Advocating for Lower Child Support Payments Undermines Awareness of the Tyranny Fit Fathers Face

The U.S. requires the states to review their child support guidelines. Family court judges oversee hearings where anyone may give his opinion on current state child support guidelines. Fathers groups who push simply for more reasonable (lower) child support payments lend justification of a tyrannical system that controls them and, thereby, help cover up the real denial of rights they face.

A recent review process prompted me to consider how father's rights advocates should generally address this review process. First, though, I want to clarify the circumstance that produces a child support order.

*What is child support and who is supposed to pay it?

Under divorce & paternity suits in Massachusetts, a judge orders one of the two fit parents into a non custodial status, while the other takes on a custodial status (i.e. the child lives with the parent). Fathers are overwhelmingly assigned, indeed targeted, to be non custodial parents for operationally one reason - they are men. I shall not beat around the bush on this!

The significance of the non custodial status is that it encompasses the loss of a host of fundamental (i.e. constitutional) rights. These include, first and foremost, parental rights (i.e. right to care, control, nurture, and directly support your child), effectively what job you can work at as it relates to your ability to pay an assigned child support order, limitation on where you can go such as traveling out of the country if you owe child support. Nonpayment of the assigned child support will prompt confiscation of your property and jail.

Such a status is constitutionally illegal. It is virtually a slave status. Additionally, the legal process by which a father is assigned this status is unconstitutional since the denial of any fundamental right, such as parental rights, must find the parent to be unfit by clear and convincing evidence and shown to present serious (i.e. life-threatening) harm to the child. This is generally never the case.

Child support payments under this scenario are more accurately termed child extortion payments. The law puts no restriction on what the mother can use these 'child support' payments for.

Many studies have shown, time and again, that the judicial and legislative creation of this dual and extremely unequal status for fit parents - with the father operationally relegated to non custodial status - actually encourages women to file divorce and paternity suits for the selfish benefits it brings them and thereby helps to create a society growing more fatherless everyday.

At the same time it most often leads to the destruction of father-child relationship, the dissolution of families, and the undermining of the wealth and legacy that fathers create for their children (and families) since it effectively brings about the civil murder of those fathers. The present system is, in large part, responsible for much of the social pathology associated with fatherless children. This system is obviously not in the best interests of the child not to mention freedom for all.

This non custodial status, with the guaranteed child extortion payments that it brings, is the engine that makes this tyrannical system grows since the process by which this status is imposed funds a whole industry known as the Divorce and Domestic Violence Industry (DDVI). The DDVI with all its extortion payments and fees as well as state and federal funding continues to lobby for more of the same. Importantly, it always lobbies against a status guaranteeing equal parenting rights and full individual rights for both fit parents which is the only constitutional status for parents (i.e. a real father and mother).

Now, fathers rights advocates always correctly claim that these payments leave non custodial fathers with little, if anything to live on. These payments are almost never diminished when fathers' incomes go down, and many fathers are assigned or fall into support orders significantly above the already draconian child support guidelines levels for their circumstance.

This puts fathers in an untenable position and ripe for jailing - a clear unconstitutional arrangement. Horror stories on these issues are ubiquitous. Often fathers, left dead broke, careers destroyed, homes broken irreparably, are tracked down by 'our government' to be thrown in jail under the applause of a public ignorant of the evil that is the divorce and paternity process carried out by our family courts judges.

*Enabling the tyranny

Unfortunately, many fathers' rights advocates simply argue for a solution to their untenable or grievous circumstance that the guidelines need to be made more reasonable, more easily adjusted when incomes drop. Unbelievably, though, this approach is fundamentally a justification of the present system that I've called unconstitutional in every way.

Some years ago Judge Ginsburg (a family court judge) instructed a father (a 35 year old fireman) who was complaining of a child support order that required him to work an extra job just to squeeze by (and who's ex-wife was alienating his daughter) that fathers rights groups had participated in the process of determining child support to quiet the objections of the father. It was a disgusting justification.

After his retirement Judge Ginsburg actually testified that child support guidelines should be raised, while fathers, participating at the hearing, are testifying that the problem with the system is that child support is simply too high. Sure enough, under the new federal review laws, fathers are indeed helping to determine what the child support guidelines should be - within the construct of such a malicious and unconstitutional divorce/paternity system.

Unfortunately, these fathers are validating the very system that is extorting money from them while stealing their children - a system based upon putting them in a constitutionally illegal status by means of a constitutionally illegal process.

Fathers' rights advocates such as these are acting like slaves arguing for better slave conditions (or as prisoners fighting for better prison conditions). What they fail to realize is that they aren't supposed to be slaves in the first place; or, they are not prisoners who belong in prison. And that most important point is NOT getting out to the public! Such advocates are, at best, only pruning the branches on the tree that is a divorce/paternity tyranny. Pruning is generally healthy for trees!

*Wake up and Smell the Coffee:

What we need are fathers (and other decent people) hacking at the roots of this tyranny and its unconstitutional basis. Fathers' rights advocates should recognize what they ought to be fighting for a return to constitutional rights and protection for everyone including fathers.

For slavery to exist, it requires the cooperation of the slaves. Fathers' slavery is part of the war on fathers and fatherhood taking place now. Those who don't fight for their rights and freedom, neither get them nor deserve them.

Comments? Questions? Email Here

© HowtoAdvice.com

How to Advice .com