Some years back I entered a dialogue with a man about the problems associated with
being a single custodial father. My recent column on the perceived bias of the custody
courts against fathers prompted this response from "North Dakota Dad." The
thoughts are his, the captions are mine.
A program of economic redistribution. "Although it is still not commonly
acceptable to say so, the reality of divorce in America is based upon a political agenda
generated by gender oriented groups.
"It is a thinly disguised program of economic redistribution which crassly uses
the plight of children to further a political goal. Now the fruits of this failed agenda
are coming home in the ruined lives of children because single mothers are failing to
raise these children adequately . . .
Spending by the custodial parent. "I don't feel I should have to give an
accounting of how I have spent my money for my children. First, the non-custodial mother
owes tens of thousands of dollars in child support arrearage and has not paid anything for
years. My children are properly fed, clothed, housed, cared for and educated and absent
evidence of neglect, neither the courts nor my ex-wife should have the right to open my
financial records to see how I have spent every dime I have made.
"This accountability is just another 'control' issue, which is one of the divorce
elements in most divorces, and my ex-spouse, simply by virtue of being divorced from me,
should not have unlimited access to my finances for eighteen years or more . . . I agree
if there is evidence of chemical abuse, neglect or financial irresponsibility by the
custodial parent, the courts should be empowered to examine this issue.
Joint custody. "Although it sounds good on paper, in most cases it is simply
unworkable. A few divorced parents, perhaps about 10 percent, can make it work with
considerable sacrifice by both parents. In the other 90 percent, there are too many
examples of obstructionism, control issues and outright violations to make this work.
"Joint custody is one of those issues which attempts to remedy the symptoms of
divorce without addressing the actual problem - divorce is just too darned attractive an
alternative under current law. John Guidabaldi points out there are too many financial
enticements for divorce which interfere with the normal problem-solving in marital
relationships which should be encouraged.
"The policy of the law, although intended to protect children of divorced parents,
actually encourages divorce through economic incentives to divorce. These incentives cross
the economic spectrum, from increased welfare benefits to single mothers through awarding
the house and child support in middle class families to the custodial parent . . .
"Divorce - and marriage - should be harder to get. The social stigma of divorce
and out-of-wedlock childbirth needs to be reattached.
"Most of all, divorce needs to change from the view that somebody gets
rich. Marriage and divorce should not be seen like a personal injury automobile
accident, where money and assets are transferred from one party to another due to an
injury by negligence or willful misconduct. Money and assets to support children of
divorce need to follow the children, not the custodial parent . . . People have to
get the message that if there isn't enough money for a family before divorce, there
certainly isn't going to be more money afterward.
Deadbeat Moms and enforcement of court orders. "Since I am also a custodial
parent, I can add that the child enforcement agencies, which are funded by our tax
dollars, don't bother enforcing child support against delinquent, non-custodial mothers.
Nationally, non-custodial mothers are required to pay significantly less for child support
than fathers, and significantly less is ever paid.
"I am owed tens of thousands of dollars by the non-custodial mother to support my
two children, know here she is living, can describe her assets, and can identify her
sources of income, but child support enforcement agencies still refuse to even attempt to
collect child support arrearage . . .
"Various excuses I have been given for not attempting to collect child support
have included being unable to locate the non-custodial mother - she refused to answer her
mail; . . . requiring me to prove "maternity" and stating other states refused
to collect even though she lived in the state for six months last year.
"Perhaps most indicative of the inherent unfairness of this system is that every
time I call the child support enforcement agency, I have to explain to the receptionist or
the case worker that I am not some deadbeat dad, but the person to whom child support is
owed. This institutional attitude infects every aspect of child support enforcement.
The disposable parent. "But being a non-custodial father means that you are
disposable parent, the one parent who is literally thrown away from the family and deemed
unnecessary - except as a source of income. I grieve for the 'North Dakota reader' because
as much as he may want to be an involved parent, his involvement in his children's lives
has effectively ended, his rights measured by a legal system designed to separate him from
his children.
"I feel society is becoming more comfortable with the idea of custodial fathers,
but the law has a long way to catch up with the concept of equality and fairness for
men."