Some Sensible Questions about Child Support Debtors’ Prisons

http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/...btors-prisons/

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_159775.asp
Woman Asks Some Sensible Questions about Child Support Debtors’ Prisons
Saturday, October 10, 2009
By Robert Franklin, Esq.
I was riding in a car with a couple of old friends the other day. They're
both educated and smart. One of them is a woman with whom I attended law
school. At one point she opened a topic of conversation with the words "I
know we don't have debtors' prisons anymore..." which prompted me to
interrupt and, in no uncertain terms, point out to her that we do in fact
have debtors' prisons for one crime only - non-payment of child support. As
I said, she's a smart person; she reads newspapers, etc., but was still able
to hold the opinion that we've abolished debtor's prisons. It's interesting
how difficult it is for people, even smart, informed ones, to notice when
facts contradict previously held opinions.

Anyway, here's a letter that makes some simple basic points about our
current day debtors' prisons (The Chattanoogan, 9/28/09). It reminds us of
what many people, my friend included, learned in school - that one of the
reasons debtors' prisons were abolished was that debtors can't make good on
what they owe when they can't earn a living.

The writer doesn't seem to know about some rather arcane facts, like that
63% of child support debtors report under $10,000 in earnings per year, or
that even the Office of Child Support Enforcement admits that family court
judges routinely order support levels that the non-custodial parent can't
pay.

What she does know, however, is that her next door neighbor is a good father
who does a lot for his daughter and obviously cares deeply for her. She
knows he lost his job, genuinely can't pay what he owes, won't be able to
until he's re-employed and won't find a job sitting in jail. More
importantly, she knows that every day he's in jail is a day his daughter
isn't with him.

And that's the unspoken farce of debtors' prison for child support
obligors - we care so much about the wellbeing of children that we take
their fathers from them and put them in prison. That's sensible only if you
believe that fathers have nothing to offer children except money. And that,
come to think of it, is a pretty fair description of public policy with
regard to fathers and children.

There are probably parents out there with plenty of money to pay child
support who just refuse to. According to Sanford Braver's reliable
analysis, there aren't many, but there are probably some. I don't mind
putting them in jail. If all that's standing between a child and support is
someone's signature, which that someone refuses to give, I say the slammer
is a good place for him/her until the wisdom of paying arrives.

But those parents aren't common. What we do now - incarcerating parents who
can't pay - is more about our mindless outrage at fathers than about
supporting children. The argument against debtors' prisons is the same as
it's always been - they don't help and they in fact do harm, as the letter
linked to clearly shows.

The sensible approach to all of this is equally shared parenting in which
parents have equal time with children and share the expenses of childcare
equally. But until we get there, family courts must (a) start establishing
support orders that parents can actually pay, (b) start enforcing visitation
orders (that's the main cause of refusal to pay), and (c) establish summary
procedures for child support modification that reflect changed
circumstances.

Oh, and (d) only send people to prison who can pay but don't.

[Dusty - (d) only send people to prison who can pay but don't - only after
proving it with hard evidence, not just someone's gut feeling or say-so.]