The NCP Revue

The Columbus Dispatch : Boy’s parents sue to get his baby from mom, 21

In many occasions I’ve read about the reverse case (where, say a 19 year old man gets charged with statutory rape with a 15 year old girl) and I can listen to the argument that what she did should not be a crime. But given the situation, I do know this: she shouldn’t be able to profit off of what was said crime.
But think on the positive: the father does get seven hours a week of “visitation”. How nice of the family courts.

Missing men - The Boston Globe

“If men were taking responsibility for their children, they would be receiving benefits,” says Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women.

That is simply hilarious. When I was going through some hard times I decided to apply for food stamps. I was paying my child support and had established a payment plan on the arrears. You know how much I got? $10 a month. $10. I guess the state of Colorado expected me to go down to the Wal Mart and stock up on Ramen noodles and only Ramen noodles.

Quite frankly, Ms. Grady, you have just proven how far out of it you are. If we can expose comments like these to our poor brothers (many of whom are minorities and may be somewhat favorable to the NOW ilk) I think we can definitely expand our ranks.

Never Ending Child Support | WFTS-TV | First in HD

Joe lost track of all the hours he spent on the phone trying to recover
his hard earned money. Child support enforcement would reimburse him
only to take more money out of his next check.
“I could not get no where.”
At one point the financial burden became almost too much to bear. While
Joe was taking on the city of New York his wife received notice that
she would soon be laid off.
“I really thought i was going to lose it.”

Okay, I’m kidding about losing it in the mail, but this is another reminder to keep fighting when injustice comes your way. Don’t give up and involve as many media outlets as you can.

Judge David Young - Official Site - On the Docket

He’s one of these TV courtroom judges that pollute our airwaves. I caught his show today and I just could not believe this clown. The case was a defamation suit by this man against his stbx for posting something about him on myspace. Almost immediately before they even start on the case this “judge” proceeds to slam the man for three months of arrears for child support which was $2,000. The guy (and I do not want to dignify this guy by calling him a judge) goes on this rant to say “I do not care if you have to be a barrista at Starbucks there is no excuse for being in arrears on your child support.” The guy in question by the way was a software programmer and did not have any contracts for those three months.

So, nobody’s taken Mr. Young by the hand and taught him the economics of a software programmer vs that of a barista at Starbucks. If any of us had to take that economic downturn we would be in a hole even if we gave up extravagances like food and shelter.

Now, onto the case itself, which was a defamation. The woman said that a guy (she disputed it was the guy) needed mental help because he had slept with her best friend. Mr. Young said that he thought the statement was true that the guy needed mental health. So in addition to dabbling in economics he’s a psychiatrist as well.

Some of these TV judges do get a bad break (I’ve heard Judge Judy in several cases talk about the plight of fathers) but this guy takes the cake. He’s a proped up game show host and game show judge in a black muumuu and he’s saying this sort of crap?

I just had to get this off my chest and if I’m that guy I’m suing the good “judge” for defamation.

DNA testing: One in five fathers wrongly identified by mothers in Child Support Agency claims | Politics | The Guardian

Under child support legislation it is a criminal offence to make a false statement or representation, and to provide false documents or information.

However, according to the CSA, there has not been a single prosecution of a woman for making a false claim. The figures showing the number of false paternity claims have been compiled using freedom of information legislation.

I’m not sure whether or not these types of statistics could be compiled here in the US or not, but I’m pretty certain that British women are, on average, no more or less honest than American women.

Of course, we’ll have the other side saying that number is unnaturally high because there were suspicions in the first place. But what about the cases where the father got freaked out by the cost of the DNA testing?

And that’s another bone of contention for me with that article that they don’t bring up. There is no crime in having suspicions so why do you have to pay to determine the results?

Problem Solver: Child Support Enforcement Sends Refund | WSPA

“We don’t see this often in the child support program,” said Glenn Hastie with the Department of Social Services.

Another father, another Atlas, and they keep piling up the burden no matter what is right. Props that he got his name cleared and his money back. The article is right: they can’t get him his time back, but hopefully this is a reminder that there is some justice in this world.

No more excuses: Pay your child support | Lubbock Avalanche-Journal

We understand there are a small percentage of non-custodial parents who have legitimate concerns with their child-support situation.

A “small percentage”? According to an Urban Institute report out of 4.5 million fathers who do not pay child support, 2.5 million of them are poor themselves. I know math may not be a prime skill for journalists, but that is approximately 56%. Exactly how does that qualify as a “small percentage”.

What’s equally as troubling is that those same fathers often do not have equal access to job search assistance and education training that mothers don’t. In terms of numbers it is 6 percent to 11 percent on job search and 4 percent to 19 percent respectively.

Next time I would recommend to the Lubbock Avalanche Journal that they actually do some homework before they publish online and embarrass themselves (not to mention the state of Texas).

FindLaw’s Writ - Hamilton: The United States Senate Judiciary Committee Holds Hearings on Polygamy Crimes: What Needs to Be Done at the Federal Level to Protect Children from Abuse and Neglect

If you’ve never caught Marci’s act, to sum up she believes that as long as you’re doing it for the kiddies it’s okay to violate basic constitutional rights of individuals. Now she wants Congress to stretch out RICO to preposterous proportions.

She also wants to extort. . .ERR encourage states to eliminate the statute of limitations. Basically, she sees nothing wrong with forcing a 50-year-old man to have to defend himself against 20- or even 30- year old allegations of child support. We have statutes of limitation for a good reason, and that is to bury the past for somebody after a period of time.

GlennSacks.com » Blog Archive » Lesbian Mom Abducts Her Gay Partner’s Kids

Badger (one of the commenters) said that this outcome would not have happened if it had been a heterosexual couple and the suing partner was a man. Maybe. But even given that that does not mean what the judge did in this case wasn’t the right thing. It just needs to be applied to all parents. So long as who they sleep with is of age and consenting, that’s really none of our business.

And cases like this may help the fathers’ rights movement in the long run. We need to be building alliances with other people and other groups. And with the decision in the state of California, I think we’re going to see more and more of these cases involving same sex couples.

Chasing child support: Parents owe about $14.2 million in La Crosse County : La Crosse Tribune

Barnas’ story

The story behind how Barnas became the county’s top child support delinquent is simple: When he lost his job, he no longer could afford the child and spousal support payments and didn’t know he could petition the courts for a reduction.

The story is simple and all too common. And I fear that as this recession increases, we’ll see more and more and more of these cases.

This is one of those frustrating cases where you want to shout to the entire world that YOU CAN MODIFY CHILD SUPPORT. You always have that option. Things change, situations change. All states have rules that state there must be a review and modification process, both every so many years (usually 2-4) or when financial circumstances change (Colorado, for instance, makes it 10 percent). If you have a serious hiccup in your finances you need to modify now. Not later, not ten years down the road. Modify now.

You can usually find the forms needed to modify at your state judicial system’s web site or at the court house. The people there cannot give you legal advice, but they can tell you which forms you will need. If there is a filing fee, see if you qualify for waiving that fee because of poverty. If you have a case involving welfare in Colorado, there is no fee.

And finally don’t take anything on faith as Barnas did. Faith is for church not for court. Get a second opinion, particularly if the first one comes from the other side.