Saturday, September 29, 2012

Bordering on Slavery: The system treats fathers as no more than ATM machines, incapable of making financial decisions for their children

This system treats fathers as no more than ATM machines, incapable of making financial decisions for their children 
writes Erin Johnson, Member of the Massachusetts Executive Committee, Fathers and Families (thanks to Instapundit).
My ex-husband has his shortcomings, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t a good father, capable of making financial decisions for his kids. Fathers made competent decisions on behalf of their children before divorce, so why is it that the state deems men incompetent after divorce, empowering only the mothers? Deciding what to spend on our children should be EVERY parent’s right, not just mothers. The state of Massachusetts has taken away that parenting right from fathers by giving mothers complete financial control.

The moms are the heroes, which further alienates the kids from dad because all they know is that mom spends all the money on them and dad is always broke. That dad lives in a dump that they are embarrassed to visit and never has enough money to do things with them. They have no concept that the money that mom spends is coming from dad. The monetary gains that mothers achieve under these guidelines, coupled with free legal aid, encourage mothers to demand full custody in our court system. I am confident that there would be a significant decrease in this disturbing trend if the guidelines were adjusted to reflect fair child support amounts for each party.

… As a working mother, I am insulted that the State allows mothers to bleed these fathers dry under the cop-out of doing what’s best for the children, with absolutely NO requirement that the money is actually being spent on the children.

The guideline’s ineffective modification language falls on deaf ears with our probate courts. If a married couple faces a job loss, the entire family must adjust to the financial impact. But in a divorced family, this state does everything in its power to push the burden only to the father.

… I have two master’s degrees and make a decent salary, but if I lost my job, I would not be able to replace my current income in this economy. I would be faced with a severe pay cut if I could even get another similar job. Why is it that the court system is quick to impute an “earning capacity” to the father, yet fails to impute the same for the mother of school aged children who is capable of working, yet chooses not to? These men did not sign up to be their spouse’s father too, but these unfair child support amounts are causing just that.

… The physical demands of overtime work cannot be sustained as fathers age, especially in the labor trades. This requirement borders on slavery.