Deadbeat Equality

Why is it that we don't have equality in deadbeat status (support vs. visitation)?

The child support enforcement agency has super collection powers making the IRS look like kittens. They can seize assets, take passports and driver's licenses. Who can argue with that, the deadbeats deserve it, right? Well that depends on the definition of deadbeat. See an earlier post below for a definition of that.

But what of the Deadbeat Mom's that prevent visitation. The law says support must be paid regardless of interference with visitation. So what is the penalty, there isn't one. You can hire lawyers and go to court and probably not get anywhere.

I have paid all ordered child support, but with 5 errors in the support agency, I have a large stack of threats, several thousand dollars in legal fees and was nearly imprisoned.

My wife kidnapped my child, avoided the service of the court for over a week, I had no knowledge of where he was or how to contact him.

I called the police, they said there is no such thing as parental kidnapping. They threatened to arrest me if I interfered in her taking my child (in his pajamas while he was sleeping). I informed them of her past threats and a legal agreement requiring advance notice to leave the county. They told me legal agreements don't count only court orders (guess the officer could use an Intro to Contract Law course).

The last thing my son saw was his mother's family strapping him in a seat and the police K9 unit pushing me back and not even allowing me to say goodbye.

At one point during my pleading with the officer he reached for his weapon. He said the law required him to protect the weaker party (female). I filed a complaint and the responders were disciplined for poor handling of the "domestic dispute" (not kidnapping).

So one week and $5000 later when I finally found him, justice was served, right? No, possession is truly 9/10 of the law, and today you can still possess a person if they are under 18. No visitation, more hearings, lots of restrictions. The courts don't like to change things and at the dawn of the 20th century the homemaker got the kids and money from the breadwinner. Maybe in a hundred years they'll move to the 21st century. Her penalty - a big check every month. She has constantly given me less than even the sub-standard visitation that the court ordered.

My lawyer's advice (off the record, of course), you want him, take him back and then she'll have to beg you for visitation. Yeah right, I'd probably get as far as two miles before the police would drag me out my car, throw me to the ground and cuff me, if they didn't shoot me, all in front of my son. Tell me, does anybody think for a minute that I could get away with what she did? Better yet, tell me why.

So that's the state of 21st century Domestic Relations Justice. Can someone please help me understand the difference between that and cave man justice?

Visitation is a form of emotional support for the child so they can benefit from the non-custodial parent. No child should be deprived of the emotional support of either of their parents.

My proposal, redefine support to include both money and emotional (visitation) support. Use the exact same rules (with the same error rate) and when the custodial parent withholds emotional support then you impose the same penalties - fines, seize assets, IRS refunds, passport, driver's license and of course imprisonment.

How about it? - Let there be equality!