From: idqm400@indyvax.iupui.edu
Subject: Dr. Garrod's letter on child support
Organization: J. Random Misconfigured Site
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:20:40 GMT
X-Posted-From: indyvax.iupui.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

POSTING BY DALE MARMADUKE   IDQM400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU
           WITH PERMISSION.
STUDY AND REPORT BY DR. GARROD AND POSTED TO FREE-L.
 
 
From:         David Garrod <garrod@ECN.PURDUE.EDU>
 
On December 13, 1992 the local newspaper devoted an editorial, a full
page plus a further front page column to the claim that the cause of
child poverty in the U.S. is non-compliance and non-enforcement of
child support orders.  It claimed that all non-support paying fathers
should be thrown in jail until they learn their lessons.
I could have written that debtor`s jail was out-lawed 2 centuries ago.
I could have said that when a mother chooses not to work she gets
welfare, when a father looses a job he gets thrown in jail and that
this double-standard sexist system sucks.  But I chose to respond
as follows:
 
Letters to Editor,
Journal & Courier.
 
December 13, 1992
 
 
INCIDENCE OF CHILD POVERTY
 
     Your editorial of December 13 claimed a connection between
children in poverty and non-payment of child support.  That claim
is factually incorrect.
 
Poor children as a percent of all children:
 
In custody of:     1979          1989
Two parents         7.2%          6.8%
Neither parent       .8%           .5%
Father only          .3%           .6%
Mother only         8.3%         11.1%
 
TOTAL              16.6%         19.0%
 
The mother only category can be further broken down:
 
Mother only:
  Divorced          2.5%          3.0%
  Separated         3.4%          3.2%
  Widowed            .8%           .5%
  Never married     1.6%          4.4%
 
We see that the primary area, indeed the only statistically significant
area, in which the poor children are expanding is in the custody of a
never-married mother.  Now given the fact that 76% of these mothers
DO NOT HAVE any child support order, we see that the increase of children
living in poverty has, in fact, little to do with child support
non-compliance and much to do with the increasing acceptance of society
not to force never-married mothers to seek child support.
The number of single mothers with children living in poverty without
a child support order was 1.82 million; the number with a child support
order was only 1.19 million.  (1989 data)
 
The time has come to re-think the problem.
 
Should not an appropriate solution be to force mothers to name fathers of
children, before they receive welfare?  (Of course exceptions for cause; etc.)
How about mandatory birth control for welfare mothers, so they cannot
increase their burden to the state?
 
Of course, there is a problem with child support compliance.  Partly
because 66% of non-compliance arises from the father`s inability to pay.
(The dollar amount per support order typically doubled in the last four
years, while income has only increased less than 20%.)
However, when 3/5 of single mothers do not even seek a support order,
simply because they do not want the father to be a part of their
children`s life or because they know society will pick up the tab
anyway, that is where the real problem is.
 
Sincerely,
 
 
David K. Garrod, Ph.D.
(Member of the Indiana Child Support Advisory Committee)
R.R.2, Box 345D,
Monticello, In 47960