Dangerous Women Channel

Roy Sheppard, co-author of "That Bitch: Protect Yourself Against Women with Malicious Intent" along with Mary Cleary of Amen.IE has put together a Youtube Channel and website.

Among one of the most useful ideas was this Pre-Marriage Due Dilligence Checklist workbook that is almost humorous in it's un-PC attitude of  advocating "Full Disclosure" by blind couples in their race to altar.  It is done from the point of view of men who are often pursued by "gold diggers".


Here is Roy's introductory video.

Swedish Viewpoint on Family Law

Remarkable!   Except for the Swedish accent - it could be Canada.  My thanks to Daddy Sverige.

The rise of mid-life lesbians?

I kid you not - preceded by the outing of Meridith BAXTER (Micheal J. FOX's mom on 1980's Family Ties TV show) the article can not congratulate themselves enough for the new improvement to "women's liberation".  It refers to the many middle aged women who are joyously escaping dead-end marriages and children in a new wave of late-flowering lesbians.

Actress Sharon STONE claims she has had her best dates with butch dykes because "they know how to take control.  Men, on the other hand, she declared, have become “much more ‘fem’. They don’t know who to be and how to get their life together, and they can’t make a decision, and I find that such a turn-off."

Hopefully their abandoned husbands will get a nice settlement out of them?   And - in the intrest of equal time - this other article may temper the celebration.

Birth mother loses child custody to former lesbian partner

MONTPELIER, Vt. Dec 29, 2009 — The birth mother of a 7-year-old Virginia girl must transfer custody of the child to the woman’s former lesbian partner, a Vermont judge has ruled.   Vermont Family Court Judge William Cohen ordered Lisa Miller of Winchester, Va., to turn over daughter Isabella to Janet Jenkins of Fair Haven at 1 p.m. Friday at the Virginia home of Jenkins’ parents.

Miller and Jenkins were joined in a Vermont civil union in 2000. Isabella was born to Miller through artificial insemination in 2002. The couple broke up in 2003, and Miller moved to Virginia, renounced homosexuality and became an evangelical Christian.   In the Dec. 22 order denying Miller’s request to delay the transfer of Isabella, Cohen wrote: “It appears that Ms. Miller has ceased contact with her attorneys and disappeared with the minor child.”   

Liberty Counsel attorneys who have represented Miller in the past did not immediately respond to telephone messages left Tuesday by The Associated Press.    A listing for Lisa Miller in Winchester, Va., says the phone line has been temporarily disconnected at the customer’s request.    Jenkins’ attorney, Sarah Star, said she hopes Miller is simply not communicating with her attorneys but plans to comply with the order.

“It is Ms. Jenkins’ intent when she has custody of Isabella to allow as liberal contact as is possible with her other mother,” Star said Tuesday.    When Cohen dissolved the civil union, he awarded custody to Miller but granted liberal visitation rights to Jenkins.    The supreme courts of Virginia and Vermont ruled in favor of Jenkins, saying the case was the same was a custody dispute between a heterosexual couple. The case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear arguments on it.

Memorium to David Andrew BAGLEY (1973SEP25 - 2001NOV05)

On Nov 5, 2001 David Andrew BAGLEY was murdered in Latrobe PA. All available evidence pointed pretty convincingly to his former girlfriend, Shirley TURNER - with whom he had just ended their relationship.  Before she was taken into custody and properly investigated for her role in the crime, she fled to her native Newfoundland.  But that was not the end of her crimes.  Extradition proceeding were started but it became known she was pregnant with BAGLEY's baby.  This delayed extradition proceedings  until this baby - to be named Zachary - was born on Aug 18, 2002.

As time drew on many odd behaviours by TURNER became known to those professionals and personal acquaintances around her.   Yet not one seemed inclined to "connect the dots" about her poor mental state.  In particular, as TURNER was a MD and had friends who were also health professionals it seems remarkable than no-one flagged her troubled behaviour as a potential risk for her new baby.  In an exhaustive review of the case by Justice MARKESTEYN issued in 2006, he described TURNER as "in denial about her own state" and that "her own lawyer seemed unaware about her emotional fragility".

After Zachary was born the extradition process was put in motion again and due to the lengthy process, discussions and appeals - the final decision was received around August 15, 2003 as Zachary was almost 13mths.  With the extradition looming, TURNER late on the evening of Aug 17, 2003 drove with her young son near the home of a recent paramour who had also rejected her, gave her infant son Ativan and jumped into the ocean drowning them both.

I would probably not be marking these deaths - despite the terrible tragedy it represented - except to highlight the strange tunnel-vision of authorities who failed to hold this women to the same standards as we know would apply to men.  I suggest such inattention can not be rationally explained as anything but gender discrimination and happens all too often, usually the lethal detriment of men.

In general the whole sorry case is outlined here, GLNL Turner Review and Investigation - Sept 2006. 

• the preferential treatment of women after divorce allowed TURNER to gain financially from child support payments despite not actually looking after or maintaining full custody of her children.
• she married and divorced twice with 3 children.
• she was unfaithful during her marriages with a number of men - often 9-12 yrs younger - which likely contributed to the failure of her marriages.
  
• a poor and neglectful mother who was the subject of child abuse reports - with no consequences
  
• according to her residency supervisor (who himself was a doctor) she exhibited "manipulative, guiltless and psychopathic" behaviour on many occasions. 
• exhibited many classical DV "controlling" behaviour in many of her personal relationships - stalking, persistent phone-calls, unconscionable jealousy, female "territoriality" (highly exclusionary of current and former female relationships), dramatic suicidal threats and gestures etc.

With hindsight, Shirley TURNER was "unbalanced" but as MARKESTEYN stated in his report, she was so skilled at deceptions it would have taken diligent study to determine her "delinquent parenting history or her - in my reserved opinion - seriously dysfunctional psyche".  A sad case at the hands of an truly psychotic women.

[On March 11, 2009 a longtime friend of Andrew BAGLEY screened a documentary film about this whole saga - it was titled  "Dear Zachary" and I am posting on my "Movie's To Watch" sidebar.]

[References: here and here or http://www.dearzachary.com/]

Equal Parenting Amendment - Press Conference Highlights

I apologize for this tardy post.  It has taken me some time to get a copy of this 2009 Jun17 Press Conference held following the First Reading of PMB-C422, introduced by Saskatchewan-Wanuskewin MP, Mr. Maurice VELLACOTT (Cons) with the co-sponsorship of two Quebec members - Laval-Les Iles MP, Mme. Raymonde FALCO (Lib) and Levis-Bellchasse MP, M. Steven BLANEY (Cons).

It is worthwhile viewing all of them as I do not think the Press Conference was widely broadcast and it is quite interesting to see the broad public and political support in Quebec.   In addition, Quebec spokesperson Lise BILODEAU,  ANCQ (L’ACTION DES NOUVELLES CONJOINTES ET NOUVEAUX CONJOINTS DU QUÉBEC) as well as Mme. FALCO and M. BLANEY made of number of important points (in French) in their brief comments.   In addition, the only questions asked was from a member of the french Press - indicating the high level of interest by Quebec on the issue of Equal Parenting

Here are the links:
Clip 1 - Introduction by MP Maurice VELLACOTT (5:52)
Clip 2 - comments by Kristin TITUS, Co-President CEPC (Cdn Equal Parenting Council) (2:49)
Clip 3 - comments by John MENEER, Director CEPC (2:11)
Clip 4 - comments (in french) by Lise BILODEAU, President ANCQ (2:14)
Clip 5 - comments (in french) by MP Raymonde FALCO (3:53)
Clip 6 - comments (in french) by MP Steven BLANEY (3.21) 
Clip 7 - Closing Remarks by MP Maurice VELLACOTT (2:13)
Clip 8 - Q&A (in french) (7:40)

Please refer to other previous posts on this topic - here, here and here.

Equal Parenting (EP) Amendment for Divorce Act

As many of you know, MP Maurice VELLACOTT introduced his PMB C422 Equal Parenting Amendment in Parliament just before the summer recess on June 16. Here are some of the reasons CEPC* gave to support EP. Here is a copy of the Hansard and a backgrounder.

Australia introduced a new Family Law Act in 2006 that included the presumption of Equal Parenting. Here is an interview with Chief Justice Diana BRYANT of the Australian Family Court on how their experience is going.

Many men's groups have been pressing for EP in the hopes that it will create a better climate between couples who split up. Currently mothers achieve sole/joint custody with primary residence in something like 90% of contested divorces.

Dr. Edward Kruk of FIRA (Father Research Involvement Institute) based in Guelph ON also released a report that reviewed recent academic Literature which notes the vitally important role of fathers in their childrens lives, and advocates for correcting imbalances that have seen their role minimized or excluded.

*Canadian Equal Parenting Council
Fathers have be marginalized from their children's lives by our Family Law (FLAW) process. We think the evidence has been growing for decades but no one has had the political will to make change happen.

Here are some international statistics that indicate the harm to children when their fathers are not included in their lives. They show a litany of social mis-behaviours that threatens our very social fabric.

• Massachusetts Fathers & Families
• Charting Parenthood (USA)
  
• ACFC Shared Parenting Facts and Fictions
• Rainbow International (US & UK)
• The Fatherless Family (2002 UK CIVITAS)
  

How much evidence do we need to take action in reforming Family Law.


[Addendum: July 29 - I encourage everyone to write letters of Support for C422 to your MP's, Senators and MLA's. (Admittedly, the MLA's will claim it is not their responsibility, but I suggest you ask them to consider similar changes to the various provincial Family Law Acts that affect common-law relationships.) To help kickstart this effort, here is a draft letter (in RTF format - just add your MP/Senator/MLA's name + your contact information) and link to Parliaments MP's/Senators contact info - they also are in the sidebar along with links to all Provincial/Territorial Government MLA's/members.

Things to remember for effective communication with your MP/MLA:

1) Include your address + tel# so they can keep track of your comment/complaint.
2) Keep letter short and to the point - 1 page and no more than 3 points.
3) Tell them a solution/response/action you want taken.

Remember that a any Canadian can send a letter to his/her MP without postage simply by addressing to any MP/Senator at: House of Commons/The Senate, Parliament Buildings, Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6. I have found such a method will always get a reply/response (although it can take a long time). If you send to a constituency office, you will have to apply a stamp.]

The Trial by Franz KAFKA

The term "Kafkaesque" is often used to describe existential, ridiculous and surreal personal encounters with government bureaucracy and they derive mostly from the selection of titles written by Franz KAFKA (1883-1924). These include such classics as "The Metamorphosis", "The Castle" and posthumously "The Trial".

KAFKA was a Jew, uniquely placed to comment on the queasy state of seeping antisemitism which grew to official policy under the Nazi's. Much of what he wrote described the worst fears of a totalitarian state. His popular novel "The Trial" was one of his many unfinished works at his death and was not published until 13 years later - right after the Nazi's took power. Such timing lead it to be incorrectly considered a satire on the absurdity of the Third Reich's absolute disregard for natural justice, despite a veneer of law.

Here is a critical synopsis of the book.

The Trial is a fascinating, truly terrifying performance but leaves an impression of incompleteness, of narrative threads calling out for repair.

The novel begins with one of the most famous openings in modern literature. It is the rising bank manager Joseph K.'s thirtieth birthday, and two sinister-looking men claiming to have court authorization to arrest him rudely accost him in his bed that morning. Someone must surely have falsely accused him of a crime. The two warders examine his clothes with a view to carting off what they can. Our protagonist K. wonders what authority these warders represent. The shock is immense, for as we are told: "He lived in a country with a legal constitution, there was universal peace, all the laws were in force; who dared seize him in his own dwelling?"

K. is told that he is free to proceed to work that day but must await a summons. Sure enough he is called to attend his first interrogation, the process of formally and systematically questioning a suspect in order to elicit incriminating responses. This odd affair takes place in a courtroom found in a maze of poorly ventilated, nondescript, disorientating office cubicles. We quickly learn that in this system, there is no due process of law, no rights whatsoever that an accused can rely upon, and that the process can be interminable. Kafka is offering us an exaggerated account of Austro-Hungarian criminal procedure -- no right to remain silent, etc. -- but also a grim prophecy of a situation in which the courts will be accountable to no citizen and will rule as arbitrarily as they wish.

K.'s uncle turns up at the bank to advise him to consult the eminent lawyer Huld ("Grace" in German). Growing ever-more desperate, our once-respectable hero dutifully attends before the lawyer, who claims to have important connections to the court, but who we immediately suspect will be unlikely to affect the outcome of these rigged proceedings.

The Trial is in important respects a symbolic account of the manner in which ordinary citizens will find their lives shattered by a totalitarian legal system which will rule by brute force under a veneer of legal rules. Kafka conveys the sheer horror and bewilderment of ordinary, apolitical citizens, who realize too late that a new regime has targeted them for punishment not for what they have done, but for who they are.

Perhaps the most tragic aspect of Kafka's chilling depiction of the ease in which a totalitarian regime can use the judicial machinery and a large bureaucracy to strip citizens of their rights is the way in which citizens respond with a mixture of fear and gullibility. Somehow, they think, there must be a reason for the laying of charges against their fellow citizens. In any event, there is no point in getting involved. No one in The Trial comes to Joseph K.'s aid in any meaningful manner, including the lawyers he encounters. K. himself, when he encounters others who have been charged with unknown offences, fails to make common cause with to join with in purposes and aims. And so a desolate end awaits the protagonist and by implication anyone else singled out by the sinister forces of the emerging totalitarian state.

To anyone who has been involved with Family Court, this sounds vaguely familiar.

Grim news

These recent news story's should indicate that existing "familiy policies" are creating a crisis for many in our society. Consider:

Neighbours shocked as remains of three babies found in London, Ont., home

Natalie Alcoba, National Post - Published: Tuesday, June 09, 2009LONDON -- When investigators were first alerted to the boxes of bloody clothing in the basement of a southwestern Ontario home, they believed they were looking at the decomposed remains of a baby. On Tuesday, police said forensic testing determined that the remains were in fact that of three children. They said further investigation is needed to determine the babies' gender and ages -- and how they died.Jennifer Sinn, 32, has been charged with three counts each of concealing the body of a child and offering an indignity to a dead human body.

Frenchwoman on trial for 'freezer baby' murders

Agence France-Presse - Published: Tuesday, June 09, 2009

TOURS, France -- A Frenchwoman who confessed to killing three of her newborn babies, hiding two of them in the freezer of her expat home in South Korea, broke down in tears at the opening of her trial Tuesday.In a case that has gripped France, Veronique Courjault, 41, faces life in jail after admitting smothering two baby boys born secretly in Seoul in 2002 and 2003, and a third child born in France in 1999.

L. A. detective charged in cold-case murder accused of killing ex-boyfriend's wife in 1986

Agence France-Presse - Published: Wednesday, June 10, 2009

A veteran Los Angeles Police Department detective appeared in court yesterday after being charged with murdering the wife of an ex-boyfriend 23 years ago, officials said. Stephanie Lazarus, 49, a seasoned LAPD detective with several high-profile cases under her belt, is alleged to have beaten and shot dead her rival, Sherri Rasmussen, in February, 1986. She also left bite marks on the body. The crime had remained unsolved until cold case officers re-examined files from the original investigation into the killing of the 29-year-old hospital nursing director, three months after her marriage to John Ruetten.

Former police officer guilty of raping ex-wife - Home Invasion

Mike McIntyre, National Post - Published: Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The Crown is seeking up to 17 years in prison for a former Winnipeg police officer who spent days carefully plotting the violent home invasion and rape of his terminally ill former wife. Sentencing began yesterday for the 53-year-old, who cannot be named under a court order to protect the identity of the victim. He has pleaded guilty to break, enter to commit aggravated sexual assault.An agreed statement of facts tendered in court reveals details about the July, 2008, attack, which came after the man had already been arrested five previous times since 2006 for breaching a protection order the victim obtained against him.

Family offers secrecy with $170k 'bonus' for Girl, 9, Vanished; 'We want to know what happened to Cedrika

Graeme Hamilton, National Post - Published: Wednesday, June 10, 2009

For nearly two years, the parents of Cedrika Provencher have suffered the anguish of not knowing what happened to their nine-year-old daughter, who vanished on a summer evening while playing near her Trois-Rivieres, Que., home. The massive police search, the ubiquitous "Missing" posters and the promise of a $100,000 reward have all led nowhere. Now, as the police investigation continues, the family is taking the unusual step of enlisting a prominent lawyer to act as an independent investigator. Guy Bertrand yesterday appealed for anyone with knowledge of the missing girl's fate to come forward, dangling a $170,000 "good-deed bonus." The family's hope is that the nightmare of uncertainty will end. The hitch is that even if Mr. Bertrand identifies Cedrika's abductor, he says he will be bound by professional secrecy law and will not provide the information to police.

RCMP gambles on 'terrifying' child kidnap warning

Sam Cooper And Jack Keating - National Post Published: Thursday, June 11, 2009

Parents in a British Columbia community are rattled after police issued an unusual warning that an Asian child will be kidnapped from an elementary school in the next few weeks. Families in Richmond, B. C., whose population is more than 50% Asian, are now largely in a state of panic, fearful that the child to be abducted is their own. The alert asks parents to be vigilant in guarding their children. "That kind of warning would make anyone who had an Asian child, or any child for that matter, extremely anxious and overprotective," said Dr. Sam Ozersky, a Toronto psychiatrist. "It would be extremely provocative in terms of generating anxiety and fear."Dr. Mike Webster, a psychologist who consults with police forces around the world on kidnapping negotiations, said the unusual warning must have been justified by credible information.Police shed little light on the threat, saying they received the information on the possible kidnapping Tuesday afternoon.

These are all beyond shocking and disturbing.

• How is it possible that a 32yr old women would become pregnant three times and no one is aware or asks about the absence of the children? (friends, family - boyfriend) Does "my body - my choice" become "don't ask - don't tell"? What kind of psychopathology describes these women - given that the fair sex has accredited themselves with a richer emotional spectrum to "inferior" men, which I guess accounts for their higher rates of mental illness including depression?

• Are women so bent on having children, and society so set on accommodating them - that we never consider it possible they are unsuitable for having or raising children until it is too late? This applies to Octomom as well as Veronique Courjault.

• That a "cold-case" murder suspect would be a LAPD officer is bad enough but is it not obvious that "crimes of passion" are just as likely for women to commit as men? Remember Lisa NOWAK, former NASA 2006 Shuttle Discovery mission specialist who attempted to murder a rival for the affections of another officer. Police and military are able to use skills acquired "on the job" to help intimidate spouses.

• Parental or Stranger Abductions? Which is worse? Do single mothers find themselves involved with unsavoury men out of desperation? Does this not put their children at greater risk? Are they held to account to the father of their child if it turns out badly? Recently a Toronto women called police to report a "stranger abduction" of her daughter. The police found the man and it was revealed it was her husband. She was charged with "mischief".

Do Judges make justice unaffordable or not?

Family Law is a mess. Only the courts do not recognize it.

On Nov 18, Karen SELICK wrote this op-ed piece critical of a recent Supreme Court refusal to hear an appeal of a Ontario Family Court decision that over-rode a pre-nuptial contract because of inaccurate property values.

On Nov 24, John T. SIRTASH, counsel to Bnai B'rith Canada Family Law responded with "Don't blame the judges" - which I took as an odd instance of flattery except he has been a lawyer for 27 years and so is clearly angling for his appointment to the bench.

I fully support Karen's points. It was irrelevant that the husband-to-be misrepresented in good faith the "true value"1 of his assets/property owned before he agreed to marry his wife-to-be (the gold-digger) as she signed a pre-nup disavowing any claim to such assets/property. Further he made it clear that he would not have made a marriage proposal otherwise.

Mr. LeVan was happy to remain in a committed common-law relationship with this women. However in a common-law relationship - unlike formal matrimony2 - she could not have gained any rights to any of his assets/property owned before they began their relationship.

Comments in both are worth reading, especially Karen SELICK's rejoinder to SIRTASH on these points in following the "Comment" section.


Footnotes:
1) Partially due to cost (estimated at $10,000) the husband did not bother to provide an "official" valuation of his personal business interests. Eventually these assets were proven to be worth $5.3 million and so obviously he was a wealthy man. His failure to provide an accurate valuation was construed as a "material" misrepresentation in the pre-nuptial contract. As the final indignity the husband was charged $500,000+ and the wife $244,753 for appraisals of both parties assets.

2) Common Law relationships are governed by Provincial Statutes that intentionally adopt lower social obligations (which itself is a highly debated subject depending on your gender) for the parties involved. A formal marriage must be registered under Federal Statute and holds to established traditions.

Minority Report - *New* Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines

Dr. Ned HOLSTEIN - Executive Director of Massachusetts Fathers and Families (MAFF), was a member of the Massachusetts Child Support Guideline Task Force and put together a dissenting opinion. Background information can be found at www.fathersandfamilies.org

It is his position that Child Support Guidelines should require payments sufficient for both parents to equitably meet the important needs of their children. Above those levels of support, additional, excessive child support orders impair the payor’s parenting and thus have adverse consequences for children that far outweigh the benefits.1

At issue is the negative effects of excessive child support orders. They diminish the standard of living children enjoy in the payor’s2 household. They alienate payors, require them to work excessive hours, and may force them to live far from their children, making parenting time impractical and potentially isolating children from friends and activities during such times. Very excessive child support orders may present payors with the constant threat of incarceration despite the best of intentions.

Here is a summary of key points:

Improvements

• Under federal law, Massachusetts must review its Guidelines not less than every four years, and revise them if it seems appropriate. Here are the new ones effective Jan 1, 2009. They must be next reviewed again by January 1, 2013. Existing orders and judgments less than three years old as of date of these guidelines shall not be modified unless the income of one or both parties changes or new circumstance warrants.3

• Determining the Child Support Guidelines has been given to the Chief Justice for Administration and Management (“CJAM”) Robert A. Mulligan. Over two years ago, Chief Justice Mulligan appointed a Task Force to advise him on the revision. This process has been significantly improved to be more open and transparent as A) The twelve members who advised CJAM are no longer secret and included Dr. Ned HOLSTEIN to represent men and payors views (9 lawyers included 6 women and men until one member retired) and B) 13 public hearings were held across the state, hundreds of non-custodial parents and others testifying. C) In addition to a majority report by the Task Force, a minority report with Dissenting Viewpoints was presented. (www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport)

• Principle 3 which encouraged the courts “To provide the standard of living the child would have enjoyed had the family been intact” was dropped from the 2009 Guidelines. Despite being noble it was rarely achieved in practice without impoverishing the Payor, which is not in a child’s best interest. In the 2009 Guidelines it now reads "to meet the child’s survival needs in the first instance, but to the extent either parent enjoys a higher standard of living, to entitle the child to enjoy that higher standard."
  

• The $20,000 "head start" for custodial parents that disregarded the first $20,000 of income in child support calculations has been abandoned. This provision no longer exists. All income of the custodial parent now counts.

• The automatic 10% increase in the child support order for children age 13 or over has been eliminated.

• In the past it was extremely difficult to get a child support order modified by the court unless one's income varied by at least 20%. Any change in income is now sufficient to qualify one to be heard in court for a modification. [Editor: Obviously the burden of time/cost just to appear in court will disabuse frivolous cases.]
  

• As shared parenting is the best arrangement for children, the Guidelines should adjust child support orders when there is shared parenting. This principle will be adopted in the 2009 Guidelines for cases where parenting is equal or approximately equal.

• In the past, the child care credit was only available to the custodial parent, and the cost of child care could be deducted regardless of the reason for putting the child into care. MAFF won provisions that the deduction for child care expenses may be available to either party, and to qualify, child care must in most cases be for the purpose of gainful employment. [Editor: Quite similar to tax rules in Canada, this means existing child-care and health-care expenses can only be applied against employment income.]

• Under existing Guidelines, whomever pays for Health Insurance recovers half of that cost through an offsetting decrease in their child support order. Now that offset will only be in the range of about 20% to 25%. This will also be the case with child care expenses. [Editor: I like this alot as this is a rough approximation of the net after tax advantage of deducting such health-care expenses BUT more importantly, it introduces a co-sharing of responsibility for these expenses which may mitigates irresponsible "expense downloading".]
  

• A major issue for Payors has been the extreme financial distress that excessive child support orders can create. Under current legislation, if a payor took a second job or made overtime it became counted at the time of a subsequent modification of the child support order and he was no better off. Many payors found themselves unable to work their way out of an arrears situation. This has been relaxed somewhat under the new guidelines to allow a judge to exclude such temporary income if it is unlikely to continue in the future, or consider if the extra work is a requirement of the job, and the evaluate the impact of the overtime on a parenting plan at the time of the initial order. If however a payor or recipient obtains a secondary job or begins to work overtime after a child support order is entered, it shall not be considered in a future support order.
  

No Change

• For the very poorest payors there is no letup. For someone earning only $7,800 per year, already in poverty, must pay $1,638 in child support for one child, pushing him/her close to homelessness. [Editor: In his Minority Report Dr. HOLSTEIN goes into greater details about the negative effects on low income payors. The guidelines simply require desperately poor men to make token payments they cannot afford and that make little difference to the recipient when compared to the level of social assistance received.]

• There is no cap on child support for very wealthy Payors. They may still be paying for “three ponies” for the child by court order.

• The expenses of second families still cannot be used as a reason to decrease an existing child support order, although such expenses still can be used as a defense to a request to increase the child support order. Thus, the well-being of children of second families is often ignored by the Guidelines. A child of a second family is often raised in a household that is quite less well off than the household of the first child, to which child support is being paid.

• Massachusetts remains the only state other than Hawaii that allows child support to age 23. Except where there are circumstances like "special needs" it is discriminatory to insist divorced parents provide for the post-secondary education of their children when intact families do not have that legal duty. The Task Force declined to place "de minimus" rules for college expenses that can be ordered or recommend reasonable limitations on the payments.
  

Steps Backward

• Overall child support levels remain too high. It is clear that Recipients usually have a substantially better standard of living than a Payor unless she/he has little or no earnings of her own. Here are some comparisons:

Table MR1: Low Income Groups - 2009 Guideline Increases
Low Income - A minimum wage payor earns $16,640 annually. If the recipient has no earnings, the proposed child support order will be $4,004. After paying income and payroll taxes, the payor will have $9,978 to live on for the year. At $832 per month rent, the payor will have no money left. The proposed child support order of $4,004 is 13% higher than the $3,546 currently required. (refer to Table MR1: Low Income Groups - 2009 Guideline Increases). Whereas the current guideline order is unpayable, the newly proposed guideline order is still more unpayable.

• The Guidelines simply require poor people to make payments they cannot afford and which make little difference to the recipient relative to the level of public support. Federal data bear this out as about 70% of the total child support arrears nationwide are owed
  by people earning less than $10,000 per year, and 96% is owed by those earning less than $40,000 per year. Child support debt is almost entirely a problem of poverty. Child support orders for the poor should be lowered, not raised.
  

Table MR2: Middle Income Groups - Relative Standards of Living

• Middle-Class - Even these payors will have difficulty remaining active parents to their children under the 2009 Guidelines. In above Table MR2: Middle Income Groups - Relative Standards of Living “Disposable Income” (DI) is the money left after paying Income and payroll taxes, and after paying (or receiving) child support. In the examples above in which the payor and recipient earn equal amounts, the payor will have only about half the disposable income of the recipient after taxes and child support transfers. Even a payor who earns three times as much as the recipient will have less disposable income than the recipient (85%). In addition, the proposed increases will be large - double and triple for many.
  

• Massachusetts is in the paradoxical situation that the 2009 Guidelines have adopted a number of principles and concepts for which MAFF has long fought to achieve, but the actual amounts of child support have made an inequitable situation worse in most cases.

Footnotes:
1) To some extent children of divorce who experience "asymmetric support" (child support that provides children proportional financial benefits without proportional responsibility) are denied important lesson in life that intact families still enjoy - those oldtime virtues of thrift, self-denial and placing needs of the collective family first.

2) Payors in Massachusetts are known as "debtors" in Alberta (and there is something not so subtle behind that).

3) Other relevant supporting information for The Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines can be found here, here, and here .

References:
Massachusetts Child Support Task Force - Majority Report
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/task-force-report.pdf
Massachusetts Child Support Task Force - Minority Report
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/minority-report.pdf
*New* 2009 Guidelines
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/guidelines.pdf
*New* 2009 Guidelines Worksheet
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/worksheet-child-support-guidelines.pdf
*New* 2009 Guidelines Reference Tables
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/child-support-guidelines-chart.pdf