Child Support: The Fallacy, The Fraud,
And The Failure
The American Legal System At Its Worst
The fundamental changes
in American Law that lead to the body
of law we now call, "Family Law",
arose in 1960's, born of the Feminist
Rights Movements. Let's make it clear
from the start that the flaws and
failures of the "family law"
system are not of the making of that
movement, and that both their intent
and causes were good and just.
A sociological study
done thirty some years ago found that
only 40% of "fathers" nationwide
paid any support for their children.
Somebody in government got the bright
idea that we could save the taxpayer
scads of money, paid out in welfare,
if those fathers were "held responsible"
for supporting their own children.
The theory wasn't
half bad, just founded on a fallacy.
Multiple studies, beginning from that
point and continuing yet today, demonstrate
this. Today, even the author of that
study made more than thirty years
ago, admits that the "statistical
model" used to analyze that data
was fundamentally flawed. In fact,
the statistics showed that, back then,
80% of fathers paid child support.
Yet even today, that study is widely
quoted in numerous articles and legislative
hearings regarding issues of child
Today, we know a
whole lot more. Today, those same
statistics show that currently 80%
of fathers pay child support. Further,
we know that another 13% of fathers
simply cannot afford to pay anything.
Another 3% acknowledge a "responsibility",
but refuse to pay because they are
denied access to their own children,
and another 3% claim they are "forced
into hiding" by the child support
enforcement system and unable to pay
for fear of revealing themselves.
Total: 99%. Ergo, only 1% of men actually
qualify as what could truly be considered
Please note that
the percentage of men paying support
for their children more than thirty
years ago is identical to the percent
of men paying that support today.
The system itself has failed by that
very fact, because it has not reduced
the demands on welfare at all, as
was its original intent.
Enter the lawyers.
The entire "family law"
system is founded on litigation, lots
of it, and solely serves to feed the
legal community. Much can be said
about the scam perpetrated in that
area of "family law" called
the Child Protection Services racket,
but this analysis will leave that
to those more experienced and educated
in that field. For these purposes,
let's focus on the "divorce industry,"
a government-sponsored money-laundering
scheme to enrich mostly lawyers.
Quite simply, the
law, well supported by the US Supreme
Court, states that the State must
first demonstrate a "compelling
interest," and by which claim
it may then, and only then, interfere
with the "ownership and custody"
of a parent's children. Further, that
such a claim must be demonstrated
in all of the protections afforded
through "due process." That
is, all the protections of both the
State and Federal Constitution: An
actual hearing with testimony, witnesses
and statements of law, culminated
in a "lawful" finding by
the court that accounts to those facts
presented and those laws stated.
It would appear that
"everyone knows" that the
State has a "compelling interest"
in the welfare of children - i.e.,
the "children's best interest."
This is the first fraud, because the
State simply "presumes"
that authority, without any of the
above procedural due process - no
hearing, no evidence, nothing. It
is called "procedural fraud."
The second fraud
appears immediately thereafter, when
they "presume" to assign
custody of the children, presumed
to be the mother more than 90% of
the time. Again, the US Supreme Court
says that "absent a finding of
unfitness", a parent cannot be
deprived of the custody and ownership
of their children, and that, again,
all of the procedural rights of due
process must be upheld. Ergo, custody
may not simply be "assigned"
and then just approved by the court.
It must be "demonstrated"
in the actual procedure of hearing,
evidence, law and "finding."
The third fraud follows
post haste. They demand "child
support" from the now disenfranchised
parent, most notably fathers. This
is the key; it's for the money. Make
no doubt about it; it is not the child
support money, but the taxpayer's
money. Child support generally does
go to the "custodial parent",
but it is the State and Federal funds
that abound for the purpose of "enforcing
and collecting child support"
that are the real goal of those who
"act for the government."
This third fraud
is, at law, no better than the first
two. In Civil Law, a "contract",
"debt" or "obligation"
is set forth in writing, but apparently
not in the supposedly Civil "Family
Law" system. They won't show
you a contract, and in fact refuse
to discuss it. It is "presumed"
to exist. They won't show you the
terms, nor discuss the determination
of the amount of alleged "debt."
Again, the US Supreme Court clearly
states that a "hidden contract
is an abhorrent in law."
The fourth fraud
in law is that minor little detail
called enforcement. "Failure
to pay child support" is stated
as a "civil contempt", ergo
refusing to obey a court order. In
law, there are two forms of "contempt
of court", first, civil contempt,
which is failing to do what the court
orders you to do, and, second, criminal
contempt, which is doing what the
court ordered you not to do. The former
is punishable by fiscal sanctions
- fines; and the latter by incarceration.
Except, of course, in Family Law,
where the plain and simple standard
is "pay up of go to jail."
Both the State and
Federal courts duly uphold that there
must be proof "beyond a reasonable
doubt" that this alleged contempt
was a "willful disobedience"
of the court's order, and further,
that the burden of that proof is on
the prosecution to show that "an
ability to pay" exists, but was
willfully disobeyed. Except, of course,
in Family Law, where "pay up
of go to jail" is enforced almost
universally: No hearing, no evidence,
and no testimony required.
Practice of Extortion Fraud
In practice, it is
a simple system of collusion and abusing
the privilege of authority. The "prosecutor"
for the child support enforcement
system "just does it", and
the judge "just ignores it."
Lawyers, whether willing or unwilling,
are caught between hell and high water,
but fundamentally are an integral
part of the fraud, and reap enormous
financial dividends from it.
A couple gets a divorce,
and immediately the "presumed
non-custodial parent" gets a
notice from the child support enforcement
offices demanding that they "appear"
and reveal their financial information.
Many States have statutes that say
this information must be revealed,
under penalty of contempt. Federal,
constitutional law however says that
your civil rights to not answer, under
the 5th Amendment, extends to all
aspects of law, not just the criminal
arena. "Too bad", says the
State court, "Answer �
determines who gets custody, and how
much child support will be paid. Enforcement
is immediate. The first three legal
frauds discussed above are committed
in one basic act, not by a judge,
but by a caseworker. The court merely
"approves" whatever the
caseworker says. Supposedly, that
makes it a "legal decision."
Note the lack of any hearing, any
evidence or any actual "findings"
issued by a court. This is the entire
basis of their procedural fraud, to
simply ignore any actual "procedure"
that might demonstrate that essential
Ostensibly, the caseworker
is required to use "guidelines,"
set by the State but regulated by
the federal funding mandates, to set
the amount of child support. In theory,
that is 17% of your gross income for
one child, 25% for two, etc. The trick
is that they can "impute"
your income. The original idea of
"imputing wages" was to
"catch" people who are making
more than they claim or seek "under-employment
to reduce the child support amounts.
However, it is commonly and widely
used to "up the ante" and
increase child support revenues.
Your first instinct
is to hire a lawyer and appeal this
decision. Lawyers, as "officers
of the court" are prevented from
arguing for your rights in these supposed
Family Courts! Either by "court
rules", a fraudulent misrepresentation
by the lawyer in as much as the State's
own published Court Rules make no
such mention, or by the retributions
of the court and prosecutor aimed
at all of that lawyer's other clients.
Basically, their sole function is
to "cut a deal" for you,
probably better than the original
exorbitant imputation, but still more
than "the truth".
Since now you are
under a court order to pay child support
(or go to jail), the odds are that
now you can't afford a lawyer at all.
Forget any deals. Neither the prosecutor
nor your Ex will present any evidence
to demonstrate this fraudulent imputation,
and even though you have competent,
clear evidence to the contrary, which
neither the prosecutor nor your Ex
will contend is false, the judge will
"dismiss" your appeal. This
is the procedural fraud of "administrative
ruling." No actual "finding"
is made by the court, which would
then have to include that evidence
and testimony. Judges will even "wave
away" documentation you have,
making you just read it out loud,
as a means of keeping it from being
entered into your record.
Judges are commonly
known to "go home and do some
research" and enter that alleged
evidence in support of their dismissal.
This is a further fraud, this time
called "substantive fraud".
The judge is "acting for the
prosecution", and "entering
evidence outside of the courtroom."
Both are fundamental violations of
every State's Court Rules, and a fundamental
denial of any constitutional rights
toward due process.
Needless to say,
you appeal that decision again, but
of it is within the same court as
before, and of course the result will
be the same. In fact, you are required
to appeal twice before that court
before being allowed, and told you
can appeal to a higher court, the
State Court of Appeals. For 99.9%
of the population, this is a daunting
task beyond their knowledge and comprehension.
Without a lawyer, it seems impossible,
and the cost of such an appeal can
run $15-20,000. Now, six months of
excessive child support payments has
made you nearly or completely destitute.
It is called "adjudication
by fiscal attrition." When you
go to that Appeals Court, they will
not "refund" the excess,
nor cease those collections, but merely,
and only possibly, reduce those payments
to what they should have been all
along. "The Law" becomes
a matter of whether it is bottom-line
cheaper to pay their "buddy lawyer"
for "justice", or to pay
their extortive demands. The bottom
line is that most people cannot afford
Ultimately you reach
a point where you cannot pay. These
courts know that, and expect you to
reach out to friends and family. They
are using you as "bait"
to "shakedown" the money
any way they can. Again, US Supreme
Court rulings state that this is clearly
illegal. But ultimately, you will
end up getting a Show Court Order,
demanding that you appear in court
and explain why you haven't paid.
When you appear,
the prosecutor will not show evidence
that you can pay this money but refuse
to do so. Instead you are required
to show why you cannot. There is ample
federal case law that says you don't
have to "show what is not"
because it is nearly impossible to
do! More case law that says the burden
of proof is on the prosecutor, and
more case law that says "an ability
to pay" must be demonstrated
before the penalties of incarceration
can be applied.
The prosecutor has
access to all of your records, such
as employment, banks, etc., and is
well aware that you can't pay the
money. They will not present that
evidence even though, by law they
are required to. Arguing your rights
to due process or suggesting they
have no evidence of an "ability
to pay" will end up getting you
put in jail for contempt anyway. Many
States have limits for contempt proceedings,
like a maximum of $500, yet it is
common for them to demand far more.
The only answer the court has is "pay
up or go to jail," and that answer
was decided long before you entered
Of course you can
appeal this decision too, and of course
it is in the same court. You know
the answer to that. In some cases,
they are known to enter that appeal
or objection into the record of your
case, but then simply refuse to answer
it, not denying, dismissing or setting
it for hearing - just ignore it! This
is gross violation of every State's
Court Rules. Of course you can appeal
to the Court of Appeals, but you can
expect that to be after you have already
done time in jail. Nor does "doing
the time" relieve you of the
financial demand, and in fact more
support "debt" will accrue
while you are in jail. They can, in
most States, keep putting you in jail,
up to a total six months in any given
year, making it just that much more
difficult to even make any payments.
They can, after three
"offenses" put you in jail
for up to ten years. After accumulating
more than six months worth of child
support debt, they can take away your
driver's license and any other "professional"
licenses you may hold. Both of these
would seem contrary to their supposed
goal. You can't find work or maintain
a job without a car, and usually those
professional licenses are the means
you have of making any money. To understand
all of this, go back to the statement
back at the top, that it not about
the child support money, but the Federal
and State funding.
Paternity Fraud and the Welfare Mom
Two of the most critical
abuses of this "Family Law"
system involved how women are abusing
it. Can't really blame them, like
in the Federal Tax system that provides
"loopholes", this system
has holes you could drive a Mac truck
Paternity fraud is
all too common. Most laboratories
that do DNA paternity testing record
that nearly a third of those tests
come back as "not a match".
This includes married couples. No
doubt there are thousands of cases
that never get tested as well. Thousands
of married fathers have discovered,
only after going through a divorce,
that another man fathered some of
their children. Yet the courts claim
that it would disrupt the children's
lives to discover that and is therefore
not in the "children's best interest".
The husband is ordered to continue
to pay support for them, and even
prevented from telling them on penalty
It is common for
an unmarried woman who had multiple
partners during "the right time"
to simply "pick a likely victim"
and start prosecuting for the money.
Many victims, because they did have
sex with her, will not question the
claim. While it would seem with the
advent of DNA testing that it would
be a "logical place to start",
most courts are resistant to insisting
on "evidence," commonly
work to prevent testing at all or
even just reject it under the guise
of "the children's best interest."
Also common, where the first "victim"
turns out to not be the father, the
women will just keep "going down
the list", until they get one
who doesn't "resist" or
is actually proven to be the father.
That list of "alleged" fathers,
individually all get to pay the costs
of testing and attorney fees, not
to mention the traumatic disruption
of their lives.
Recent cases have
also shown that some women have "retrieved"
used condoms, even from men they never
had sex with, and used the contents
to impregnate themselves. The issues
of a man's right to choose to be a
father go far beyond the scope of
this article. Suffice it to say that,
without a wink of consent of the father,
a woman can choose to have an abortion,
put a child up for adoption, abandon
a child at the nearest fire station
or hospital, or keep it and make the
father pay for its support, often
never even seeing his own child. Men
have none of those choices, and are
limited to the one and only choice,
"pay up or go to jail."
The courts have long ignored that
this is a clear violation of 14th
Amendment rights to "equal treatment
under the law" by hiding behind
that ever present "the children's
Another common trick
women use is to have multiple children
by multiple fathers. As stated above,
child support for once child is 17%
of the father's income, but only 25%
if there are two children by the same
father. For women, the solution is
simple, by not having more than one
child per father they can substantially
increase the amount of child support
they can receive. The Family Law system
is actively discouraging marriage
and family unity, and financially
encouraging the "bastarding"
of our society with fatherless children
Remember that the
original intent of these laws was
to reduce the costs to the taxpayer
by reducing the needs for welfare.
As a matter of statistical fact, it
has not reduced the role of welfare
even by 1%. The same percentage of
fathers pay child support as did thirty
years ago at its inception. Here,
however, is where it gets truly ugly,
and reveals that these government
programs are the most destructive,
debilitating and even deadly ever
devised by our "public servants."
child support advertises that it collected
$18 billion in 2003, it also claims
that the "administrative costs"
were only $4.5 billion, or $1 spent
for every $4 collected. This is a
hidden lie. True, the administrative
costs were as claimed. False, because
they are only the beginning for the
multiplicity of hidden costs.
One of the big keys
to understanding this problem lies
in understanding the money, or, as
they say, follow the money trail.
Caseworkers get a "bonus"
for every case they "handle",
as do the agency heads. This commonly
leads to, not only overburdening caseloads
per caseworker, but also intentional
acts to "create animosity and
conflict" between couples to
get them to "duke it out"
so that there is a clear winner and
a clear loser who pays child
support. Joint custodies and equitable
settlements are not in the caseworker
or agency's best interest. Bonuses
are tied to some amount of child support
being paid through their offices.
The Family Court
judges get a "judicial award".
Every State has constitutional law
that prevents a judge from being paid
in relation to the "performance
on his bench." So it is commonly
paid as an "award" to the
judge's retirement fund. Whether now
or later, the judge personally profits
by his acts. Further, that over-imputation
of wages now comes into play, where
the alleged amount owed is directly
relevant to the amount of State and
Federal funding. The higher the amounts
owed, the bigger the paychecks.
Much of that State
and Federal funding also goes to the
courts and offices, which run the
Family Law system. Besides these personal
incentives, their professional "enterprise"
gets more money to employ more people,
and get new technology to pursue "the
money" more effectively.
Virtually every responsible
economist recognizes that the billions
of dollars of child support supposed
unpaid is not likely to ever be paid.
Most experts agree that at least 90%
of it is the product of the zealous
fantasies of the public servants running
these programs; and that the people
who supposedly owe this debt simply
don't have the money and never did.
Primary Hidden Costs
Even with extensive
research, it is nearly impossible
to discover the "hidden costs",
very likely because they don't want
us to know the real devastation being
wrecked on the taxpayer. Hidden costs
start where the judge "puts you
on probation" for failing to
pay child support. Ultimately this
leads to a warrant for your arrest.
Neither the caseworker and agency
head nor the judge care much whether
or not you actually pay, because they
get even more State and Federal funds
for putting people in jail for failing
to pay child support.
The number of people
in jail for failure to pay child support
is a secret; and estimates range from
25% of all those incarcerated to 50%
of all county jails. Either way, the
numbers are staggering. First, the
cost of incarcerating one person for
a year is between $30-50,000. America
has the highest incarceration rate
in the world, at 1 person for every
147. If a quarter of those people
are held for child support charges,
the taxpayer for imprisoning "bad
dads" is approximately $20 billion,
or more than all the child support
Those people sitting
in jail are not earning money, and
therefore not paying taxes, ergo creating
"lost money." Many people
have to hire lawyers, not to defend
themselves from their Ex, but to defend
themselves from their own government.
The "divorce industry" is
booming for lawyers, and is primarily
why both the American Bar Association
and Trial Lawyers Association have
been instrumental in developing this
system, and have a fundamental interest
in promoting its continuation. Remember
that the judges and prosecutors are
put these hidden "legal counsel"
cost figures in the $100 billion range,
and some experts suggest it may be
as high as $200 billion. If incarceration
costs run another $20 billion - or
higher, and supposed "administrative
costs" are about $4.5 billion,
the American Public is paying a minimum
of $125 billion to "collect a
debt" of $18 billion. Remember
that it still has not reduced welfare
by a single iota and while the receivers
of the child support do get "most"
of their $18 billion, the primary
receivers of the other $107 billion
are not children, but lawyers and
other members of the legal community.
men committed suicide last year. While
we do not know the exact reasons why,
because they are not here to tell
us, we do know that 80% of them were
"recently involved" in a
Family Court case. That, on average,
is almost 400 men for every State.
We can't even begin to estimate that
price tag, except, sardonically to
say, that none of them are paying
taxes anymore either.
Thousands more men
languish in jails for crimes committed
when the "snapped." Having
your children stolen from you, your
house and all your property, often
losing your job and then being put
in "debtors prison" has
a way of driving even a "reasonable
man" over the edge. The recent
events of the "East Coast Snipers,"
whose story began in a Family Court
on the West Coast, are only a small
sample of the vast extent of this
Grotesque Hidden Costs
It is our children
who are and will pay the truly hidden
costs, both in taxes, and in the quality
of their lives. These programs are
systematically, and intentionally,
disenfranchising children from their
fathers, because � well, because
it is good for big-government business.
Those who have an
interest in perpetuating this system
would have us believe that this is
the fault of "bad dads"
who don't care to act as good parents
to their children. Of course, now
we have more tax money being spent
to encourage fathers to act like better
dads, but have not yet recognized
the true source of these problems
never was the dads.
Most dads do care
very much about their kids, but these
government programs are very much
designed to drive them away �
in droves. Teaching "parenting
skills" to a man who cannot afford
to eat because of governmental extortions,
is a futile scam, aimed solely at
political pacification of "the
masses" and not a purposeful
address of the problems.
Children who are
so disenfranchised from a father's
"guidance and counsel" are:
- 5 times more likely to commit
- 32 times more likely to run
- 20 times more likely to have
- 14 times more likely to commit
rape: This applies to boys of
- 9 times more likely to drop
out of high school.
- 10 times more likely to abuse
- 9 times more likely to end up
in a state-operated institution.
- 20 times more like to end up
All of the above
are serious societal problems that,
of course, require more tax money;
but now to deal with all the bad kids
they have purposefully created. Incidentally,
those "bad boys" are also
significantly more likely to become
"bad dads" themselves. It
is a downward spiraling system that
can only ultimately get much worse.
We cannot even begin to estimate the
future fiscal costs to taxpayers,
much less to the "fiber"
of our society.
Band-Aids For A Cancer Patient
Recently, many states
have announced legislative "studies",
introduced new legislation, or "amended"
some of their "family law"
system. Virtually all of it is akin
to putting band-aids on a cancer patient.
These committees consistently are
composed of "family court"
judges, family law attorneys, and
caseworkers; and all are the very
people whose greatest interest is
in continuation of the status quo.
A recent legislative study in Ohio
is a prime case in point - the committee
members were exactly as that stated
Beyond that, one
of the most powerful key components
is the Federal "guidelines and
standards" which dictate formulas
and rules to the State. Failing to
meet those Federal formulas and rules
means the reduction or complete cutting-off
of those crucial Federal funds. It
is these Federal funds that drive
the States, and the incentive/bonus
system, paid from those funds, that
drives the people working for the
legal system. Lawyers are driven by
the lucrative hoard of litigation
it all creates.
Many students of
socio/economic political systems now
acknowledge that the current system
of Family Law in this country is nearly
identical to the system used in the
"old USSR." Many also maintain
that that system was, in large part,
responsible for the collapse of that
government. Our Family Law system
is an abject socialism, not just "a
little" socialistic, but a disease-ridden,
corrupt socialism that will ultimately
To suggest "something
must be done about it" is woefully
inadequate. "Who" is to
do this "something"? Would
we have more laws, rules and guidelines,
and by the very people who are instrumental
in designing and perpetrating this
existing "plan"? Would we
have more and bigger, big-government
rule our lives? The answers to this
are well beyond this author's ability
to even begin to suggest.
Except that this
author will say: Simply eliminating
the entire child support system would
save the taxpayer at least 100 billion
dollars every year. It might also
just save our society.