The other side of the coin is to persevere if possible. It can have its'
rewards.

The combination of a loving and sincere relationship with one's kids can
"bring them home" so to speak. I wonder how many children have gladly
changed residence at an age where child support flowing in the other
direction brings at least some equity to what is for all intent and purpose,
gender based discrimination.

To everything, there is a season and a time for every purpose.


"Avenger" wrote in message
news:yXrIg.2036$pX3.106@trnddc07...
Stop trying to reason with the unreasonable fascists. Any man who finds
himself in the situation you describe should just change his identity or
leave the country and be done with it.You can't be extridited or even
arrested outside US jurisdiction for these sort of petty civil contempt
charges. And English teachers are in great demand among the wealthy (and
not
so wealthy) in many countries so you would have easy employment teaching
their kids. Cash, no taxes and about $50 an hour. Knowledge of the local
language is not required and in fact you earn more if you don't speak it
because the person you're teaching is forced to speak English only and
will
learn faster.Parents like their kids to be taught this way especially in
Russia, Taiwan etc I was just giving an example because men usually have
many money making skills even outside their field of expertise. Easy
choice,no?




"Meldon Fens" wrote in message
...
In their current form, Child Support laws are driving fathers into
poverty.
Non-custodial parents, primarily fathers, become unable to see their
kids
and the kids lose the child support they are entitled to. At the very
least,
low income fathers should be given some priority for government funding
and
for employment.

Here are the simple economics of child support and how economic
oppression
ruins fathers' lives and any chance at normalcy.

Let's take an average person earning $30K per year.

Child Support is based on pre-tax income. At this level and in most
countries, he will be required to pay between $250 and $300 per month
per
child, equivalent to between $3000 and $3600 per year. He is taxed in
most
countries at approximately %20 equivalent to $6000 (a conservative
estimate). As a result he will take home slightly more than $20,000.

Should he find himself in arrears with Child Support, he must pay up to
but
no more than half of his gross income. In this example the equivalent of
$15,000 per year. He is left with $5000 per year with which to live,
including paying for a vehicle to see his kids.

Child Support laws require that any reduction in child support must show
three criteria for actual hardship one being that the Child Support is
causing the hardship. To do so, he needs to make an application to court
which takes a considerable amount of financial resources. In fact, any
application to court which is not self-represented will be next to
financially impossible including defence of false allegations of
domestic
abuse or anything else the "mother" can think of to drive him into
abject
poverty.

Most fathers do anything they can to continue paying child support and
to
see their kids. Most would not argue that they should be contributing
financially toward their kids but there is no help available for these
low
income fathers. Something must be done for low income fathers facing
debtor's prison and losing contact with their kids. It is after all with
few
exceptions, in the child's best interest to continue to see their
fathers
but government and advocacy groups do nothing for low income fathers,
ignoring the best interests of the chidren.

How long can this continue?