Experts say number of deadbeat moms on the rise

Experts say the recession and drug abuse are causing more mothers to miss out on child support payments than ever before in Jefferson County.

And because of that, thousands of kids are not getting the financial help they need leading to the growing problem of deadbeat moms.

When it comes to deadbeat parents, the child support division says their staff of 200 people faces a tough challenge trying to collect millions of dollars.

Many of the deadbeat parents on a public list haven't paid a dime in 10 years.

It could be a while before this payment window at the child support office sees any cash from thousands of deadbeat mothers in Jefferson County.

Mothers we're told who have been delinquent on their child support for years.

But why?

Angela Anton, Assistant Director Child Support Division said, “instead of being deadbeats, they're more dead broke from the state of the economy and the issues with drug and alcohol abuse."

In fact, the Child Support Division's basement is filled with thousands of files.

They say out of roughly 61,000 active cases nearly 10% are deadbeat moms which equals hundreds of thousands of dollars for the division to collect.

Part of the solution is an annual list made available to the public.
Over 4 years, it helped collect roughly $2 million in child support.
It has the top 1000 deadbeat parents and WHAS11 counted at least 20 women.

Including Adrian Ellis at nearly $40,000, Shanna Adams at $22,000 plus and Nicole Birdsong who owes more than $27,000.

We knocked on doors of the last known address for each woman.

None of them were home.

Birdsong listed her residence as The Healing Place on Broadway which was an old location.

So we went to the new building and folks there told us Birdsong is no longer staying with them.

"It's a real good possibility that she knew she had it hanging over her head and was worried about it and so decided to get help," said Pam Scott at the Healing Place.

Family Rights Lawyer Louis Winner tells us another part of the problem.

Many of his male clients don't want to ask for child support from women.

Winner said, "it becomes a little more difficult for the father to say you know what, I need to go after and get child support because it's the right thing to do and it costs money to raise children."

The division says they're more than willing to set up payment plans with any mom or dad who's avoided child support.

If not, they tell us it can be punished by jail time and heavy fines.

See the List: 2009 Delinquent Child Support Obligors

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Crack is creating Deadbeat mothers

Since the emergence of crack the rate of women becoming deadbeat moms continue to rise to new levels.

Our society is quick to force fathers to pay for child support while simultaneously curtailing their custodial rights and limiting their one-on-one time with their kids; our society loves to rail against "Deadbeat Dads" who refuse to pay support and desert their children. I agree that Deadbeat Dads should be reprimanded and be forced to contribute resources towards their childrens' upbringing--but what about Deadbeat Moms? You never hear about them, but trust me, they exist. I know of dozens of cases of mothers who use child support to remodel their houses and take exotic vacations; mothers who readily accept child support yet find excuse after excuse for not holding a steady job; mothers who abandon their children and then disappear, only to show up again years later demanding full custody; and, yes, mothers who are told by the courts to pay child support who can't seem to ever cough up the cash. Ridiculous. We hardly ever hear about these cases of delinquent mothers in the media, so the image of the "Deadbeat Dad" lingers on whereas birth mothers are continuously heralded and lauded for their apparent purity and virtue.


I think nothing is more heart breaking to see a woman who got hooked on that glass dick and nothing matters to her except when can she get her next high...

I suppose my pet peeve with the Courts is that they have don't really try to handle the problem with these addicts or these damn deadbeats! They give them a slap on the wrist and don't really want to lock them up. Although if the situation was reversed and it was a man hooked on crack and he did not pay child support, they lock him up!

The way society looks at women who are deadbeat, they make excuses! They will give them a pass in one breath and give them chance after chance to try and get right!

Lets look at it from this prospective if you are a woman and you fit into this criteria of:

	Doesn't feed their Children
	Doesn't help them with School work
	Doesn't bathe them
	Doesn't keep their hair clean
	Talks despairingly of their Father
	Doesn't pay Child Support
	Doesn't have a job
	Gets evicted more than often
	Doesn't maintain a clean, living environment
	Doesn't provide beds for the children to sleep on
	Physically, sexually, or mentally abuses the children
	Allows their significant other to physically, sexually, or mentally abuse the children

You are a deadbeat mom, and need help and if she can not help herself, then maybe the Court should step in and help you out. I would rather have a deadbeat mother who is locked up than a dead mother who got killed because she was in the streets!

To see more about Child Support the things you never hear click here

You've bankrupted my dad': 13-year-old girl to sue Child Support Agency after legal battle left father with crippling debts

A girl of 13 is suing the Child Support Agency, which she claims is trying to destroy her 'hero' father to pay off the mother she no longer wants to see.

Emma Chapelhow - the first child to take legal action against the CSA - says the agency has threatened to jail her father David and seize their home unless £43,000 in backdated payments is settled.

In a letter to the CSA, Emma said: 'I am happy living with my dad, who has spent ten years fighting for me. He is a hero.

Landmark case: Emma Chapelhow claims legal battles have forced her father David, right, to live in a caravan to make ends meet

'I know he spent everything he had fighting for me and I know he has no money left. My mum does not have to pay my dad for me and this is unfair.'

Mr Chapelhow, 42, first began paying child support to his ex-partner Janette Plummer when Emma lived with her in Brighton.

He was handed the huge bill by the CSA in 2006 and told it was backdated payments based on regulations covering 'lifestyle being inconsistent with income'. This rule usually comes into force when one partner claims the other has undeclared income that has not been taken into account when benefit payments are first being calculated.

However, a year later - after a judge ruled Emma did not have to live with Mrs Plummer and she moved in with her father and his wife Gair - Mr Chapelhow was told he would still have to meet the bill.

The schoolgirl, who instructs her own solicitor, is now taking on the agency because Mr Chapelhow, a graphic designer, has been left with crippling debts following a ten-year legal battle in the family court.

Father and daughter claim the CSA have believed Mrs Plummer's 'fantastical' claims they live a luxury lifestyle without checking. They point out that the family is currently living in a caravan while they rent out their farm house in Wellow, Nottinghamshire to make ends meet.

And the teenager claims that, four months ago, she was left in tears after bailiffs acting for the CSA allegedly threatened to take her pet pony Pringle to help meet the payments.

'Outrageous' demands: The CSA threatened to seize Emma's pet pony, Pringle, to help pay £43,000 in backpayments it claims her father owes

In a letter to CSA chief executive Mark Grimshaw, Emma wrote: 'My name is Emma Chapelhow and I am 13 years old. In 2007 I moved to live with my father.

'The judge said that I am old enough and able to instruct my solicitor, which I did. The court moved me to my father. They said my mother could not see me again.' Emma is suing under Article 2 of the Child Support Act 1991, which orders CSA officials to 'have regard to the welfare of any child likely to be affected by their decisions'.

She believes the agency's actions breach the code because it will bankrupt her father and force her into poverty.

Emma said: 'I will take legal action because the CSA have failed to protect me and are still failing to protect me. How can taking my home and financial stability away to pay the mother who the courts are protecting me from not affect my welfare?'

Mr Chapelhow, who is taking joint legal action with his daughter, said: 'They are ignoring her needs as a child and putting both the CSA and the mother she no longer wishes to see before her.

'And to make matters worse, when she has written to them about possible legal action they have ignored her letters and keep writing back to me.

'Enforcement action will have no effect except to put Emma in child poverty.'

The National Association for Child Support Action said it believes Emma is the first child in England to sue the CSA. Mrs Plummet, who lives in Brighton with her new husband-Lee, has not paid any maintenance to Mr Chapelhow since her daughter moved in with him.

She said she supported the decision to award custody to her exhusband but insisted that claims the backdated maintenance would bankrupt him are untrue.

Since it was created in 1993 the CSA has faced controversy. According to the Department for Work and Pensions a quarter of its decisions are later ruled to be 'wrong'.

A spokesman for the CSA said they could not comment on individual cases, but added it was not their policy to carry out enforcement orders which would affect a child's living conditions.

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1239217/Youve-bankrupted-dad-13-year-old-girl-sue-Child-Support-Agency-legal-battle-left-father-crippling-debts.html#ixzz0btoIXRO8

Can I object to the modification of the amount of child support?

A Question was asked that do I have the right to object to more money taken from my check? When Child support is already being deducted out of my paycheck.

She you do have the right to object to more money being taken out of your account. There is a protocol that you must follow.

First you have to file a motion for reduction of child support. If your income has dropped significantly the Court will take all that inconsideration. Also very important now that the Courts are also considering the Custody Parent, if her income increased then you could receive a reduction for that reason as well.







To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Pasco man beat woman pregnant with his child, sheriff's report says

HOLIDAY — A 40-year-old man is accused of beating a woman who is four months pregnant with his child. The incident happened on the night of Dec. 24.

According to the Pasco Sheriff's Office, Terrance E. Reckley tried to kick in the door to the woman's home on Supreme Drive in Holiday.

When that didn't work, Reckley broke two windows to get inside, a report says. Then Reckley punched the woman several times in the face, tried to strangle her and said he was going to "cut the baby from her stomach," the report states.

Deputies found her covered in blood, swollen and bruised on her face, neck, back and arms, with a possible broken nose, the report states.

Reckley of Tarpon Springs was arrested Thursday and is charged with aggravated battery on a pregnant woman, burglary of an occupied dwelling, resisting arrest, criminal mischief and contempt of court on a charge of not paying child support.

Reckley did four stints in prison — for a total of nine years — on drug convictions, according to the Florida Department of Corrections. He is being held without bail at the Land O'Lakes jail. An updated medical condition on the woman was not available Friday.

Blood match leads to arrest, police say

NEW PORT RICHEY — A New Port Richey man was arrested Thursday, charged in the Nov. 3 kidnapping of a 52-year-old woman.

Adam T. Schmidt, 22, of 5920 Grand Blvd. was being held in county jail Friday night in lieu of $50,000 bail.

The woman had told authorities she was attacked by a masked man in downtown New Port Richey. She said the man put his hand over her mouth and tried to drag her behind Club 727 at 6229 Grand Blvd.

She bit his hand and was able to disable him with pepper spray, according to the New Port Richey Police Department. He ran away, but blood from his hand was left on the woman's shirt. Authorities say they matched the blood to Schmidt.

Parents Arrested for Leaving Infant in Cold Car

CONWAY, Ark. Police in Conway have arrested two 22-year-olds for allegedly leaving their 6-month-old daughter alone in a cold car while they played video games.

Officer Chris Harris says Nathan Martin and Mindy Shay were arrested Monday night for endangering the welfare of a minor. Police say the infant was left in the unheated car for about 45 minutes as the two played video slots at a convenience store.

The outside temperature was 32 degrees.

Police say the infant was taken to a local hospital for treatment then released to state custody.

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Octomom Doctor's License To Be Suspended

Dr. Michael Kamrava, who implanted way too many embryos in the now-famous Nadya Suleman, should have his license suspended, the Medical Board of California has recommended.

A complaint was filed against Octomom's doctor by the office of California's Attorney General, accusing him of gross negligence, for repeated negligent acts, and for inadequate records.

The office of Attorney General Edmund G. Brown says Kamrava transferred "a number of blastocyst embryos far in excess of ASRM [American Society for Reproductive Medicine] recommendation and beyond the reasonable judgment of any treating physician."

He is also charged with neglecting to perform a mental evaluation on Suleman, a single mom, who gave birth to 14 children between 1997 and 2008, mostly through IVF.

The Medical Board of California's report condems the doctor for his " ... failure to recognize that [Suleman's] behavior was outside the norm and that her conduct was placing her offspring at risk for potential harm."

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Elizabeth Edwards to meet Rielle Hunter and child

John Edwards’ wife, Elizabeth has now decided to meet John’s mistress and love child face-to-face.

Although reportedly ‘heartbroken’ by her husband’s affair, the 60-year old former law clerk is desperate to avoid the ugly court battle that is sure to ensue if John’s former mistress, Rielle Hunter doesn’t achieve her demands for $18,000 a month in child support.

This change of heart is even more unexpected if you know that when John bought Rielle a home near their $2.6-million mansion in North Carolina, Elizabeth was so incensed, she packed a suitcase and was threatening to leave.

Elizabeth’s fears of a public court hearing became even more real after Rielle demanded an annual $214,920 in tax-free child support for the 22-month old child. Talks between her lawyers and John’s broke down at that point and have been stalled until now. John also refused to let her live in the house.

Just to add motivation, Rielle’s legal reps were threatening to take the dispute to the Superior Court of New Jersey, where Rielle now lives. And the risk of a snowstorm of career-wrecking headlines in the down-market tabloids has clearly made Liz change her mind.

“Elizabeth feels John and Rielle need to put their differences aside,” says the source. “Despite her anger at Rielle, Elizabeth knows Frances didn’t cause any of this. She sometimes breaks down in tears over Frances – All children need their father.’”

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Montell Williams kids are ungrateful

Former talk show host Montel Williams is being put through the wringer by his own children. Montel Jr. and Wynter are both calling him an emotionally deadbeat Dad for not being supportive enough of them despite the fact that Montel pays $18,700 a month in child support. According to the NY Daily news:

Montel Williams two kids with his ex-wife Grace put in on blast in the NY Daily News. 14-year-old Wyntergrace and 16-year-old Montel Jr both say their father is not a part of their lives. Montell Jr says, "I eat every night. I'm comfortable, but I can't say I have him as a father. There's all this fighting over things that shouldn't be a fight, like paying for my PSAT." While Wyntergrace adds, "I wouldn't say I really have a relationship with my dad. He's not in my life right now. It's his choice."

I really wish that it was that easy, that he does not care about the children. Lets face it sometimes a man has to suck it up and make a choice that he will not deal with the children on the mothers terms. Nothing is more frustrating that the children come to your home and they are used as spys for the mother. What does he have, who is he seeing. Its funny that you never question what they have but they always want to know what you got...

The sad thing about the children is that they can not see the truth, the man spent $224,400 a year on his children. Please understand one thing, the man put his life on hold to take car of his children, of course if they don't see him, does that really justify calling the man a deadbeat?

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Deadbeat can mean mom now, and the totals are rising

Single dads are sick and tired of being labeled "deadbeats" when it comes to paying child support. When deadbeat moms are on the rise.

The percentage of "deadbeat" moms is actually higher than that of dads who won't pay, even though mothers are more consistently awarded custody of children by the courts.

Census figures show only 57 percent of moms required to pay child support -- 385,000 women out of a total of 674,000 -- give up some or all of the money they owe. That leaves some 289,000 "deadbeat" mothers out there, a fact that has barely been reported in the media.

That compares with 68 percent of dads who pay up, according to the figures.

Men who are due child support are also getting tired of deadbeat moms' excuse that they can't pony up the money, and some courts have responded.

California lawyer Eudene Eunique in February was denied a passport because she was $30,000 behind in child-support. Instead of spending money on visiting her family in Mexico and on business contracts, the appeals court ruled Eunique�s money should go to her kids.

Meanwhile, warrant officers in southwest Florida earlier this summer dubbed an effort to list the area�s top deadbeat moms who owed up to $19,000 in support as "Operation Father�s Day." Included on the list were Trudi Dana, 43, who owes $19,001 and 29-year-old Mary Mahadie Friar, who owes $16,493.

Of course, the problem of deadbeat dads remains a serious one. Many more men than women have to pay child support, making the overall number of deadbeat dads much greater.

The statistics show 4.3 million moms out of 6.3 million who are supposed to receive child support actually get it. That leaves the alarming figure of about 2 million deadbeat dads, putting them more in the media spotlight than deadbeat moms.

But men also still pay much more in child support. The Census Bureau last month also released numbers showing fathers paid an average of $3,000 to custodial moms in 1997. Women paid little over half that. Moms also get about 60 percent of what they are owed, whereas dads only get 48 percent.

Not only are the dads paying up more when they don�t have custody, but when the court does hand the kids over to dads, they work more than moms who have custody.

While 7 percent of custodial moms work more than 44 hours a week, 24.5 percent of single custodial dads work more than 44 hours. And only about half as many custodial dads get government help than moms.

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Woman says Darius Miles is her baby’s father and petitions for child support

PATERNITY PLEA: Arthurjameeia M.R. Moore has sued NBA player and East St. Louisan, Darius L. Miles, to establish legal paternity and support for a daughter they had out of wedlock.

The petition to establish the parent-child relation and seeking other relief was filed in the domestic relations division of the circuit court of Cook County, Illinois on Dec. 18 by Moore’s attorney, Enrico J. Mirabelli of the law firm of Nadler, Pritikin and Mirabelli. Cook County includes Chicago and some of the city’s suburbs.

The baby, Ari J. Moore, has lived with her mother since her birth on Oct. 26, according to the petition. Attached to the court filing is a DNA test result that says the probability of Miles being the baby’s father is 99.99 percent.

Arthurjameeia Moore says in the petition that she has incurred medical expenses related to the pregnancy and birth of Ari and that she needs support for the “reasonable needs and expenses” of the child.

The amount of child support and other expenses that she is seeking from Miles is not specified in the petition, which says only that the amount is “to be determined,” and that it should include retroactive child support from the date of Ari’s birth to the present.

Miles, 28, played last year for the Memphis Grizzlies. He has played in the NBA for six years and joined the professional ranks directly out of East St. Louis High School.

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Have you been cuckolded by your wife?

In the case of Mike L, his wife broke their marriage contract when she cuckolded him( is when a married man wife commits an adulterous act) and bore a child that was not his. As reported by the Times, when he discovered that the girl was not his daughter he immediately sought a divorce.

By violating their marriage contracts, women who cuckold their husbands already have increased the chances of financial and emotional instability affecting the lives of their children. This instability is augmented by laws which require men to cut ties in order to avoid child support, thus making them choose between their desire for retribution against the cheating spouse and their desire to maintain a relationship with the child.


Wives who violate their marriage contracts by cuckolding their spouses should not be awarded child support payments for those children. One suspects that the advent of widespread paternity testing at birth will reduce the instances of this kind of contractual violation and thus also shrink the number of children who will be affected by the emotional and financial instability it causes.

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Gamblers who owe child support could lose jackpots

Gamblers who are significantly behind on child-support payments would have to forfeit jackpots at Indiana casinos so their kids can get the money, under a bill backed by Gov. Mitch Daniels.

Senate Bill 163 would put casinos in charge of checking customers with single-game winnings of at least $1,200 against a list of parents who are at least $2,000 behind in child-support payments.

Currently, about 165,000 noncustodial parents fit that description. In total, they owe more than $2 billion in back child-support payments.

“We do not believe that parents who have not paid child support should be out gambling,” said Stuart Showalter, legislative liaison for Indiana Shared Parenting, a group that supports the bill.

The ideal has great merit, although lets look at it from this point of view, collecting child support is the option in some cases by any means possible. At times the DHS (Department Of Human Services) takes on this callous approach when imposing a sentence to take child support. The Courts jump on this white horse saying that its all in the name of the child that we must take this money. Even if his or her check can not pay the regular amount of child support the Court has ruled that no man or woman paycheck can not be totally seized; the nice things is only half of the check can be taken. So one portion of the check is untaxed and the other portion is taxed, which portion do you think that the person paying the support gets? You guessed it the tax portion!

So from the stand point of wining gambling, I think that taking half of a persons wining is fair but leaving the man with nothing is unfair and should be unconstitutional. Believe it or not some people make a living gambling and if you take all his income, how can he or she live?

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

Loss of passport over child support challenged

A Montreal man is asking the Quebec Superior Court to strike down a federal law that can see parents who don’t pay child support lose their passports and other licences.

Francisco Caruso is arguing that his right to mobility — including the right to leave and enter Canada — is protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Caruso said that after his divorce in 2001, he became depressed and lost his job at his father’s bakery. He has barely been able to make ends meet, he said.

But thanks to money from friends and some investors, he started a business importing exotic woods from Latin America, he said. Over a two-year period, Caruso made nine business trips.

But in 2003, he said, he was informed his passport would be suspended because he was late paying child support to his ex-wife and three children. The payments owing now amount to more than $80,000.

Alexander Pless, the lawyer for the federal government, argued that Caruso is the author of his own misfortune. If he had the money to travel to Latin America, he could also have arranged to provide financial support for his children, Pless said.

Child Support Laws are changing

The ideal of this blog when I first started was to tell all the horrors of child support, but after the first story I began to think that one could become redundant! So my ideal was to take it to the next level of reporting and show some news with a twist. So one thing that I continue to try and stress is that the law is not fair or impartial when it comes to men and how the Courts deal with the.

Thank goodness for the Child Support laws changing for the better and protecting the men a little more. Although I don't understand what these judges are thinking when they impose these gross and unreal income tax on these super stars income! I am shocked that these women who make their own millions still expect the men to give them another few millions of tax free income.

Now with the New law that passed, it is suppose to change everything in how the calculate the income. Now the income is shared and if both parents make $50,000 they spilt child support equally. The days of not considering the mothers income is gone. Taking care of the child is the interest of the Court... Or that is what they tell the fathers of the world...

The new Income Shares formula will be applied in any marriage dissolution (divorce), legal separation, paternity action, or other action where child support is ordered for the first time, or changes an existing child support order. The Income Share formula applies to all cases filed in court after January 1, 2007.
Pre-existing child support orders will not automatically change because there is a new law. For one year starting January 1, 2007, modifications of pre-existing child support orders are allowed only in limited situations, or if the parties agree to change the support. See Limits to Modifying Existing Orders in 2007.

So remember when decision are made now this is the guidelines that they are suppose to be following

The general legal concept of "child support" is made up of three (3) parts:
1) basic support = costs for a child's housing, food, clothing, transportation, and education costs, and other expenses to care for the child
2) medical support = health insurance and other medical/dental costs
3) child care support = child care costs when parents go to work or school
"Joint child" is a dependent legal child of both parents in the support action.
"Non-joint child" is a dependent legal child of one, but not both parents, in a support action. [NOTE: A step-parent is not considered the "legal" parent of his/her step-child, unless the step-parent legally adopted the child.]
Important Factors
The Income Shares formula includes the gross income of BOTH parents in figuring the amount of child support.
The amount of court-ordered parenting time (visitation) is considered in calculating "basic support." If a parent has the child between 10% and 45% of the time, the parent gets a 12% adjustment (reduction) in child support owed. If the parenting time is less than 10%, there is no adjustment to child support. Percentage of time is generally calculated by counting overnights the child spends with the parent.
The law presumes that both parents can or should work and earn an income. The Income Shares formula considers this "potential income" as a factor in determining support.
By law, if the parties do not provide specific details about their income, the court will set child support based on other available evidence, including past work experience, the current legal minimum wage, or it will set a minimum amount provided for in the law.
to see more Child Support news click here

A former Top Model suing Braylon Edwards for child support

Former "America's Next Top Model" contestant is reportedly suing former Browns wide receiver Braylon Edwards for up to $70,000 a month in child support.

The New York Post reported that 25-year-old Nik Pace gave birth to Edwards' son in August.The article says Edwards filed in Atlanta to be recognized as the boy's father, but Pace objected and sued for child support in NewYork.

According to the Post, Pace's lawyer said Edwards filed in Georgia because the state is traditionally less generous with child support payments.But a source said that Edwards wants to be a part of his child's life and filed in Georgia because that's where Pace lived and gave birth, only moving to New York in November.Edwards' attorney, Randy Kessler, said Edwards has loved and supported his son since before he was born.Pace was a finalist on "Top Model" in 2005.

State plans to pull fee from payees

The Federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 requires the payment of $25 per qualifying case each year. The state Department of Human Services' Division of Child Support Services paid the fees until Sept. 30.

The funds were required to reduce the federal deficit, said Gary Dart, the director of the Child Support Services division.

Like other agencies, Dart said, DHS has been ordered to cut 5 percent from its operating budget because of the state's revenue shortfall.

"We hope the $25 federal fee is easier on the families we serve than cutting services would have been," Dart said Wednesday.

Dart said the state originally chose to cover the fee as a form of customer service because it wanted to put as much money in the hands of families as possible.

"That was before the bottom dropped out of our own state funding situation," he said.

The agency is one of the last in the country to pass the fee on to customers.

The agency will send out notices to those affected before the fee is charged, Dart said. Many recipients can expect to see the fee on their first payment after programming changes are made in February.

Dart expects some complaints.

"People are having a hard time," he said. "This is not something we are doing because we want to.

"You know, however, on the other hand, they get very good services from

us so far for free. If $25 was all you had to pay to have some help to collect your child support, that is not a bad deal."

The fee is expected to generate about $1.1 million that will be passed on to the federal government.

The fee will be charged for those whom the agency has collected and sent at least $500, the agency said. The fee is based on the federal fiscal year, which is from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30. The agency is reviewing cases going back to October.

Those who receive Temporary Assistance to Needy Families and those who were on Aid to Families with Dependent Children are exempt from the fee.

The Child Support Services division handles more than 190,000 active child support cases.

Father charged for waterboarding his 4 year old daughter

A soldier waterboarded his four-year-old daughter because she was unable to recite her alphabet.

Joshua Tabor admitted to police he had used the CIA torture technique because he was so angry.

As his daughter 'squirmed' to get away, Tabor said he submerged her face three or four times until the water was lapping around her forehead and jawline.

Tabor, 27, who had won custody of his daughter only four weeks earlier, admitted choosing the punishment because the girl was terrified of water.

Human rights activists demonstrate waterboarding in front of the Justice Department. A soldier father stands accused of waterboarding his daughter because she couldn't recite the alphabet

The practice of waterboarding was used by the CIA to break Al Qaeda suspects at Guantanamo Bay. Detainees had water poured over their face until they feared they would drown. President Barack Obama has since outlawed the practice.

Tabor, a soldier at the Lewis-McChord base in Tacoma, Washington, was arrested after being seen walking around his neighbourhood wearing a Kevlar military helmet and threatening to break windows.

Police discovered the alleged waterboarding when they went to his home in the Tacoma suburb of Yelm and spoke to his girlfriend.

She told them about the alleged torture and the terrified girl was found hiding in a closet, with bruising on her back and scratch marks on her neck and throat.

Asked how she got the bruises, the girl is said to have replied: 'Daddy did it.'

During a police interview Tabor allegedly admitted grabbing his daughter, placing her on the kitchen counter and submerging her face into a bowl of water.

Sergeant Rob Carlson said the punishment was carried out because the girl would not recite the alphabet.

Police have not revealed Tabor's military service, but his base is home to units that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Tabor has been charged with assault and ordered to remain on his base and have no contact with his daughter or girlfriend, who has not been named. He is due to appear in court this week.

The girl has been taken into care. Her natural mother lives in Kansas but Tabor had been granted custody by a court.

To see more chid support material click here

Hey, thats not neglect, just a beat down!

I found this court case were a son knocked his mother down. Now what surprised me was the outcome of her reaction. I am glad that someone in the Appellant Court system does live in the real world.

The New York City's Administration for Children Services filed a petition of neglect against Tanyan Mc. for hitting her son in the face with the heel of her shoe, giving him a bloody nose. They also removed him from her custody. Due to this incident, ACS said that she had also derivatively neglected her other child.

Now what is surprising is that Child Protective Services failed to confront that sometimes children endanger their parents. This is particularly, although not exclusively, true of women who feel or who are threatened by overgrown teen sons.

The Queens Family Court Judge, Edwina G. Richardson-Mendelson, agreed with ACS.

Tanya however believed that what she did was not neglectful, so she appealed to the Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department.

The court described the incident between Tanya and her son in the following words:

"The finding of neglect in this case is based on a single physical confrontation between the mother and her adolescent son, Corey Mc. (hereinafter the son), who at that time was 15 years old and 5 feet 10 inches tall. The evidence in the record established that the mother and the son had a troubled relationship. In this particular incident, the mother confronted the son over what she believed to be a specific instance of inconsiderate behavior, after which she left his room and closed the door. The son came out of his room and directed a stream of profanity-laced invective at the mother, who attempted several times to withdraw from the confrontation. When the son continued his verbal abuse, the mother either punched or slapped him in the face. The incident escalated further, and the son knocked his mother down and continued to curse at her; she got up and hit him on the face with the heel of her shoe, bloodying his nose. The mother then immediately called the police to seek medical attention for the son."

The Supreme Court sided with Tanya on November 24, 2009, declaring that the neglect finding was not supported by the preponderance of the evidence.

The court stated, "Given the age and size of the son, the provocation, and the dynamics of the incident, the mother's acts, which, as she readily acknowledged, were not an appropriate response to her son's conduct, did not constitute neglect."

Just a old fashion beat down, by any means necessary!

To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here

NY state court rules that dad did not neglect child by failing to pay support & by fighting with mom

Yesterday, the New York State Appellate Division, Third Department, ruled against Chenango County Department of Social Services and reversed a Supreme Court judge's ruling that Andrew PP neglected his daughter by having verbal and physical altercations with her mother while she was present, by failing to go for domestic violence counseling, and by failing to pay child support.

In its ruling the Appellate Division defined neglect by quoting the law. "[A] party seeking to establish neglect must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, first, that a child's physical, mental or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired and second, that the actual or threatened harm to the child is a consequence of the failure of the parent or caretaker to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship" (Nicholson v Scoppetta)."

The standard for neglect is that the petitioner (Chenango County DSS) must show by a preponderance of credible evidence that the "child has been harmed or threatened with harm. In the absence of such proof, the statutory requirement of impairment or imminent danger of impairment will not be satisfied and neglect will not be established"

While the upper courts always give deference to the lower courts, as they did in this case, the court ruled that the petitioner had failed to meet the burden of proof, and therefore the case had to be reversed. Furthermore, the court made several points in relation to the subject of neglect.

First, the Appellate Division stated that "Proof that respondent has failed to meet his child support obligations does not, by itself, rise to the level of neglect." In other words, there was no evidence the child was harmed by the father's failure to pay child support of $50 a month. Indeed, the child was being well cared for.

Secondly, while the court stated that verbal and physical altercations between the father and mother were inappropriate, it also had the following to say:

"We further find that petitioner has failed to meet its burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent's conduct in engaging in verbal and physical altercations with Heather OO. impaired or posed an imminent danger of impairing Alyssa's physical, mental or emotional condition. While the parties agreed that they frequently argued with one another, and that such verbal disputes often involved screaming and hollering, with respondent ultimately leaving the home before things escalated, such proof does not constitute the level of conduct that has been found to serve as a basis for neglect (see Matter of Anthony PP., 291 AD2d 687, 688 [2002]). Although there was evidence that respondent and Heather OO. engaged in a number of physical altercations, there was no proof that Alyssa was present in the home during any such altercations, with the exception of an October 2004 incident. As to that incident, the record is devoid of proof that physical injury resulted to any participant or that Alyssa — who was then an infant and in a crib upstairs — witnessed or was otherwise aware of the incident..."

Finally, on the issue of going for domestic violence counselling, the court said, "Nor was there any evidence to support petitioner's assertion that respondent neglected Alyssa by failing to obtain counseling for domestic violence. No evidence was presented establishing that respondent was ever required to obtain such counseling. Moreover, respondent's testimony that he went to a counselor and discussed the domestic issues between he and Heather OO. went unrebutted."