Charles Bruce and debtors prison

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. Kids aren't a consumer good. One doesn't need "to pay for them", one needs to "parent" them.

If one's only value to their kids is the income they bring in, it's unfortunate that they became parents.

"Who is better suited as a parent" is a gordian knot that no court has the time, inclination or wisdom to fully sort out. A parent who lives in-state, who doesn't have a relevant criminal conviction and who agrees to it, should be obliged to shared custody.

Courts "err toward mothers" = bias. Any rationalizations for why are irrelevant to that basic point.

If a woman is more valuable in the home and should be awarded custody/child support accordingly, then a man is more valuable in the workplace, and should be paid and promoted accordingly.

Family court is not only biased, it is corrupt and incestuous. Child support is a profit center for cash strapped states. For instance, for five years the State of Ohio knowingly double-collected the $1330.78 monthly child support that they ordered from Matthew Dunlop, skimmed 2% off the top for "administrative expenses" and refused to refund the $84,000 that they stole from him.

Family court orders arbitrarily large child support awards that the non custodial parent can't afford then collects a commission on the "deal". The parent then is unable to afford housing or basic needs to be a parent during (generally his) visitation.

The rarity of shared custody orders are partially the result of this conflict of interest. If the judge doesn't give custody to someone, they'll be unable to extract "administrative expenses" from the other one, nor will they get the federal incentive match from the federal government for collecting the debt. Ohio made $223 million in 2005 off this arrangement, and used some of the proceeds to purchase ad and billboard space villifiying deadbeat dads. It's self interest masquerading as public interest, and it is harming kids by contributing to alienation from their parents.