How depressing - this week in the newspaper

It started on Sunday (Father's Day) with this column by Leonard
Pitts:

http://www.miamiherald.com/851/story/141138.html

I usually like Pitts' column but this one upsets me. While he says the
most important thing is being there, he offers zero insight into why
Dads might not be there and ends with "You may fool yourself. You
don't fool your children at all."
Way to go, PItts, for that condescending admonishment to fathers as if
they are always to blame in these situations. As a syndicated
columnist who reaches millions, he needs to do another column that
calls the system to task for creating and encouraging situations that
produce fathers who are mere visitors, if allowed even that. I intend
to write him, challenging him to ask fathers to write to him about
their personal experiences battling a system that is stacked against
them and only sees them as a dollar sign. Perhaps after reading
thousands of letters from fathers who have been thru hell trying,
often unsuccessfully, to remain a significant factor in thier
childrens lives, perhaps then he will write another column on this
subject....

You can email Mr.Pitts at and/or leave a
comment under the article at the link above.

On Tuesday, this Letter to the Editor appeared in my local paper:

----------
Custody arrangements are a two-way street

Why do deadbeat dads have more say than the moms who support their
kids? My ex-son-in-law uses the court order to see his kids, but
forgets the court order to support the same kids. He has not paid a
dime since before April 2006, but insists on using the order to see
them.

My daughter busts her butt to support two children and he gets all the
benefits of seeing them. She is not on welfare, so why are my
grandchildren any different than any others?

All children deserve to receive the money the court allows, so why do
some people get away without paying for their responsibilities? It
takes two people to make children. In this day and age it takes two to
support them. Something needs to be done about deadbeat dads and only
we can make that happen.

Lori G
----------

Now today, this story was on the front page and page 3:

----------
50 Cent in child support court battle

CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. (AP) - The $25,000 a month in child support and
household expenses that rapper 50 Cent pays to the mother of his 10-
year-old son is not enough, says the boy's mother, Shaniqua Tompkins.

The rapper is "worth tens and tens of millions of dollars," said her
attorney, Raoul Felder.

The parents of young Marquise Jackson are wrangling over the issue in
family court in this Long Island community, where 50 Cent arrived
Friday in an armored SUV equipped with a satellite dish.

50 Cent no longer needs to worry about the choice he famously
expressed on a 2004 album - "Get Rich or Die Tryin'."

With his G-Unit record label, clothing line, ring tones and other
enterprises, 50 Cent - whose real name is Curtis Jackson - reeled in
an estimated $33 million in the past year, according to Forbes. He has
sold more than 11 million albums and has a new album, "Curtis," due
out in September.

His lawyer, Brett Kimmel, called Tompkins "insatiable."

"Her demands keep escalating," he told the Daily News.

Closed-door hearings on the child-support case are scheduled to
continue this coming week
----------

It's not supposed to matter how much the Dad is worth ("...The rapper
is "worth tens and tens of millions of dollars," said her
attorney...") it's the kids and being a good Daddy to them by being
there for them that's supposed to matter isn't it? I wonder what Mr.
Pitts would say to this.....


Then in Today's, letters to the Editor, we had:

----------
It's time for action on deadbeat dads

In response to the letter from Lori Groner ("Custody arrangements are
a two-way street," Tuesday): I agree with her 100 percent. I am also a
single working mom. I have been supporting my daughter since birth.
She is now going to be 9 years old. We have only ever received child
support three times. The last support payment was $75 on May 9, 2003.
He is in the arrears to the sum of $35,000 and nobody in the judicial
system does anything about it. They say they can't locate him but yet
he is still living locally.

I think it is sick how these low-life, scumbag, deadbeat dads get away
without supporting their children. It's about time they step up to the
plate and take care of their responsibilities. It's about time that
all of us out there who have deadbeat dads that fail to pay their
child support get together and form a group to take care of this
situation.

A couple of weeks ago Robin's Law was introduced to the Pennsylvania
House of Representatives to target the domestic violence offenders.
Under that bill, one click of the mouse would reveal the domestic
violence registry. Why can't we do something like that for deadbeat
dads? Why not the covers of pizza boxes and milk cartons like they do
for missing and exploited children?

We need the support of our local legislators. Obviously, suspending
their driver's licenses isn't working. It's time we come up with
something else to force them into paying. Why can't we have a column
in The Express-Times to post information about deadbeats like they
post for the most wanted for Warren and Northampton counties?

We need to band together and do something.

Pam V
----------

and

----------
Child custody system stacks deck against dads

For those of us dads who know in our hearts that the term "deadbeat"
does not fit us, the reality is a system designed to make us this
way.

In a child custody case, a dad is expected to pay support, provide
health care insurance and assume responsibilities of which we have no
voice or input. This is the extent of our automatically assigned
"rights."

If we want anything more, or are not satisfied that this is all there
is to being a dad, then we become a nuisance to a system that then may
give up visitation with our children. How many dads out there deserve
and are happy with "visiting" their children? Why is it that the dad
has to fight for rights that the mother is automatically given?

"In the best interest of the child" is a term often heard during a
custody case. But how does the child learn that there may be a reason
that daddy is just a visitor, or that he does not come around very
often. And how does a child learn that daddy may truly love them, but
that even after piling up huge legal fees to gain more time and access
to them, that we are "only" the dad, that we are "expendable" and that
somehow this is the child's best interest?

Of course, I do not speak for all dads as each case should be judged
on its own merit. However, I am quite certain that there are dads out
there who do not deserve to be trapped in this situation.

We should all be heard by our legislators on this issue and stop
playing the role of the victim.

Roger A
----------

Note that these letters from the two angry Moms are about MONEY.
Neither mentions time (or lack of time) with the child on the father's
part as anything of concern, it's child support they're angry about.
It's child support they're all always angry about, always the money.
Going back to Pitts' column, where is all the anger over the time
factor???

Note that neither of the two women mentioned "Deadbeat" Moms. Just the
usual "Deadbeat Dad" term always used by ignorant folk who can't see
past thier singular experience to the bigger picture.

Note that Pam V wants a group to form to fight Deadbeat Dads, she
wants legislative action, she wants Deadbeat Dad registeries and
weekly columns and faces on pizza boxes. Is she flippin' kidding? Does
she not know that the government has already beaten down fathers with
the overreaching laws, that there are already hundreds or
organizations and agencies eager to help her chase money while the
father's get nothing?

(As a side note, I happened to look at NOW's website this week. It
made me physically ill; I can't comprehend the things they write or
how anyone, male or female, could possibly subscribe to their agenda!
What's needed is a NOM group as big as NOW to fight back!)

I'm rambling a bit, but want to add, in closing: Can you imagine a
flood of negative articles and letters about mothers coming out the
week of Mother's day??
Why is it that on Mother's day, Mothers are revered and put on a
pedestal, but Father's Day is seen as a time to attack Fathers?

Just ain't right I tell ya'.

System,

I have been a so-called deadbeat(read beatdead) for many years, I am now
age 53.
I have been in the shadows of the underground,
sometimes coming up for air only to be pursued
back to the depths. Recently, I have come up
for a little stinking air but soon I know that I'll
have to retreat once again, when they come
seeking half or more of my pathetic income.

My advice to hard-working, low income beatdead dads is to continue the
fight with
stealth and perserverance because to confront
the beast head-on is a mistake!! The fight is
won from the underground especially by those
with limited resources. A good example of this
is how the American revolutionaries fought the
British and also the French during the occupation of France during WWII.
Fighting
above-ground is not in the cards for most beatdead dads who have meager
resources!!