Talk:Deadbeat parent

message: "But, like any other past-due debt, the obligee, typically a mother, may forgive what is owed to her."
It has always been my understanding that child support was owed to the child rather than the parent. I don't have a citation for this, but does anyone have anything that backs up the claim that the obligee is the child's guardian? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.191.163.177 (talk • contribs) 
:In Australia, the debt is payable to the resident parent. Their name appears on Child Support Agency account statements, example, CHILD SUPPORT TO ((name of parent)). I'd scan one for you but the forms contain a lot of personal details and it'd be almost blank by the time I published it online. -- Longhair 04:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is the obligee to child support? 

message: This section is biased.  I agree that "deadbeat dads" or "moms" for that matter is an inflammatory term, but I disagree that most parents don't pay because they can't afford it.  It may be the case in some areas (states) but many places (and there are places outside the US) have systems where child support is calculated based on the non-custodial parent's income and expenses.  Please edit this section!!
Your opinion of why a non-custodial parent does not make child support payments is irrelevant. What matters are the facts, and not opinions in this matter. This is a well researched area, and while there are always exceptions, most of the non-payers cannot pay for one or more reasons, including being in jail. Cia123454321 15:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You will notice the Citation Needed tags on your anonymous comment.  I am not disputing what you have stated but if you make a statement of fact please cite your references.  --Triad man 21:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DeadBeat Parents 

message: ----
This point is factually indisputable.  
Louisiana reported that 70% of all arrears are owed by parents making less than $10,000/year.
What does matter is facts.  It is indisputable that orders are being made that exceed parents ability to pay.
:You will notice the Citation Needed tags on your anonymous comment.  I am not disputing what you have stated but if you make a statement of fact please cite your references.  --Triad man 21:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most arrears are because of poverty 

message: Regarding whether or not parents who don't pay can afford to.... It does not make sense to me to assume that parents would prefer incarceration over paying reasonably for the support of their children. Even if they were disinterested in their children's welfare, selfish motivation suggests they'd be better off outside of prison than in. 
Low income obligees not only have insufficient income to pay support, they have insufficient income to hire good lawyers to protect (or often, even help them understand) their rights. Most states with the Income Shares CS model do allow for a Self Support Reserve for the non-custodial parent, an amount that get's sheltered from potential assignment to support, but it's usually set at or below the Federal Poverty level.
Higher income obligees that wind up in jail for non-support must either be idiots, not truly high income, or victims of a broken system. I find it hard to believe that the majority of them prefer jail to living in a 1500 sq ft Ranch rather than a 2500 sq ft Colonial.
129.33.1.37 19:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While we all have opinions, some more informed than others, it's irrelevant.  Encyclopedic content must be verifiable.Triad man 21:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agree to a point 

message: Fox News quotes do not reliable sources make, so I've deleted this:
"According to Fox News:
Non-payment of child support is a significant problem in the United States. According to the Federal Office of Child Support, in 2003, $96 billion in accumulated unpaid support was due to children in the United States; 68 percent of child support cases were in arrears. An overwhelming majority of children, particularly minorities, living in single-parent homes where child support is not paid live in poverty."  Unless the author can locate and cite the source Fox News quotes, it has no place here.  Kemet 14:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fox News excerpt 

message: Although the term "deadbeat parent" is mentioned in the intro, the fact that there is no associated article, nor an article for "deadbeat mother" makes this article inherently gender biased. I suggest renaming to "deadbeat parent." 
:I agree, this article should be renamed, edited to reflect the name change and have deadbeat dad/mom redirected here.Triad man 20:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender Bias 

message: It seems that this section was recently added at the top of this article, claiming that "Many "deadbeat dads" are actually victims of forced paternity - a form of domestic violence against men."  While that is probably true in some cases, this assertion is a)unsourced b)given unreasonable prominence in an article that purports to be about the subject of parents who do not fulfill their obligations to pay child support.  I think it needs to go, be seriously amended, or put in a place into the article that more accurately reflects that it is a minority point of view and not uniformly true in most cases.  The assertion that "forced paternity" is a kind of "domestic violence" seems particularly troublesome and original research to me, as redefining terms with commonly understood meanings is not Wikipedia's purpose. Dina 17:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Forced paternity as Domestic violence

message: After a bit of research I'd like to suggest that the title of this article be changed to "noncompliant payers of child support".  Awkward yes, and a redirect from "deadbeat dad" should remain, as that is, frankly, at least in the U.S. the more "common" term.  But I agree that as a title for an article "deadbeat dad" is both inherently POV and unencyclopedic. Dina 17:19, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Additionally, a title suggestion

message: The article starts by saying the term is primarily used in the US, then refers to the child support agency in the UK. Also - it's a matter of fact that - although the article defines the meaning of the term reasonably well (if not a little too broadly) - the term as used referred to pretty much all divorced and never married fathers, and was strongly linked even more generally to anti-male rhetoric. The myth that fathers often abandon mothers and children was predicated on the idea that all men are selfish pigs (if I may use that term simply for the sake of brevity) and all women (and by extention children) are victims in a male-dominated society. One should not lose sight however, of the specific intent behind use of the term and the long and intense propaganda campaign that went with it. The federal government passed a series of corrupt reforms which would not have been accepted by the general public if they had been viewed objectively. Easily predicting that the victims of reforms (fathers) would complain, it was necessary to define them in such a way that their complaints and arguments would be ignored. As I have said that the article's definition may be slightly too broad - it is because there were a larger number of features associated with the term - including a "deadbeat dad's" high income, that he could easily afford to support his children but simply refused to do so, that he had abandoned the family rather than being forced from it by divorce, that the noncustodial parent is poor such that both she and the children were left "living in a hovel" and dependent on public support .... I have estimated that less than 1 percent (perhaps less than half a percent) of the subject population actually fits the definition. Certainly it is far less than those who simply fall behind in payments. Rogerfgay 11:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  In relation to the article's reference to a UK agency to explain a term used primarily in the US: I have proposed that the title of article Child_support_in_the_United_States be changed - one option suggested is that the article should be named like articles covering similar material in other countries; by the name of the agency Talk:Child_support_in_the_United_States. Rogerfgay 11:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some confusion 

message: Removed Shackelford from further reading list. Discussion about "deadbeat dads" included many articles attempting to explain why there were so many, done by researchers who assumed the truth of it. Shackelford's research for example, repeats a myth produced by the US Bureau of Census I believe it was (50% receive no payment, 25% receive partial payment). He then wants to explain from an evolutionary perspective, why men are such irresponsible pigs (expession for brevity) in their handling of family responsibilities in modern life. If this reference were given as an aid in explaining the extent of the problem with anti-father propaganda, it would serve a useful purpose in connection with the article. But it is simply one of many mistakes of that era in which researchers presumed the myth of deadbeat dads to be true, and launched investigations based on that belief. I have added two references for further reading that provide credible factual science and analysis of the politics involved. Rogerfgay 11:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Because the article includes the shared parenting issue in discussion, I have added Custody Revolution by Warsak to the further reading list. Bravers' study (leading to his book listed in further reading) was the largest federally funded study on divorced fathers performed in the US (and most likely the world), and its credibility has never been challenged. Warsak performed the longest study of noncustodial parents specific to custody and visitation. Likewise, his study has enormous credibility. Baskerville has done the most to study (and is well published academically and otherwise) from a political scientists perspective. Although the book is new, no one has done more to provide honest and competent analysis (or been published more on the subject) from that perspective than Baskerville. Rogerfgay 12:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shackelford 

message: The title of this page produces clear, obvious gender bias.  As it is possible for a parent of any gender to be forced to pay child support, and it is possible for a parent of any gender to be not in compliance with said child support order, I see no reason for the title page to hold this kind of bias.  I am proposing, a renaming to Deadbeat Parent and partial rewrite of the article to help maintain WP:NPOV as much as possible.  Does anyone disagree? Celarnor (talk) 03:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move Proposal 2008 

message: Even before the TOC, there is a bunch of caps-locked nonsense that is really people just people expressing their distaste for the subject of the article, and for American English. It is out of order with the rest of the talk page, and I move to delete it, and look through it, while placing the (possibly) serious discussion topics at the bottom of the page, where it belongs. From when I type t
his, I will give  one week for objection, discussion, or for someone else to do it, before I do it myself.Landfritter (talk) 03:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  We should clean up the beginning of this talk page.  

message: This article should be titled "Deadbeat dad."  It's a simple fact that the phrase "Deadbeat mom" is not used except on rare occasions to illustrate the sexist (or at least one-sided) nature of the term.  Some comments here have brought up how this article is sexist because mothers can be deadbeats too.  This is simply wrong.  The article should simply reflect the reality and the reality is sexist.  Mothers who "abandon" their kids are not considered deadbeats but fathers are.  They may be considered bad mothers for not having custody of their children, but there is little real social, much less legal, stigma on them for subsequently failing to financially support the children.  Indeed mothers have the option to take birth control or the morning after pill, may abort the child, legally adopt out the child, or completely abandon the child under "Safe Haven" laws with no future financial responsibility whatsoever.  Mothers have the full gamut of reproductive rights and options but they are not legally expected to assume the commensurate responsibility for those rights.  Only men and fathers are really labeled, or legally pursued, as deadbeats and this article is falsely implying that such is not the case using misleading gender neutral language.  Just like in this article, when the term "deadbeat parent" is used it is little more than a PC euphemism for deadbeat dad.  More important than the title though is the fact that the entire article maintains this charade of gender neutrality without every pointing out that virtually 100% of those referred to as "deadbeat parents" are dads.  This is a clear example of where political correctness goes wrong.  The articles lead even says "the gender-specific deadbeat dad and deadbeat mom are commonly used by the child support agency to refer to men and women who have fathered or mothered a child and willingly fail to pay child support ordered by a family law court or statutory agency such as the Child Support Agency."  I'd be surprised if a any child support agency EVER used the term "deadbeat mom" (rather than parent) much less that it was "common."--Cybermud (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've heard individual people use the terms "Deadbeat mom" and "Deadbeat parents" (in that context, clearly referring to the couple as a unit) all the time. You can google both terms in quotes and you see a lot of commentary. Sugar-Baby-Love (talk) 17:19, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never heard anyone say "deadbeat mom," online or in real life, without making reference to "deadbeat dad."  Deadbeat mom is a natural play on words for deadbeat dad.  Using your google test I get 140,000 hits for "deadbeat dad," and just 7,000 for "deadbeat mom." For every one hit of deadbeat mom there's 20 for dad and almost every one of the ones for mom say something like "mom's can be deadbeats too."  The number one hit for deadbeat mom doesn't even have anything to do with child support it is about mothers who alienate children from their fathers.--Cybermud (talk) 22:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stupid Political Correctness 

message: I notice an IP editor is repeatedly trying to bring up the allegations against Joe Walsh (Illinois politician) as an anecdotal example of a "deadbeat parent". I have two issues with this. First, Wikipedia is not a courtroom; if Rep. Walsh is in fact in arrears on child support, that will be borne out by a court of law, and only after such court action is entered into the public record should it be reflected in a Wikipedia article. Second, anecdotal information such as this is best left out of the article, both as a WP:BLP violation and as a matter of a right of privacy for the accused individual. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rep. Walsh 

message: I was going to close the move in the previous section but decided not to as the argument is parochial and seems to be only about usage in the USA. 
See for example 
*UK: Child Support Agency - Gov.uk -- "The Child Maintenance Service" 
*IE: Child Maintenance
*Aus: Child support and child maintenance
*NZ: child support
The UK and IE and AUS use very similar language, the NZ article uses different terms.
The article name (and content) should reflect usage in all English speaking countries and "Deadbeat parent" is American slang -- A global search on the term in the UK domain returns "dead beat parent" site:uk 348 (estimated) 40 actual results for good bad and indifferent sources -- so it should be changed to something more appropriate which is a either a  neurally descriptive title or one which is more universally used.
There is a UN "Convention on the Recovery Abroad of Maintenance", which would allow for a neutrally worded title such as "Recovery of child maintenance payments". and the convention would be a good place to start such an article. -- PBS (talk) 14:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree, actually.  My overall intent is finding an appropriately encyclopedic entry- and the international term, if it is the COMMONNAME is demonstrably better than a US specific term.  Which of your terms dominates in the Anglophone world?  And might we also look at South Africa, Nigeria and India for similar terms?  If we want a dominate Anglophone term, we should look to all majority Anglophone countries with significant countries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.175.8 (talk) 06:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

text: I like the UN angle.  Perhaps we can achieve consensus using a multinational term, if their is not one that governs international law or is used in a majority of Anglophone jurisdictions world wide.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.175.8 (talk) 06:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

text: At this point, this article is heavily specifically about the US. As such, theproblem may be not that the title isn't universal enough, but that it isn't specific enough. perhaps this should be the article on deadbeat parentage in the USA or US child support arrears or some other title that makes it specific, rather than needing to change the article to match a new title and a title to match some expected article. --Nat Gertler (talk) 07:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Globalise  

message: I've seen no justification for the article to exist.  What does it provide in terms of language?  An explication of a oft used racial slur, sometimes used as a poor white trash-ism.  This is an "urban dictionary" term not an encyclopedic term.  Grow up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.76.16 (talk) 06:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete Article  

message: It should be noted that failure to allow or encourage visitation when ordered by the court should be considered deadbeat as well. When it comes to enforcement of visitation the office of the AG in Texas any way is " we are not responsible for that, hire an attorney".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shortmech (talk • contribs) 23:04, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  deadbeat parent 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Deadbeat parent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130509175601/http://www.co.dodge.wi.us:80/index.aspx?page=124 to http://www.co.dodge.wi.us/index.aspx?page=124
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Deadbeat parent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150604044116/http://www.cafcusa.org/docs/DCSS_2003_collectability_study.pdf to http://www.cafcusa.org/docs/DCSS_2003_collectability_study.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060111235506/http://www.usdoj.gov:80/criminal/ceos/child_support.htm to http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/ceos/child_support.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:03, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The "See Also" section contains links that are relevant to the topic (child custody, child support, etc). However, the last link is "Kody Brown" and the link leads to an article about the television series "Sister Wives". Kody Brown is apparently the patriarch on that show. I looked through the Sister Wives article and I'm struggling to see how it's relevant to the topic of "deadbeat parents". There's nothing in the Sister Wives article that specifically mentions child custody or deadbeat parents. Is the inclusion of the link a mistake? Was there previously an article that contained information relevant to this topic? Keylimepie2006 (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed it as a WP:BLP concern. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  See Also Section