From: root@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick)
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights
Subject: Re: what's fair?
Summary: what is parity?
Date: 11 Apr 92 19:37:49 GMT
Organization: Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA

Responding to thrushea@memstvx1.memst.edu (do you have a name?):

I think that you badly misjudge those of us who participate here. At least, I
believe that you have misjudged me, and I'll be direct enough to say that I'm
offended by it.

I will phrase this as -I- because I don't want to speak for anyone else.


I believe that support should be an equitable division of the actual costs of
raising a child in todays economy. Most of the support tables are based in
1972 incomes, which are a darn sight higher than todays are.

I believe that basing support on 'averaged national incomes' (with 30% tacked
on for safety) is ludicrous. If everybody made the national average income
(with 30% tacked on for safety) then nobody would be complaining.

I believe that child support should be computed from the costs of ADDING a
child to an existing home --the way it's computed now assumes that the
custodial parent (mom 90% of the time) is homeless at the time of the award.
This makes no sense, considering that the facts are that the VAST majority of
the moms get the house from their divorce, and it's the man who is rendered
homeless.

I believe that education is paramount for a child. And if special educational
needs are present, then both parents should shoulder that burden equally. The
same holds true for any special medical or developmental needs that the child
may have.

I don't believe that one parent should have sole control over the raising and
education of a child that two parents made. If at all possible, both parents
should participate.

I don't come by these opinions haphazardly. My own circumstances contribute
to them, but it's what I do every single day that contributes more. I have
the (what around here is a rather unpopular) title of Guardian ad Litem. I
work for the courts to determine the facts of the cases presented to the
courts. It is my job to determine the best interests of the child. (A time
worn phrase which most often means "what I can use the child for to get for
myself" to laypeople).

In that capacity, I see things which fly in the face of the Current Public
View of the Politically Correct. What I see every day disagrees completely
with the stereotype of men and women.

83% of the children I see are physically abused by their mothers.
09% of the children I see are physically abused by their fathers.
03% of the children I see are sexually molested by their fathers.
04% of the children I see are sold for sexual purposes by their mothers.
91% of the children I see are needs neglected by their mothers.
62% of the mothers I see are alcohol abusive
77% of the fathers I see are alcohol abusive
48% of the mothers I see are drug abusers
61% of the fathers I see are drug abusers
68% of the fathers I see make 1/4 less money annually than their (ex)wives.

There are a lot of problems out there, and it isn't that men are all
responsible. There is a weird 'equality' of crappiness in play here.

Here's an excerpt from the DCFS case record of one of my clients:

"[name deleted] is the daughter of a broken home. After a custody battle
which lasted 3 years, custody of her was awarded to the mother. [X] was 9
years old at the time of the decree. The subject's mother was a prostitute
who was alcohol and drug involved, and has been referred for treatment 5
times in the past six years. [X] was left without competent involved parent
for the significant portion of her childhood. She became alcohol involved at
age 10, and suffered her first alcohol blackout at age 12. After being
admitted to inpatient therapy twice (once at age 12 and once at age 13), the
father again moved for custody. The motion was denied as the father is not a
resident of this state. Although he enjoys a stable quality of life, granting
custody of his daughter would have removed the child from the jurisdiction of
the court and prevented the court from futher monitoring the child's case.

At age 14 [X] became pregnant with her son [Y]. The father of the child is
unknown due to the frequent and transient sexual involvements [X] has had.
Referrals of abuse and neglect persuant to RCW 13.34.030(b) and (c) have been
consistent since his birth. (See Petition for Dependency pages 5 through 11)

The child was removed from the home at the request of City Police Officers
after an undercover agent received offers of sexual favors for compensation,
and an attempt to sell controlled substances to the officer resulted in the
arrest of the mother. A Shelter Care Hearing was held on [deleted] at which
time the mother admitted to all charges and specifications, and signed a
Stipulated Temporary Order for Placement of the child. [Y] is 3 years old,
DOB [deleted]."

This case is remarkably similar to all of the (average) 600+ cases referred
each year. It doesn't say much for the "Tender Years Doctrine" nor does it
reinforce the current set of beliefs surrounding the father's role in child
rearing and development. Oh, and those 600+ cases are referred in this city
alone. The national numbers are enough to knock a strong person off of their
feet.

So (thrushea), you should really give some thought to inspecting whether your
own personal perspectives match the realities of our society. You may have
good cause to be upset, but I'll ask you to think about the fact that it was
a few people with horror stories and a set of misconceptions which has caused
this nation to have greater misconceptions.... and to think of what that has
caused our society to do "in the best interests of the children."

If I offended you earlier, I apologize. But I reacted out of the offense I
took from your general (and highly inaccurate) indictments of myself and the
other men in our country.

-- 
bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us                 "...we found that in space, no one can
Bob Kirkpatrick                        hear you scream. In 1992 we find that
Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA       on earth, everyone can."   --alienIII