Under federal law, once you get behind in payments, the debt can only be payed off - a judge can not reduce it. This happens to reservists all the time.

In the modern divorce industry, it is not about "the best interest of the child" and never has been. The best thing for Clifford Hall to do would be to skip the country and start his life over, maybe in Eastern Europe or South America.

I've read and listen to this twice to make sure that I understand this correctly. It isn't about child support, it is about the LAWYERS getting their money (their fees are greater than the amount he owed!) - so, it isn't about supporting the child at all.

As that old joke says; what do you call 1,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea?

Answer: A good start.

Of course, I joke; but, lawyers such as these give all lawyers a bad name. And shame on the judge for allowing this kind of crap - he is a bigger asshole than the lawyers.

I understand that Tunisia has topless beaches and no extradition treaty with the US.

Just a suggestion...

It's been quite a while since fathering children has been in men's best interests. This is yet another anecdote that demonstrates it. I'm glad my daughter is grown. Despite being remarried to a much younger woman, I will not be having any more kids, ever. As shown, fathering children can be suicidal to both a man's finances and his freedom.

somebody I know very well :cough: gets threatened with this all the time...

there is also the gambit where it's hard to force the party that has the law on it's side to do anything, because they say: "so, sue me." Knowing full well that to do that, you would have to pay your own lawyer and hers too.

So. You just bump along, and look forward to the day you don't ever have to talk to her again about anything... and hope there isn't another shoe to drop BTW now and then.

A friend seriously considered leaving the country... but ended up living in his car instead to keep everything paid up, While the other man was sleeping in his bed every night with his wife, in front of his small children.

Only now 20 year later are the dividends coming back, in the fact that his adult daughters have a very close relationship with him.

The concern for children extends beyond making sure they themselves choose well when they grow up. It's not lost on them, when one parent destroys the other [I've seen it both male and female]...

The think to themselves, "EVEN IF I choose well, it can go bad."

No clue on an answer.

Under federal law, once you get behind in payments, the debt can only be payed off - a judge can not reduce it. This happens to reservists all the time. -- ParatrooperJJ at January 22, 2014 8:22 AM

I heard about a case a few years back where the woman was guilty of multiple counts of paternity fraud. She married the guy but was still sleeping and living with her boyfriend on multiple nights per week. He finally caught on, divorced her, prove they weren't his biological kids and the marriage fraud.

He was on the hook for child support, but the judge put in the support decree that he had to pay the back child support at $1 per month.

The collection of, enforcement and defense of childsupport is big business and any representation that it is in the best interest of the children is a complete misrepresentation of any facts. The obligor in any case is always the one on the hook - job changes, illness, etc., that change income levels dramatically must be taken back to court and can take months, if not YEARS to resolve. And in the interim, you are becoming further behind, licenses suspended and possibly facing jail time for things out of your control and, if you had still been together, would have been faced together as a family... Unfortunately, the courts do not seem inclined to force a standard of reasonableness on the courts and allow (mostly women) to abuse the system, although not always the case. There needs to be serious modifications to the child support system to allow the obligor (payor) to maintain a standard of living which provides for visitation for his/her children as well - courts figure visitation and childsupport on hours with each parent, however, I don't rent my house or pay my mortgage, utility bills or food bills by the hour. Ten years after my divorce, when I'm earning more, I should have the right to keep that money towards my retirement or spend it on my children directly, however, in the system now, my ex-wife gets to continue to collect more and more rather than base childsupport on the standard of living at the time of the divorce so that the payor can spend anything above that amount on the children directly. In many instances, as in those detailed above, a non-custodial parent (aka obligor) ends up living in a car in order to stay current and out of jail, continue to work, etc. The system is completely broken and yeah, feed the attorneys more and more.... It's a political non-starter, as well. No legislator wants to touch it because, one way or another, they end up alienating a complete segment of the voting population.....

I'm really surprised that a lot more men in this sitaution don't just leave the country. Yes, they probably figure on resuming their relationship with their children once said children reach adulthood. But that often doesn't work out; the ex has years and years to PAS, and depending on the age at which it starts, most children are not mature enough to see through it. Honestly, if this were to happen to me, I think what I'd eventually have to do is say to myself that that family never existed, move to some part of the world where I'm out of reach, and start over.

I'm really surprised that a lot more men in this situation don't just kill the bitch.

> I'm really surprised that a lot more men in
> this sitaution don't just leave the country.

I'm really surprised that a lot more men in this situation didn't choose better partners.

I wonder, Crid:
What sort of partner attends a hyper-intelligent trans-dimensional being, whom the chicks dig, such as yourself?

Crid, I'm sure that the state giving women the options of the lead pipe, candlestick, revolver, rope and knife and the room to use them as they see fit has had no effect on the situation at all. All to benefit the state under the guise of "for the children."

Clearly its all about choosing better partners. I mean if one actually had to uphold a marraige contract they might think twice about say, cheating and leaving since they wouldn't win the divorce lottery.

Saying just pick a better partner oversimplifies the situation. Marriage completely overhauls the power structure of the relationship. Women behave much differently when given the power of the state at their disposal, just like how the man acts differently when handed a gun. Most of us have had coworkers who were fine to work with, yet became assholes or bitches when promoted. Why? They are no longer peers, the power changes the relationship.

It's not a coincidence that girlfriends are nicer and put out more than wives do. Most husbands are understandably caught off guard when girlfriends who sucked and fucked their brains out make them go months without sex. And how a loving playful girlfriend can use the law to punish you later.

They say if you.want to test someones character give then power. Unfortunately it is.really tough to predict how much power will change someone.

> Clearly its all about choosing better partners.

Nobody said "It's all about" anything. Enough of it's about choosing better partners that your sarcasm betrays you.

> Women behave much differently when given the
> power of the state at their disposal

"Women"? I haven't seen that in my friends, not even the less-close ones. Or in my family, or my extended family… Not even with the Ex… Because despite Raddy's grade-school taunting…

> a hyper-intelligent trans-dimensional being,
> whom the chicks dig, such as yourself?

…The women in my life know romantic relationships are an exchange for mutual satisfaction. And that fascinations with "power" and "cheating" portend more theatrical vulnerability than they need from another adult.


For thousands of years, men and women have had to move carefully and thoughtfully to pair well. It's always had risks some stumbling. But hundreds if not thousands of people in your life have done it well, just as they have throughout time.

But you guys think the problem is policy, always. (The man who calls himself "Trust" said "power" five times in a 147-word comment.)

I'm pretty sure this is how Obama got elected.

Wow. Count my words and do a comparative analysis of one if the words.

No I do not think the problem is always policy. I think the problem is government meddling, policy is how they meddle.

We both wish Obama didn't get elected. But you debate just like his supporters.

> Count my words and do a comparative
> analysis of one if the words.

I did that. I used computer software. The results were telling.

> I think the problem is government meddling,
> policy is how they meddle.

Right? Right? Toooooe-talleeeeee.

Gravity is a mixed blessing. It will hold the things you love to the ground beside your feet, or break your leg if you fall from a tree! Both the good things and the bad things that it brings to our lives come from the way it attracts things to each other!

The light of the Sun's rays bring nutrients to the plants that we eat... But it also burns our skin in the summertime! It's all about radiation!

Government... Policy becomes meddling!

You're the one who uses the word policy, not me. I described the effects of law, and as one that rails against Obama I would think you would think law is a problem.

You probably fool yourself I to thinking you are making intellectual arguments, when in reality you're just a fucking asshole who doesn't know how to make a logical point or when to quit.

> You're the one who uses the word policy,
> not me. I described the effects of law

Do you discern any discoherence in those two sentences? Anything at all?

You're a grown man, an American in the twenty-first century, and women scare the shit out of you. You're going to gummint for cuddly protection, just like some people go to it for health care, or to have Obama pay their rent...

Chicks dig neediness! Good luck out there!