There is no adequate remedy for liberty deprivations under Ohio‘s statutory scheme.
37. There is no adequate remedy for loss of property deprivations under Ohio‘s statutory
scheme.
7
38. There is no adequate remedy for loss of personal liberty under Ohio‘s statutory
scheme and with the current scheme allowing for loss of license and freedom
through administrative process without due process of law.
39. There is no prospective constitutional remedy in Ohio’s statutory scheme where
Plaintiff Paul Neumann and all Ohio parents are subjected to the same statutory
scheme.
40. A direct appeal is neither a timely statutory post-deprivation remedy nor a
constitutional remedy for relief.
41. Where both parents are suitable, the parents are similarly situated.
42. Where both parents are similarly situated, the minor child is entitled to an
unencumbered associative parent-child relationship and a reciprocal and
autonomous relationship with both parents.
43. Similarly situated parents are a gender-neutral classification.
44. Where both parents are similarly situated, the application and enforcement of the law
must be equally applied. Impingement upon the prospective equal application of the
law of similarly situated autonomous parents is unconstitutional.
45. The immediate abridgment and subsequent termination upon order or decree of legal
custody for members of the suspect class violates equal protection.
46. Where both parents are similarly situated, the child(ren) at issue have a fundamental
and associative right to an autonomous reciprocal parent-child relationship that
cannot be pierced.
47. The minor children of an Ohio divorce are entitled to an unencumbered associative
parent-child relationship and a reciprocal and autonomous relationship with both
parents.
48. The competing interests of the child, the state, the mother, and the father are distinct.
8
49. The parental rights and interests of the father and mother are not subordinate to the
child’s best interests where the child’s welfare is protected by each parent’s
autonomous suitability.
50. Defendant State of Ohio’s parens patriae interests in children of divorce are in the
welfare of its minor citizens.
51. Defendant State of Ohio must have a compelling reason to intervene and implicate
fundamental parental rights of both parents where the parents are suitable and
similarly situated and the best interests of minor children are not in jeopardy.
52. While the competing interests of the parents may be different, the state has no
compelling reason to intervene, regardless of the interests of each parent, when both
parents are suitable and similarly situated.
53. Defendant State of Ohio has no parens patriae interest in a divorce where both
parents are suitable and where similarly situated parental rights must be equally
protected.
54. There is neither a legal basis nor any governmental objective to interfere in the
abridgment of parental rights through an ex parte order achieved under color of state
law where there is no remedy and no ability to achieve a post-deprivation hearing.
55. Statutes and rules, on their face and as applied, that impinge on constitutionally
protected liberty and property rights of a statutorily designated individual are subject
to constitutional strict scrutiny pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment.
56. To state a cause of action to challenge the facial validity of the law, there must be
some prospect where the affected party faces having their constitutional right
violated in the future. The affected party has standing to prospectively challenge the
constitutionality of the law.
9
57. Statutes and rules, on their face and as applied, which abridge fundamental
procedural due process pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment, are flagrantly
unconstitutional.
58. Deprivation of an underlying liberty right is of the highest order.
59. An express and constitutionally compliant pre-deprivation hearing is required on the
face of Ohio’s statutory scheme upon implication of parental/legal custodial rights.
60. Post-deprivation statutory remedies for liberty right deprivations are not constitutional
remedies.
61. An official action violates every Ohio parent’s fundamental due process right if not
rationally related to a legitimate government interest.
62. Defendant State of Ohio has a rationally related interest in allegations affecting the
welfare/best interests of minor children.
63. Defendant State of Ohio has a compelling interest in the welfare/best interests and
custody of minor children only upon a particularized finding of unsuitability of one or
both parents.
64. Defendant State of Ohio enacts and enforces current criminal and juvenile
procedures and laws to protect the welfare/best interests of minor children.
65. Defendant State of Ohio has no rationally related interest, and certainly no
compelling interest, in matters of child custody where both parents are implicitly
presumed to be suitable and similarly situated.
66. The express state procedure required for challenging deprivations of fundamental
liberty and property rights must satisfy requirements of federal due process.
67. Due process requires:
a) The court to set forth alleged parental misconduct with particularity.
b) The right to a hearing and notice of said hearing.
c) The legal standard of “clear and convincing” evidence as the standard of proof.
10
d) A particularized showing of advantage.
e) The least restrictive means to achieve the desired objective.
FACTS
68. Defendant State of Ohio implicitly presumes that both parents are fit and suitable
parents.
69. Suitable parents protect the welfare, i.e., best interests, of their children.
70. Ohio Revised Code §3109.03 states that both parents shall stand on an equality as
to their parental rights and responsibilities.
71. Where parents are presumed suitable, Defendant State of Ohio has no compelling
reason to intervene in the deprivation of Plaintiff Paul Neumann’s parental rights or
any other parent’s rights.
72. There has been no evidentiary hearing in Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations
Court; Case No. DR-09-328194, Neumann v Neumann nor has one been scheduled.
73. Where there has been no evidentiary hearing in Case No. DR-09-328194, there has
been no finding to deny Plaintiff Paul Neumann his parental and associative rights
with his child.
74. Defendant State of Ohio has made no particularized finding in Case No. DR-09-
328194, Neumann v Neumann.
75. Plaintiff Paul Neumann was denied his fundamental parental and associative rights
without notice; without a pre-deprivation hearing; without an evidentiary hearing;
without the right to confront witnesses; without the opportunity to cross-examine
witnesses; without a constitutionally compliant evidentiary standard; without a finding
11
of fact; without the state court instituting the least restrictive means; and without a
post-deprivation remedy.
76. Plaintiff Paul Neumann was denied his fundamental property rights without notice;
without a pre-deprivation hearing; without an evidentiary hearing; without the right to
confront witnesses; without the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses; without a
constitutionally compliant evidentiary standard; without a finding of fact; without the
state court instituting the least restrictive means; and without a post-deprivation
remedy.
77. Plaintiff Paul Neumann was designated a non-custodial/non-residential parent which
unconstitutionally deprives Plaintiff Paul Neumann of his parental rights and
unconstitutionally restricts Plaintiff of his autonomous and reciprocal familial rights,
associative rights, and privacy rights.
78. Where Defendant State of Ohio had no compelling reason to intervene in Plaintiff
Paul Neumann’s legal custody of Plaintiff Grace Neumann, Defendant State of Ohio
has no compelling reason to unconstitutionally restrict Plaintiff’s reciprocal
associative and parental rights.
79. Plaintiff Paul Neumann was penalized with the most restrictive means pursuant to
visitation in the ongoing deprivation of Plaintiff’s parental rights by allowing
Defendant Pamela Neumann to control his access to his child.
80. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme expressly fails to provide a
constitutionally compliant remedy where parental rights are implicated.
81. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme expressly fails to provide:
a) a pre-deprivation procedure;
b) a post-deprivation remedy upon the expiration of statutory time
requirements;
c) a constitutionally-compliant remedy;
d) a constitutionally compliant evidentiary standard;
12
e) a hearing requirement {expressly omitted on the face of R.C .§3109.043 &
Ohio Civ.R 75(N)};
f) a particularized showing of advantage;
g) the least restrictive means when intervention is required.
82. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme fails constitutional scrutiny where the
facial language of Ohio’s statutory scheme expressly denies due process one
hundred percent (100%) of the time.
83. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme “best interests” evidentiary standard is
discretionary and arbitrary on its face.
84. Defendant State of Ohio’s application of the child’s best interests evidentiary
standard is arbitrary, discretionary, and subjective pursuant to a listing of indefinable
factors.
85. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme “best interests” evidentiary scheme is
vague as written and without definition.
86. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme “best interests” evidentiary standard can
never be uniformly applied in any Ohio divorce with children.
87. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme fails to expressly provide all Ohio
parents notice of the consequences of their actions.
88. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme fails to expressly provide a
constitutionally compliant evidentiary standard.
89. Defendant State of Ohio’s application of the statutory scheme is arbitrary,
discretionary and subjective pursuant to a listing of indefinable factors.
90. Defendant State of Ohio invidiously discriminates against all Ohio parents where it
designates classes of parents pursuant to custodial designation.
91. Defendant State of Ohio has no personal or subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate
legal custody of minor children to one parent/legal guardian where both parents are
presumed fit and suitable under Ohio law.
13
92. Defendant State of Ohio has no compelling reason to intervene in decreeing the
custody of children to one parent/legal guardian where both parents are fit and
suitable.
93. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme denies Plaintiff Paul Neumann and all
Ohio parents a presumption of equality.
94. Plaintiff Paul Neumann’s statutory classification violates equal protection by placing
Plaintiff in a suspect class. The invidious discrimination and deprivation of
constitutional rights impacts one hundred percent (100%) of the “suspect” class.
95. Plaintiff Paul Neumann and every designated non-custodial/non-residential parent, is
denied legal custody of their children without a legitimate governmental objective
compelling Defendant State of Ohio to intervene.
96. Plaintiff Paul Neumann was designated a non-custodial/non-residential parent.
97. Defendant State of Ohio’s classification of non-custodial/non-residential is gender
neutral.
98. Statutory classification of a “suspect” class requires constitutional/strict scrutiny
where Defendant State of Ohio prospectively deprives Plaintiff Paul Neumann and
the suspect class, due process and equal protection of parental rights in the future.
99. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme fails constitutional scrutiny where the
facial language of Ohio’s statutory scheme expressly denies due process one
hundred percent (100%) of the time.
100. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme allows the designation of spousal
support, child support, and custody pendente lite where the evidentiary standard is
discretionary and arbitrary on its face.
101. Defendant State of Ohio’s application of the statute is unconstitutional in the
allowance of spousal support, child support, and custody pendente lite where the
14
evidentiary standard is arbitrary, discretionary, and subjective pursuant to a listing of
indefinable factors.
102. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme is unconstitutional in the allowance
of spousal support, child support, and custody pendente lite where the evidentiary
scheme is vague as written.
103. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme is unconstitutional in the allowance
of spousal support, child support, and custody pendente lite where the evidentiary
standard can never be uniformly applied in any Ohio divorce with children.
104. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme is unconstitutional where the
allowance of spousal support, child support, and custody pendente lite, fails to
expressly provide all Ohio parents notice of the consequences of their actions.
105. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme is unconstitutional where the
allowance of spousal support, child support, and custody pendente lite fails to
expressly provide a constitutionally compliant evidentiary standard.
106. Defendant State of Ohio’s application of the statutory scheme is unconstitutional
in the allowance of spousal support, child support, and custody pendente lite where
the evidentiary standard is arbitrary, discretionary and subjective pursuant to a listing
of indefinable factors.
107. Defendant State of Ohio invidiously discriminates against all Ohio parents in the
allowance of spousal support, child support, and custody pendente lite where it
designates classes of parents pursuant to custodial designation.
108. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme permits the arbitrary conversion of
underlying custody deprivations into permanent custody terminations of the
designated non-custodial/non-residential parent.
109. Defendant State of Ohio permits the conversion of temporary orders of suitable
and similarly situated Ohio parents, achieved without express constitutionally
15
compliant procedures on the face of Ohio’s statutory scheme, into permanent
custody deprivations without personal and subject matter jurisdiction.
110. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme is expressly unconstitutional where
Plaintiff Paul Neumann and all Ohio parents can never achieve a constitutional
outcome under any set of circumstances.
111. Plaintiff Paul Neumann was denied his parental rights and unconstitutionally
designated a non-custodial/non-residential parent under the same Ohio statutory
scheme in a previous Ohio divorce.
112. Plaintiff Paul Neumann was denied his due process rights and unconstitutionally
deprived of this property under the same Ohio statutory scheme in a previous Ohio
divorce.
113. Defendant State of Ohio’s prospective selective treatment of Plaintiff Paul
Neumann has continued without remedy and Defendants will violate his rights in the
future.
114. Plaintiff Paul Neumann has standing where Ohio‘s statutory scheme is capable
of repetition and continues to evade review.
115. Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme has irreparably deprived Plaintiff
Paul Neumann of his parental rights, right of association with his child, and privacy
where time can never be recovered.
116. Time cannot be replaced by Defendant State of Ohio where both Plaintiffs were
unconstitutionally deprived of their reciprocal and autonomous familial and
associational rights.
117. Time between Plaintiff Paul Neumann and Plaintiff Grace Neumann cannot be
replaced by Defendants Pamela Neumann, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court,
Judge Cheryl S Karner, Heather Corso or Cuyahoga County CSEA where both
16
Plaintiffs were unconstitutionally deprived of their reciprocal and autonomous familial
and associational rights.
REQUEST FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF
118. Plaintiffs request Ohio Revised Code §3109.04; Ohio Revised Code §3109.043;
and Ohio Rule of Civil Procedure 75(N); jointly, severally, and in pari materia, be
declared facially unconstitutional.
119. Plaintiffs request Defendant State of Ohio’s statutory scheme be declared
unconstitutional as written and as applied.
120. Plaintiffs Paul and Grace Neumann request the Court enjoin the Defendants,
jointly and severally from further violation of Plaintiffs civil and constitutional rights.
121. Plaintiffs request any actual and punitive damages which the court may find
appropriate.
122. Plaintiffs request the recovery of all attorney fees and all costs of this action as
permitted.
123. The aforesaid encompasses the entirety of the Complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________
Paul Neumann, pro se
17
PROOF OF SERVICE
A copy of the foregoing Motion was delivered by Personal Service, Certified or Regular
U.S. Mail Service, this ___ day of March, 2010 to:
The State of Ohio
c/o Nancy Rogers, Attorney General
30 East Broad Street, 17th Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215,
Pamela Neumann
27668 B Caroline Circle
Westlake, OH 44145
Cuyahoga County Common
Pleas Court
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1678
Judge Cheryl S Karner
c/o Cuyahoga County Common
Pleas Court
Domestic Relations Division
One West Lakeside Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
Heather Corso
1220 West 6th Street, Suite 502
The Bradley Building
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
Cuyahoga County CSEA
1640 Superior Ave. East
P.O. Box 93318
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
___________________________________
Paul Neumann, pro se
HEY TAKE A LOOK AT THIS!!!!!! THIS APPLIES NOT ONLY TO GA BUT EVERY STATE (ESPECIALLY OHIO)
Georgia judge declares child support guidelines unconstitutional
________________________________________
Most who arrived at this page and have an interest in child support issues are aware of the fact that child support, almost without exception, has little to do with common sense but everything with burdening non-custodial parents with a punitive tax that is ostensibly intended to look after “the best interest of the children,” a tax that instead appears to have the primary goals of:
1. Giving custodial parents, usually mothers, a financial incentive to take their children and walk out of their marriages, most likely to expunge their children’s fathers from their children’s lives;1
2. Punishing non-custodial parents, usually fathers, often to the point where they become destitute and commit suicide;2
3. Funding the growth and existence of a massive bureaucracy intended for the collection and distribution of child support moneys.3
It appears that radical forces are behind the creation and furtherance of the child support industry, but they are by no means the only force driving the system.
Radical forces see little value in having fathers involved in children’s lives and appear to be using child support legislation as a deterrent that is nothing other than a tool for the destruction of our families or to prevent their formation, but it would be wrong to assign all of the blame to them.
Child support legislation has become an incentive for a lucrative business, not only for the child support collection industry but also for lawyers. In the lower courts, about 40 percent of all cases heard deal with child support and child access issues. In the higher courts, such as the Ontario Superior Court, 80 percent of the case load deals with those issues.
However, the financial incentives are substantial for custodial parents to file for divorce and to claim the children of their marriages or even extramarital children as cash prizes and inexhaustible sources of income.
Much has been written about those issues elsewhere and by others. Therefore I’ll not go into more detail pertaining to them.
Child support guidelines seem to reflect an international consensus. They are much the same the world over and cause enormous devastation of family assets the world over. Some child support awards have reached truly astounding levels, more than US$300,000 per month.
Not one constitutional challenge launched by fathers was ever successful anywhere. That may well have been because any such challenges were launched by men, whereas women usually had little to complain about, because the implementation and application of punitive child support guidelines generally affected only men.
What makes the child support guidelines especially onerous is that they generally do not take into account the combined incomes of both parents and do not allocate equitable shares of the costs of child raising to both parents.
Usually the guidelines are designed or applied such that only the gross income of a non-custodial parent is taken into account when calculating child support amounts to be paid. Not only are the guidelines in general applied only to the non-custodial parent’s income, but not even the costs of child care by the non-custodial parent are taken into account when child support award amounts are calculated, unless, ostensibly, child custody is equally shared between the parents of a child. However, even then there is a net flow of cash from the higher-income-earning parent to the lower-income-earning one, with little objectivity being applied in how the amounts to be transferred are to be calculated.
There is always the cash prize of having primary custody. In Canada, for example, considerations of the costs of child-raising to the payor-parents are not taken into account unless their children are in their care for more than 40 percent of parenting time. The parents who receive the primary custody awards will therefore often do their very best to make sure that the share of parenting time for the payor-parents will stay below the magical 40 percent figure, to receive the maximum benefits calculated on the basis of the child support guidelines that were written so as to favour them enormously.4
Along comes one of the rare cases of a mother who was ordered to pay child support to the custodial father of the children she had with him. Unlike many men, for whom the child support amounts to be paid often approach and exceed the total amount of money they earn, this Georgia mother, Michelle Sweat, merely had to pay the amount of US$531.30 out of her monthly gross income of US$1,585.95. However, she was ordered to pay that amount contrary to the agreement she had made during her divorce from the father, namely that she was not required to pay child support.
Subsequently, the mother’s monthly gross income rose to US$1,862. Her expenses total7ed US$2,127.00 at that time, and she filed for bankruptcy under chapter 13, following which her payments to the Chapter 13 Trustee were set at $295.00 per month. That monthly payment had apparently not been considered in calculating the child support amount she had been ordered to pay. Thereupon she filed a constitutional challenge.
On February 25, 2002, the Honourable C. Dane Perkins, Judge of Superior Court, Alapaha Judicial Circuit, State of Georgia, agreed with her challenge.
The judge determined that the only credible evidence supporting the challenge was contained in:
…the study of custody awards in 14 south Georgia counties between 1995-97 conducted by Kent Earhardt, J.D., Ph.D., which found that, in 82.2% of contested cases, custody was awarded to the mother. It follows, therefore, that a support obligation under the Guidelines was imposed on the fathers in those cases. Ehlers v. Ehlers, 264 Ga. 668 (1994). There has been no credible challenge to the methodology or the result of the Ear[]hardt study. Therefore, this Court finds that men are adversely impacted by the Guidelines as applied to a grossly disproportionate degree, which constitutes an impermissibly discriminatory effect on a group based upon their gender.
The points discovered in the FINDINGS OF FACT are as follows:
1. The Guidelines adopted by Georgia as originally designed by the underlying economic study were intended only for welfare situations – the current use for all situations was not the intended purpose. The underlying facts of the [original] presumptions …no longer exist. The presumptive percentages were based only on data for low-income cases and were extended without the benefit of data for non-welfare cases….
2. Georgia’s presumptive awards rise as a share of obligor after-tax income. No child cost studies show child costs rising as a share of after-tax income. All child cost studies show child costs declining as a share of after-tax income. The state has presented no evidence that child costs rise as a perc[e]ntage of household net income. ….
3. There are no baseline components to the Guidelines. It is not clear what is being rebutted, therefore they are arbitrary and a due process violation.
4. The Guidelines do not take into account the large tax-related child cost offsets the custodial parent receives. ….
5. The presumptive award results in the custodial parent receiving a huge financial windfall – or profit – in excess of child costs. ….
6. The Georgia presumptive award does not allocate the child support burden according to the parents’ relative ability to pay….The outcome is that the custodial parent does not contribute to child costs at the same rate as the non-custodial parent and, often, not at all.
7. Evidence presented …show that the Guideline presumptive awards include such large amounts of hidden alimony (presumptive award less an economics based award) that a non-custodial parent is unable to provide for a child when in the non-custodial parent’s care to the same extent as in the custodial parent’s household. Presumptive awards have been shown to typically exceed total actual costs [of child raising] according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture….Such excessive child support awards are not in the best interest of the child…[and] leave[] the non-custodial parent in poverty while the custodial parent enjoys a notably higher standard of living.
8. The Guidelines are biased toward including hidden alimony for the custodial parent even when the custodial parent earns substantially higher gross income than the non-custodial parent. The Guidelines do not meet standards of fairness even for alimony….
9. The use of a range of percentages allows substantial opportunity for similarly situated individuals to receive dissimilar treatment. That is, different obligors with the same income can end up with presumptive obligations that differ by hundreds of dollars per month….
10. The presumptive award for low-income obligors (for example, minimum wage workers) pushes low-income obligors below the poverty level. A presumptive award that leaves the obligor with less income than needed for basic living needs creates an extraordinary burden for the obligor and, potentially, an additional burden on taxpayers. This violates equal protection. This is contrary both to public policy and common sense.
11. The Guidelines do not take into account custodial parent income. The presumptive child support award does not vary with family income – only obligor income. This is not economically rational and violates equal protection….
12. Child costs of only the custodial parent are covered by the Guidelines. Similar costs incurred when the child is with the non-custodial parent do not receive similar consideration….Each parent has an equal duty to provide financially for the children when in the care of the other parent….in actual practice, typically the non-custodial parent is not absent and incurs substantial child costs that the guidelines do not require the custodial parent to contribute. This violates equal protection and does not meet the financial needs of the children when they are in the care of the non-custodial parent…
13. Medical insurance costs are not treated the same for all obligors. The presumptive award includes typical medical expenses. The Guidelines allow the court to either treat an obligor’s payment of the children’s medical insurance as an add-on or as a credit toward the presumptive award. This dissimilar treatment violates equal protection….The difference between these alternatives is $140 per month for the obligor [Michelle Sweat].
14. The Guideline criteria for deviation do not give any guidance on how to apply the deviations in a consistent manner. This is unconstitutionally vague and generally results in no deviations in most cases – even when the circumstances to deviate exist.
15. The Guidelines are arbitrary and bear no relationship to the intended federal purpose of determining an economically appropriate child support award. The Guidelines have no rational relationship to child cost data….The Guidelines do not take into account where the actual child costs are incurred – that is, which parent incurs what costs. The Guidelines do not take into account child costs net of tax benefit offsets.
16. The Guidelines bear no relationship to the constitutional standards for child support of requiring each parent to have an equal duty in supporting the child.
17. Which parent is the obligor and which is the obligee should be determined only after examination of the relevant factors – not before. The financial circumstances should determine which parent is obligor. The Guidelines arbitrarily presume that the obligor is always the non-custodial parent when the financial circumstances may indicate just the opposite. Importantly, mere classification before-hand of the obligor does not provide sufficient information to determine the economically appropriate award. The classifications of obligor and obligee are not rationally related to the intended purpose of the Guidelines of determining the economically appropriate award.
18. The Guidelines interfere with a non-custodial parent’s constitutional right to raise one’s children without “unnecessary” government interference. The Guidelines are so excessive as to force non-custodial parents to frequently work extra jobs for basic needs – detracting from parenting without state justification. Low-income obligors are frequently forced to work in a cash economy to survive as a result of child support obligations that if paid push the obligor below the poverty level. This is the result of automatic withholding of child support with payroll jobs and use of guidelines that presumptively push minimum wage obligors below the poverty level. As these workers are forced to “disappear” into unofficial society, these obligors are deprived of the constitutional right to raise their children without unnecessary government intrusion. In fact, any government mandate beyond basic child costs interferes with this right to privacy as occurs with the current guidelines.
For the current case, the presumptive award pushes Ms. Sweat, the obligor, to just above the poverty level and below the poverty level if she pays court ordered bankruptcy payments. This is an extraordinary burden imposed on the obligor by the Guidelines.
19. In the present case, the earnings of the obligee, Samuel Sweat, significantly exceed those of the obligor. Nonetheless, the guidelines require the obligor, Michelle Sweat, to pay out a significant amount of her before tax income to the obligee, to whom this money will be tax free. The income of the obligee will be considerably increased, and he will have the tax advantages attendant to being a custodial parent. Additionally, the obligee will have the additional benefit of his new spouse’s earnings. In the meantime, the obligor’s net earnings will probably put her at or below the poverty line, and will in any event leave her with less than half of her earnings to live on. This scheme thus constitutes a windfall to the obligee and financial disaster to the obligor.
Thus, any calculation of a support award under the Guidelines would be so far removed from any economically rational and appropriate award that it constitutes a gross error well beyond any “mere imprecision.”
(Without any doubt, these circumstances are much the same in Canada and elsewhere.) Judge Perkins of the Georgia Superior Court then covered in his decision the constitutional issues to be considered with respect to the evidence assessed in the Finding of Facts and with respect to issues of Due Process [of the law] according to precedents.
It is remarkable and refreshing to see a judge state the issues at hand so clearly and so precisely:
….Given the very nature and purpose of the Guidelines, this Court finds that there is an overriding governmental pecuniary purpose involved. D.H.R. v. Ofutt, 217 Ga. App. 823 at 825 (1995).
This Court finds that the Guidelines were hastily enacted and left unchanged without sufficient examination of relevant economic data and for those reasons as well as the gross deviation from all child cost studies as noted previously, finds them to be arbitrary and capricious. See, Sierra Club v. Martin, 168 F. 3d 1 (11th Cir., 1999).
With all due respect to the members of the Governor’s Commissions on Child Support (hereinafter, the “Commission”) in both 1998 and 2001, it is clear that only one member in 1998, Mr. Mark Rogers, and none in 2001 were properly qualified by education, background and experience to accurately assess the economic and financial intricacies of the Guidelines. This, too, the Court finds to be indicative of arbitrary state action.
….This Court finds that this constitutes further proof of arbitrariness on the part of the State and, if left in place, may rise to a volitional violation of the constitutional protections afforded the citizens of this State.
With respect to issues of equal protection, judge Perkins stated:
….The egregiously different burdens and benefits placed on persons similarly situated but for the award of custody, i.e., parents with the obligation to support their child(ren) and the same means for doing so as when they were married, has been explained at length above. This Court finds that such disparate treatment violates the guarantees of equal protection….
Relating to the right to privacy, he stated:
…it has been long recognized to apply to “family” concerns whether the family exists within the confines of marriage or not….
….by requiring the non-custodial parent to pay an amount in excess of those required to meet the child’s basic needs, as the economic analysis has shown, the Guidelines impermissibly interfere with parental decisions regarding financial expenditures on children….
In regard to unconstitutional taking of property, he stated that the state-induced poverty in which Michelle Sweat finds herself will prevent her from being able to afford to buy the court transcripts that she’ll need, if required, to make an appeal, and therefore ordered the State of Georgia to pay for the required transcripts.
Furthermore, he stated that, in “seeking to impose an award under the Guidelines against Ms. Sweat for the purpose of the state continuing to receive federal funds,” Georgia’s Department of Human Resources’ action “constitutes a public taking for a public purpose.”
About recent supporting foreign opinion, the judge stated:
One issue of equal protection is taking into account all of an obligor’s dependents – not just those involved in the instant case…..Any formula for deviation on this matter that Georgia DHR may have is not presumptive, is not statutory, and is not applied statewide in all cases in which an obligor has additional dependents other than those in the instant case….Guidelines without such presumptive formula likewise violate equal protection requirements as related to multiple family situations and are unconstitutional.
With respect to the constitutionally acceptable child support standard, the good judge stated that,
This Court finds, as a matter of law, that a constitutionally sound standard for the determination of child support guidelines can readily be determined.
First, it must acknowledge the principle …that both parents are obliged to support their children in accordance with their relative means to do so. The Supreme Court of the United States has provided ample reason to conclude that any guideline discriminating against either parent would be found constitutionally defective….The decisions of our sister States in holding unconstitutional statutory presumptions that custody of children of “tender years” should be awarded to the mother is also persuasive….Procreation is both a joint act and a joint responsibility.
Secondly, it must conform to long-acknowledged limitations on government intrusion into the rights of families….That is, the government’s interest in family expenditures on children, whether that family exists before or after the dissolution of marriage, or even in the absence of marriage, is limited to insuring that the children’s basic needs are met. Not extravagances, not luxuries, but needs. Once that occurs, government intrusion must cease….
The third and final criteria is that the means chosen for the purpose of determining need and allocating each parent’s respective responsibility in meeting that need, whether in the form of a presumptive guideline or otherwise, must be based on a rational relationship between the predicate facts and the conclusion(s) directed….
This standard is not dissimilar to the former needs vs. ability to pay standard, but with the additional criteria that the needs are not excessive, the ability to pay is that of both parents and that the method of calculation is economically rational.
As explained above, the Guidelines fail miserably in meeting these standards.
CONCLUSION
In light of the Georgia child support guidelines being unconstitutional, Michelle Sweat shall not be required to pay Samuel E. Sweat any child support based upon her gross income of $1,862 per month, the father’s gross income of $2,647.50 per month, and the mother having parenting time with the children at least 20 percent of the time. The mother shall, however, continue to provide health insurance for the children which currently costs approximately $70 per month for so long as it is available through her employer. The mother shall also pay 14.3 percent of any unreimbursed medical expenses of the children that exceed $250 per year. This percentage is based on her share of combined income above self-support needs.
For the foregoing reasons, the Defendant’s Motion to Declare Georgia’s Child Support Guidelines Unconstitutional is hereby GRANTED.
SO ORDERED this _25th___ day of __February_, 2002,
_______________________________
HONORABLE C. DANE PERKINS
Judge of Superior Court
Alapaha Judicial Circuit
State of Georgia
The full text of the judgment.
See also the research upon which much of judge Perkins’s decision was based:
GuidelineEconomics.com
A Division of R. Mark Rogers, Economic Consulting
GuidelineEconomics.com Home Page Child Cost Research and Consulting
Update 2006 03 20: Contrary to his own 2002 ruling, Judge Perkins now awards custody and child support to a mother who walked away from her family. The Judge ordered that sole custody – that had been in place for three years – be taken away from a Georgia man, awarding him standard visitation rights: one weekend every 14 days.
The object of the “legal” battle, a 12-year-old girl, was not asked by the judge about her wishes as to which parent she would like to be with. The girl wants to stay with her father.
Should anyone be surprised that Judge Perkins ordered that the daughter be with her mother who had abandoned her three years earlier?
The mother in this case made just one child support payment to the custodial father throughout the three years. That payment was for a monthly amount set at about half of what the previously custodial father has now been ordered to pay to the mother each month. However, after the father had recently obtained court-ordered child support from the mother for the first time, the mother suddenly remembered that she wants to be a mother with custody of her daughter as a steady source of income from the father who is a paraplegic having been in a wheelchair for the past 13 years.
Details of the current state and circumstances of this case will be shown here in short order.
________________
Notes:
1. Richard Kuhn and John Guidubaldi, “Child Custody Policies and Divorce Rates in the U.S.,” 11th Annual Conference of the Children’s Rights Council October 23-26, 1997. Washington, D.C. (1997) showed a significant correlation between joint physical custody awards and reduced divorce. They conjectured that a parent who expects to receive sole custody is more likely to file for divorce than one who may be awarded shared custody. Sole custody allows one parent to hurt the other by taking away the children, and usually involves higher child support transfers than shared physical custody. Sanford Braver discusses the implications of their findings in his new book Divorced Dads. (Quoted in Comments on Justice Canada Public Consultation Document titled “Putting Children’s Interests First: Custody, Access and Child Support in Canada,” Eeva Sodhi (2001 04 27), Note i.a.))
Margaret F. Brinig and F.H. Buckley, “Joint Custody: Bonding and Monitoring Theories,” Indiana Law Journal 393 (1998). There is a correlation between joint physical custody awards and reduced divorce. Under bonding theories, a spouse who would expect to lose custody under a sole-custody regime has greater incentives to bond with his family under joint custody. With greater family bonding, the likelihood of a divorce declines. This would greatly benefit children, for whom a divorce is devastating. Under monitoring theories, joint custody usefully polices the agency costs of misbehavior by a spouse who has been granted sole custody. The noncustodial spouse has thus a greater incentive to support his child on a move to joint custody. Our principal result is that divorce levels are negatively and significantly correlated throughout with joint-custody laws. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that joint-custody laws reduce divorce levels. … A change to joint-custody laws is associated with a two- to eleven-percent reduction in divorce levels. This is a small but substantial gain; a larger one would have been suspicious.” (Quoted in Comments on Justice Canada Public Consultation Document titled “Putting Children’s Interests First: Custody, Access and Child Support in Canada,” Eeva Sodhi (2001 04 27), Note i. b.))
See also the references provided in the footnotes to Child Support Chicanery, by Stephen Baskerville, and see These Boots are Made for Walking: Why Wives File for Divorce, by Margaret F. Brinig and Douglas W. Allen. From that report:
THE ROLE OF CHILD CUSTODY IN DIVORCE FILING
Table 7. How much do the numbers matter?
Case 1: Wife married at 19, husband at 26. They’ve been married 20 years, and have three kids. The husband gets custody. Husband has 7 years more education than the wife, and they live in a fault state. Wife is white. Probability that wife files = .095. However, if the wife got custody, the probability that she’d file increases to .69.
Case 2: They married when both were 26, and have been married 5 years. They have two children, and the wife will get custody. The husband finished college and the wife a law degree (three more years of education). They live in a no-fault state and wife is white. Probability that wife files =.79. However, if the husband got custody, the probability that the wife files would decrease to .32.
2. See suicide stories (Men who broke), specifically, Andrew T. Renouf’s Suicide Note and the case of Darrin White, in Prince George, British Columbia.
3. The child-support-arrears collection industry — A comment on Senator Wellstone’s speech March 05, 2001, during the discussion in the US Senate, re: S. 420, the Bankruptcy Reform Act.), by Walter H. Schneider
4. Canadian child support guidelines — Analysis by Glenn
#
Joe Rau, on December 21st, 2010 at 1:52 am Said:
L.A. County corruption, a policed State fathers having no rights to their children.
I petitioned for divorce ending a two year marriage ended due to drugs and the abuse of my 2 year old daughter. To my surprise the court system was corrupt as the custody that was granted was taken away , I never seen so many cops in my whole live as I did the first weeks after the papers were served. The court system raped the family as they changed custody rights with unreasonable support demands of $1,500.00 per month when my job paid only 365.00 week in 1996 the system based it on potential rather than actuality me not knowing It was a lost cause soon after it started. In 2003 received from the Irvine police department to pick up my child or she was going to orangewood a county juvenile hall due to deplorable living conditions where she was held by the courts for ransom. I made a second mistake by picking up my child, I recall the call on Wednesday and responded, Monday morning I was in court on kidnapping charges, 10,000.00 later I was rewarded 100% custody which was another mistake, Today in
Today after two 12” high court folders no job no Driver or contractor license the false claim is over 120,000.00 as my second marriage two children starve and had to divorce to her bank account robed.
My 8 year old Girl Gerogia Eve and son Joe Paul are victims of the L.A. County system – my other daughter Jackie is going to a community college as her brother and sister starve. A corrupt system that holds good families hostage and puts fathers on the street. I wish I had my drivers and contractors license to be able to support my children while the county play there games on innocent families.
Would like some help – No money no license and tried of fighting back, my children and I sure would appreciate some help. Case VD019214 L.A. County
I live in New York. Oakland County Michigan ordered $200.00 a month for support for my daughter.$230.00 for child care, and $13.00 for medical. The problem was I had a part time job paying $920.00 a month. These people are corrupt devils and nobody with any real power is either not saying nothing or are going along with the program.
There are a lot of people with power who are men, but they dare not change the law.. Their wives would kill them!
Child support is in direct violation of title 18 U.S.C. Sec 1581 etc.etc. Look it up. You cannot be jailed or forced to work or be deprived of your work. for any reason. The penalties are very severe. 10 to 20 years in the federal pen, and if you are killed while in jail or injured, they can get up to life in the federal pen. In voluntary servitude is against the U.S constitution. ITS CALLED SLAVERY FOLKS. ITS ALSO IN VIOLATION OF THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS. We need to learn how to unite as one and make these home wrecking S.O.B,S Accountable for their actions.
We need more websites like this!!! Bravo!!!
There is no doubt that Child Support Enforcement and the agencies that do the enforcement are unconstitutional. A national center that collects data on it’s citizens is in itself a violation.
Then there are several major areas of conflict. State’s that receive financial incentives (federal kick backs) to obtain excessive child support awards, placed on the non custodial parent. Servitude or enslavement. The list is on and on. Too lengthy to state here. But one thing is clear, that the US Constitution does not exist for those in power with agendas of their own. For them there are no rules or laws. They are above the law. Fast forward from the 1700’s, today’s federal government has become the ENGLAND of 2010. The new boss is the same as the old boss. The exact reason why the Constitution was written, the authors knew that it would eventually happen all over again.
I never had a problem supporting my children.
My objection is with being forced to provide a government mandated LIFESTYLE for my children (and by inference, my ex-wife).
Child support should be a shared responsibility, but that doesn’t generate a profit for governments fiefdoms.
My challenge to legislators is for them to measure child support compliance by measuring the percentage of non-custodial parents with the means to pay child support that are in compliance with child support orders that meet the requirement in the Family Support Act for a “…fair and just award in all circumstances” instead of measuring just the gross amount of child support collected.
this is sad but its why alot of men go to jail or kill themselves because they know they cant pay it and when they try too the gov looks the other way time to stop
My ex husband is claiming to be too ill to work at a job and thus is awarded even more child support through TANF. On recent court papers he circled that he does not have an illness that prevents home from working yet four pages later on the very same document child support enforcement has written that he is too ill to hold down a job and lists his TANF/welfare financial worker despite a medical diagnosis or even documentation of the this supposed illness. My son doesn’t even live with this man but this clown is still able to extract a large monthly sum from me because of this “illness”
My ex husband can be found on Facebook chatting about going to the bar almost everyday of the week and has recently joined a dating site. He surely must be sick! I want to to know what recourse I have in regards to this fictitious illness? as the state appears to be knowingly aiding and abetting welfare fraud.
Someone needs to start looking into how they are running the TANF/Welfare system in the state of Minnesota! People, this is your tax dollars at work! You should be outraged!
I told my second wife of my story of how I was hoodwinked and she thought it was so bad and began to help me with modification editing and on line payment monitoring until the times changed between us as now she wants to make me the piggyback villian for her scam to cover up income by displaying voluntary impoverishment with a college degree and no job but undercover web page designing, design gift making and will fix hair for every female at the church that her mom’s is the assistant pastor for. That makes income for my wife a matter of not under the law biut in the name of Jesus for undercover gain,
I had my daughter write the reality show extreme make over all to make me the villian by their mom to receive a new house and a new car and I started off paying 1600.00 dollars per month. I thought that I could deal with the lies since my kids received $100,000.00 schalorship money that never transpired for what reason I do not know. Now the electric bill is $1,500.00 and they ask me to help out but I can not step foot in the house. The house of Ruth has made me look like a abuser by piggybacking off of a lie that my kid’s mother created for gain on her part and ratings for the ABC show.
Everyone of us that is paying unfair amounts should write into this show and tell them and especially their sponsors and announce a boycott of their products.
ANSWER TO
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO REQUEST REVIEW
BY
CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
AND
MOTION CONTESTING AMOUNT OWED AND COUNTERCLAIM
COMES NOW Michael E. Gallegos Pro Se before the Court and claims the following:
Michael E. Gallegos makes a Motion to this Court denying all debt owed to Child Support Enforcement which they claim that I owe for child support. The reasons are set forth as follows:
1. I was denied property rights (The State can take your property and refuse to return it under immunity doctrines)
2. I was denied individual rights, (The Right to Question Authority) (Social-Civil-and Political Rights)
3. I was denied Due Process of the Law, CSED is not impartial but in fact is biased and prejudiced. Explanation below!
4. I was denied Civil and Constitutional rights
5. I was routinely caused to become disenfranchised, destitute, homeless, for 7 miserable years needlessly and unjustly, exposed to the elements (sleeping outside-eating out of trash cans- attacked sometimes-no personal hygiene) (I had my life threatened on numerous occasions, I was treated badly by law-enforcement) with my college degree.
6. I was relentlessly, vigorously, routinely treated in such a grossly unjust manner I would never get on my feet, because of CSED’s efforts to reduce me to the grave.
7. Characterizations of me made by CSED, were made spuriously, to characterize me something other than who I really am. (As I mentioned in A letter I sent to numerous Senators)
8. Because of this clear cut gross, arbitrary and capricious action taken against me, I make a counter claim with good cause, and I pray I open the door for a class action against (all states) the State of New Mexico for damages.
9. The action taken by CSED is unfair, unjust, and a witch hunt, designed to make me look like the bad guy. When in fact, of material fact I am the victim. Let’s blame the victim, he is defenseless.
10. I was denied visitation, and when and when I asked about it, I was told to pay more money.
11. My mother, my sons grandmother was denied visitation.
12. To this very day, I am persecuted unjustly. I cannot get a drivers license, even though I am garnished wages, never get a tax return, I pay taxes, and have made demands for my driver’s license. Because I need it for work. I NEED FAIRNESS AND EQUITABLE PICUNIARY JUSTICE.
13. Parents are equally responsible, but not treated equally, especially if you happen to be a guy.
14. My credit is destroyed.
15. Finally I ended up in one of the Veterans Administrations medical hospitals, due to the unfair treatment, the conditions I had to live in, my health deteriorated, the utter shame of being labeled like this, knowing I had paid w/o a problem before, but with one problem with management at my work, and arbitration pending, CSED decides to hammer me. No inquiries just make me pay. Especially to make it hurt me. I had other job offers and explained to the CSED that if they would simply release my license they can garnish me. But would not.
16. CSED made these things happen to me as a strategic (SLAP), is a strategic lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, silence and extort critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition. The plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiffs goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, and mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. A SLAP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate. A SLAP is often presented by a legal threat.
WHEREAS comes now Michael E. Gallegos asserts a COUNTER CLAIM and states hereby that the State of New Mexico Child Support Enforcement erred in dealing with my case, and the issues herein. Therefore the State of New Mexico owes me damages, and an apology to me and all non-custodial parents, including federal taxpayers. Furthermore asks the court for injunctive relief, discontinuing any support whatsoever, release of my driver’s license in the State of Alaska. And payment for damages.
1. Tort Damages (Prima Facie Tort)
2. Property Damages
3. Compensatory Damages
4. Punitive Damages
5. Personal Injury Damages
6. Loss of Wages plus interest at my current wage for seven years, plus compounded interest.
7. Medical damages.
8. This is a Perfect example of how the State Misuses its authority, and taxpayer dollars, at the taxpayers and at my expense and many others like me.
9. The State of New Mexico’s gross negligence and improper treatment of my case, has consequently exacerbated and furthered my indebtedness to the State of Texas Child Support Enforcement due to the actions of NMCSEDs unfair and unjust practices. Therefore I as the court to remove 7 years of that debt taken off, including interest.
The Law Perverted! Child Support and Politicians alike have taken the position of Marxist Principal in the Freeworld by dominating and exploiting the working class. Made to perform more labor than is necessary. Alienation-denotes the estrangement of people from their humanity. Child Support has nothing to do with justice, it is a panoply of plundered pops, and overwhelmingly now more than ever, Child Support is a regime whereby a father is forced to finance the filching of his own children. What is most striking is that this witch hunt of zealots has come entirely from government officials. No public outcry ever preceded these measures. The public never demanded that the government take action, nor has any public discussion of this alleged problem ever been held in the national or local media.
Needless to say the voices of pursued parents are seldom heard amid the chorus of condemnation. The bipartisan certainty of their guilt is sufficient to set aside their right to trial and declare them public enemies by general acclaim. Yet there is reason to believe that this problem is an optical illusion and that what is being portrayed as irresponsible fathers is in reality a massive abuse of government power. In recent years, a few cracks have appeared in the monolith. William Comanor writes that “child-support obligations” the only form of “obligation” or “debt” that most of the debtors have done nothing to incur- “are now treated far more harshly than any other form of debt.” Attorney Ron Henry characterizes the system “as an obvious sham” a “disaster,” and “the most onerous form of debt collection practiced in the United States.” “The overwhelming majority of so-called ‘deadbeat dads’ are judicially created,” says another attorney. “Why all this talk about so-called ‘deadbeat dads’? Because there is a lot of money to be made through that myth.”
When one begins to research the objective data and the research of independent scholars, it turns out that the problem is mostly the creation of government officials. In fact the myth of deadbeat dad has already been discredited conclusively by Sanford Braver and other scholars. We have already seen that few married or not married fathers seldom voluntarily abandon their children. Beyond this Braver has also shown that little scientific basis exists for claims that large numbers of fathers are not paying child support. Braver found that government claims of nonpayment were derived not from any compiled database or hard figures but entirely from surveys of mothers, and these alone, in setting enforcement policy against fathers, and no effort is made to balance them with surveys of non-custodial parents. Yet Braver found that fathers overwhelmingly do pay court-ordered child support when they are employed, often at enormous personal sacrifice.
STATE REVENUE VIA CHILD SUPPORT
A look at government machinery reveals that it was created not in response to claims of widespread nonpayment but before them, and that it was less a response to “deadbeat dads” than a mechanism to create them. Like new divorce laws (and shortly after their enactment), the child-support regulations and criminal enforcement machinery were created while few were paying attention.
Under pressure from bar associations and feminist groups, President Gerald Ford signed legislation creating the Office of Child Support Enforcement in 1975, warning at the time that it constituted unwarranted federal intrusion into families and the role of states. Contrary to professions of concern “for the children,” the principal purpose was never to provide for abandoned or impoverished children but to recoup welfare costs for the government. In fact, no study has ever been undertaken by the Department of Health and Human Services, Congress, or any branch of government to explain the reason for the agency’s existence.
Almost immediately the program began to expand exponentially, increasing tenfold from 1978 to 1998. The massive growth of law-enforcement machinery and reach was federally driven. In 1984, the Child Support Enforcement amendment to the Social Security Act required states to adopt child support guidelines. The legislation was promoted by the OCSE itself and by private collection companies—again less to help children than to save the government money under the theory that it would help get single-mother families off of welfare by making fathers pay more. Because most unpaid child support is due to unemployment, and because most “non-custodial parents of AFDC [welfare] children do not earn enough to pay as much child support as their children are already receiving in AFDC benefits,” according to researchers Irwin Garfinkel and Sara McLanahan, higher child-support guidelines could not help these children.
Then, with no explanation or justification (or constitutional authority), guidelines and criminal enforcement machinery conceived and created to address the minority of children in poverty were extended, under pressure from OCSE and other interests, to all child-support orders, even the majority not receiving welfare, by the Family Support Act of 1988. This vastly enlarged the program and transformed a welfare provision into an entitlement. Today welfare cases, consisting mostly of unmarried parents account for only 17 percent of all child-support cases, and the proportion is shrinking. The remaining 83 percent of non-welfare cases consist largely of previously married fathers who are usually divorced involuntarily and who generally can be counted on to pay. With wage withholding, “the number of dollars passing through the government collection system exploded,” mostly from non-welfare cases for which the system was never designed, which currently accounts for 92 percent of the money collected.
The 1988 law also made the guidelines presumptive and, for all practical purposes, compulsory. By one estimate the new guidelines more than doubled the size of awards. Yet that point was already known among policy makers and scholars that, with the exception of the relatively small number of poor and unemployed fathers, no serious problem on nonpayment existed. Not only was Braver presenting the results of his research, but a federal pilot study commissioned four years earlier by OCSE itself was published with similar findings. Originally the full-scale government-sponsored study was planned to follow up the pilot, but that was quashed by the OCSE when the pilots findings threatened the justification for the agencies existence by demonstrating that non-payment of child support was not a serious problem. The Congressional Research Service also concluded at about the same time that no serious problem existed.
Promoted as a program that would reduce government spending, federal child-support enforcement has incurred a continuously increasing deficit. “The overall financial impact of the child-support program on taxpayers is negative,” the House Ways and Means Committee reports. Taxpayers lost $2.7 billion in 2002.
This money does not vanish. It ends up in the pockets and coffers of state officials, for whom it constitutes a lucrative source of revenue and income. “Most states make a profit on their child-support program,” according to Ways and Means, which notes that “States are free to spend this profit in any manner the State sees fit.” In other words, federal taxpayers (who were supposed to save money) subsidize state government operations through child-support. This also transforms family courts from impartial tribunals into revenue-generating engines for the state government.
In addition to penalties and interest, states profit through federal incentive payments based on the amount collected, as well as receiving 66 percent of operating costs and 90 percent of computer costs. (When two states collaborate, both states qualify for the incentive payment as if each state had collected 100 percent of the money.) Federal outlays of almost $3.5 billion in 2002 allowed Ohio to collect $228 million and California to collect $640 million. “There is a $200 million per year motive driving this system” in Michigan alone, attorney Michael Tindall points out. “It dances at the strings of federal money.”
To collect these funds states must channel payments through their criminal enforcement machinery, further criminalizing involuntarily divorced parents and allowing the government to claim its perennial crackdowns are increasing collections despite the program operating at an increasing loss. In January 2000, HHS Secretary Donna Shalala announced that “the federal and state child-support enforcement program broke new records in nationwide collections in fiscal year 1999, reaching $15.5 billion, nearly doubling the amount collected in 1992.” Yet these figures are not what they appear.
In simple accounting terms, the General Accounting Office, which appears at face value all the official HHS assumptions and data for what is “legally owed but unpaid,” found that as a percentage of what it claims is owed, collections actually decreased during this period. “In fiscal year 1996, collections represented 21 percent of the total amount due but dropped to 17 percent of the total amount due in fiscal year 2000,” writes GAO? “As a result the amount owed at the end of the period is greater than the amount owed at the beginning of the period.”
These facts are gathered from a book published by Cumberland House Publishing Inc. The Title is Taken Into Custody- The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family. By Stephen Baskerville For the sole purpose to stir up concern for rights of people. Something needs to be done.
Michael E.Gallegos
Email: droit87105@yahoo.com or
Michael.gllgs@gmail.com
Cell: 484-319-5708
WE NEED A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL
good luck with the class action suit. The child support enforcement agency is an evil enteprise. my husband is a great father and loves his daughter. We have her every other weekend and school breaks, with that said my husband has been trying to modify his support order. He used to own his own business and had a 6 figure income. now with the failing economy he has lost his business, had his car repossed, and can not keep up with the 1,600 order per month. He got a job selling cars where they took his whole paycheck and it still wasnt enough. His arrers kept adding up and they suspended his drivers license. Got a ticket driving a work car w/o license and lost his job. Now unemployeed still ordered to continue paying same ammount and the judge suggested to ex to refile so they can put him in jail in 90 days. We have 2 young children together and I am the sole provider right now until he can find a new job. I can barely make the mortage payment and feed our children. This has caused exterme hardship to our family, while she drives her new BMW. I have made a few payments myself to show good faith. His support order includes half of daycare ($450. per month) only problem is she has not attended daycare in 14 months. When he tried to speak about the daycare to the judge he was ordered to “shut up” by the court officer. What now? What recourse do we have? Can’t afford a lawer and can’t have my husband sent to jail for falling on hard times. We just need a chance to get on our feet. He should pay something fair and just. This has been anything but fair!
Sounds to me you are a very educated young man. Yes I would most definintley presume you are PROSE. I have enjoyed your writing very much. It is quite a truthful and knowlegdable enforcement overview. I agree with you one hundred percent. It was nice talking with you on Sunday. I am so sorry to here about the complicated issues you are facing. You need to know that the only thing they have accomplished is hurting and punishing our children for the sake of money. The making up of names that becomes instrumental in verbal abuse to harm the children and discredit the father falsely. ENFORCEMENT- The enforcement is designed to use by the Counties to pry as much support as possible. It became a tool to be used to warrant illegal issuance of enforcement backed up with the second to the highest court in the STATE and of the contracting agencies for the state. There are strict GUIDELINES that is called the CHILD SUPPORT HANDBOOK, these rules and guidelines are there to help insure that Compliance with the Automated Support Enforcement System is correct in reflecting all activity on an Automated Support Enforcement System Accounting Statement. By Federal Law in 1996 Pres. George W. Bush signed in to affect the E-F.O.I.A. on all automated systems. The FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT all contracting agencies has to be in Compliance in order to receive Federal Monies. I need to let you know if you think you can prove that your per child monthly obligation is wrong , you can contact your county child support office and ask for a CS-180 which is a request for an Administrative Hearing without going to court. When you submit your CS-180 the enforcement on your case by law it should freeze the ENFORCEMENT. when submitting your request make it very clear that your FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT CIVIL RIGHT HAS BEEN VIOLATED. In the mean time you will type up a letter send it certified mail making a request for a full and complete Account Statement it is a free and public Document by Federal Law, this will enable you to create a paper trail proving your County Agency is NON-COMPLIANT with E- F.O.I.A. this is very easy to do. If only every dad knew this. You will be bringing a Federal Issue to the second highest Court in the State and it is recorded.
Does this apply to Pennsylvania, too? I am an abused Child Support paying father who will probably be put in jail, soon, because I have been ordered to pay $308.00 per month, as they brazenly reported my earning capacity at 1140.00, even though I earn less than $500.00 per month in actual gross income AND THEY KNOW IT!!! In spite of the economy and my reduced ability to find a job due to lack of time at employers because no employer who will hire me pay me enough money to stay with them. I have been hounded for over five years for support, begging to the church to help pay when I could not make the payments. I would appreciate a reply at your earliest possible convenience.
proud to be an dead beat dad/ determine brother determine to change this crap enough is an enough !!!! you saw what happen nov 2 time is coming and they know it hell has no fury like a man raped of his kids
amen! and hell isnt hot enough for some women that choose to do this in the name of god. ha. im glad to see men finally fighting back im not sure what i can do for an ex of mine but i am trying to help as much as i can .
In the old west there were Indians who fought and died and ones that just gave in or captured and went to reservations. Now they get some free cheese etc…No Holidays in honor of them.
……..Then there were the ones who knew they were fighting a losing battle and just ran and hid, went into Mexico and Canada and stayed there. Most people don’t like to be treated like crap. Even animals are treated better than us men.
These judges and lawyers are just lynching us men with no fair trial. And that’s if you want to call it any type of a trial. It is a waste of time. Very, very small percent of men are lucky to walk out without biting their teeth!
yes you men do need to fiel suit and change some of these laws women are using you plus the welfare system too ! crazy ! good luck i hope to see it abolished out of child support and worked out amongst your own selves.
Great Read! Add me to the list. California resident!
The only thing non rich men can due these days that will never be allowed to see their kid is to live in hiding like a criminal. Start over and pray that one day the law will change.
I will never let someone control my life and or tell me how to live and I’ll tell you why.
I was a foster kid who prayed ever day for my parents to come and get me. The dis functional families and places they threw me to like a rag and the suffering I encountered, a child should never have to go through what I experienced. Made lots of bad choices and picked the wrong women. A father could have really helped guide me and protect me from harm.
Always wished for that Brady Bunch Family…
I am an Iraq War Veteran and have been subject to the unlawful and unconstitutional acts of DHHS scene my return. Because I have accrued arrears in my child support payments due to lack of employment. My government is know treating me like a criminal. I am challenging DHHS concerning the constitutionally of Title 45 CFR Chapter 3, Child Support Enforcement Program (CSEP). CSEP is an UNCONSTITUTIONAL “cash cow” for State courts.
I SPENT 25 YEARS SUPPORTING AND DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AGAINST ALL ENEMIES FORGING AND DOMESTIC. NOW I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CONSTITUTION WORK FOR ME.
good luck I hope you get everythng you deserve and more . my dad and my ex are both veterans they treat him the same way.. funny how they are our heros when they have no hope or fear of war now that youre back they want to make you a prisoner of them not of war.
Just today Bill Clinton has changed his mind on Gay marriage but will Bill also change his mind on the oppressive child support laws that him and Hils put into place in the 90’s?
Its so nice of him to have a change of heart about Gay marriage while ignoring the fact the that thousands of NCP’s have been driven to suicide and desperation by his current laws.
Perhaps, Bill will one day also have a change of heart on the undue suffering he has caused to millions of parents and children.
Maybe then, the suffering will not have been in vain.
yes i know ive known 2 men that have taken their lives because of it!! an ex that wants too now! its terrible.. i cannot understand why no one can make them account for anything.. they believe the woman only and she has the ability to lie . not all but some .plus she wants to make him pay for a grown kids college but neither she nor child support will produce proof the kids even in college!! wrong wrong wrong!!!! all they say is get a lawyer but she can go in there and lie like hell and they believe her she should have to get a lawyer also! and get a damn job!
Child support is nothing more than legalized slavery, with the benefits going to the government not our children. This countrys legal system is pathetic.
I agree with you ive seen my ex’s kids without anythng where does the money go? not to them.. plus i deal with his suicidal ways all the time and im an ex . thats insane government needs to get out of ppls lives. and stay out
Your absolutely right. It is amazing the corruption in child support agencies. Just like in the foster care agencies. Why doesn’t the child get the money when men are put in jail for not paying. They get out pay a lump sum to get out and work again and then where does the money go. The mothers don’t even get it on the card??? So who really cares about the child. And the man has to pay fees and all the court fees first???? What? I thought this was for the child. But no one will fight the child agencies support or foster as no one will listen they feel oh the child. Yes oh the child!! The child is in the back seat with no money but the court or the government got it??
I have a grandchild in foster care and can not even get him as the mother who caused him to go to foster care said verbal allegations about my son, so he hasn’t been able to see him for over a year and the child is 2. My son has given up trying after talking for a year to the dfacs in the area. Yet they want him to come forward and pay child support. Why they want the child out of our family? As it stands he is now in foster care I travel 6 hours to see him not sure how long I’ll be able to do that. He has a six month review due April 14th I’m not allowed, my son asked for counsel before coming forward, no one has done that. They tell me if it doesn’t work out that I can have my grandchild the only thing I could do is get a lawyer. If I had the money I would, they won’t put me on the petition, my son is but no lawyer has been given. Tell me this is an agency trying to get the family together with the child, right!! I don’t want to hear it, and then why all these people who kill their child and never had them taken. Why didn’t the grandmother get I think it was Caylee, the mother killed her so her mom wouldn’t have her. Bet that grandmother must have said something to try to get the child, yet grandparents have no rights.
Frustrated with the failing system,
Diana
I don’t object to paying support. My objection comes in the manner of which I have to pay. All Men need to be 0fforded the right to make up lost income. Overtime, Commissions and bonuses should not be subject to child support. Also there is no burden of proof for the Mothers to prove where the money is going. I mean think about it honestly, would you go to the grocery store and fill your cart to the brim and when you got in the check-out lane the cashier didn’t scan anything. He/She just looked at the cart and said, “uhh, O.K. give me let’s say $400.00 and you don’t get a reciept. Would that be fair? “That’s what it’s like to pay child support. You don’t know what the money is being used for, the money is not regulated (the Mother can trick off the money and it’s like, oh well) but let a Father not have a job! Father ‘s should not have to provide health insurance from the money that is left from child support. That makes 17% really turn out to be 25-30%!!! How is a man supposed to provide for himself? If anyone is feelin’ this or not feeling this feel free to Mail me, good or bad I will respond and if you have any suggestions at all I would love to hear them. I will promise you I will be honest and I always keep it real.
Joe;
get this family support made a mistake suspended my driving license cause they said i was’nt paying then they found out they made a mistake now they want me to pay 50 dollars to reinstate it when it was their fault !! time has come nov 2 its over for the dems then we go after this system
They took the child support out of my daughters tax return and because it is a tax offset Ohio is holding it for half a year and I was told although they have the money and it is on hold they can take her license. This is sad.
A-friggin-men, brother. I am being screwed hard by a central ohio C.S. agency. I need help! Please email me w any info you may have, i.e., attorneys, etc. moore.brenden@yahoo.com
im in schenectady ny have piad support of more than should be to out of state and children did not live with ex since seventeen and they make me pay till twentyone and she never supplied any records at all now i still owe on back support witch shouldnt be there at all one case then the other same county paid her in cash and checks which have proof of checks and her parents know half the poeple in the courts she even throws that in my face and is going to throw me in jail when she should be goimg to jail for liing in court the majestrait will not listen to me at all i have no chance and dont know where to turn i hired a laywer but she is even no good and wont fight this judge puiblic defenders tell me shut up and pay dont these poeple realize they r ruining alot of poeples lives not only our lives but the childrens lives as well if they drain u take all your rights away how do they ever expect you tu make good or even try to have a life with your children its funny how a person can cheat you give them everything and then they destroy u and the courts help them who is there to help us
I find it shocking that some Guy hasn’t snapped and went postal in the child support office that ripped him off. Of course they would label him crazy and a “deadbeat dad” when really desperation lead him there. Its the perfect system. Because it is political suicide to even touch it. Because they don’t want the label of not caring about kids or supporting deadbeat dads. We need a voice. Someone who can take our cause and force it. We are all voters. Unless you got a felony for not paying Child support. Crazy how that works huh.
honestly I think thats what its going to take to make them wake the hell up! sad but true I know many men that are or made homeless and might i add my ex husband too, were not able to eat didnt have any money because of this lazy ex of his. making him pay more and more and then doubling it when he gets sick. showed up at my place one night and had not eaten in three dam days!! im an ex and i have compassion for people .. i cant see why there isnt a stupulation for the poor working man rather than a rich man that can afford this shit. and why cant an ex wife work too why isnt that mandatory?? he pays 700 per month for one kid… rediculous whne he only makes 30,000 per year. it needs to be banned and not even put in the court system sadly enough , its the man hating women that run the show anyway. so theyve been treated bad by a man in their lives .. get over it! get a life adn keep out of others . the ex wife gets to move on and get a new life with a man and take his income the kids income plus welfares income and the man that had to leave gets nothng not even a visitation.. you men need to wake up ! and ban together and fight these evil ppl .it also makes it impossible for the man to get a new life with a woman .. the ex sees to that oh but she can… and even pay his way on the child supports dime.. bullshit. communist country its time for some changes and for the man ! and i am a woman thats seen both sides !
i think you just about have this right.they take over 500 dollars from my ss and leave 291 to live on.and i won,t even get in to the passport corruption. the child support system is based on russia,s system. what does that tell you?anyway read steven baskerville,s book on this subject,it,s an honest read. and keep your head up.
denny.g fla.
like i said in my post above….. communist country america has become …..
Joe I Agree with you completely I had know idea how bad the laws actually are until I went thru a custody battle myself
yes11
It’s time to get off the “Gravy Train”
yup… ex slaves is all you are… time for them to pay back what theyve taken
So glad I found this site! We must change the laws to be equal rights for men. It is sooo one sided for the women who want to be treated as equal but not when it comes to this issue. Where can I go to JOIN a group that helps us men to fight and not have to hide and live out of a van with no electric. Where…
sdad777 at gmail com
Dax, so far, this is the only website getting the truth out for those that are interested. The last effort against the Bradley Amendment died in 2006 with no existing group that I know of capable or interested in creating a grass roots movement or making legal change through politics. This website may be the largest effort. There is no lobby group or wide support that is publicly acknowledged. I would love to have some folks to help me write intelligent articles on this and related topics, but so far its mostly just me. There are some links that you will want to explore, but nobody is really highlighting for real change. Instead, they hide behind other issues to keep the flack down. Since the meltdown, this strategy is hardly needed as this plague has impacted many millions of previously prosperous Americans. Right now, your best option is the Occupy Wall Street Movement, which is where most attention is focused for any change. That still doesn’t help marginalized parents. ~ E.M.
This article is soo correct!!!
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200908/why-modern-feminism-is-illogical-unnecessary-and-evil