Should non custodial parents be sent to jail for failing to pay child support

ILoveYourVibes · 05-06-2019 09:04PM #1

Less than half of custodial parents in the US recieve full child support due

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018/cb18-tps03.html

About half (50.2 percent) of all 13.6 million custodial parents had either legal or informal child support agreements. Custodial mothers were more likely to have agreements (52.7 percent) than custodial fathers (39.6 percent).

The aggregate amount of child support due in 2015 was $33.7 billion, a decrease of $14.0 billion from 2003.

About 60 percent of the child support due in 2015 was reported as received, averaging $3,447 per year per custodial parent who was due support.

https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2018/demo/p60-262.html

Child support is calculated (in the states at least)as a percentage of the non custodial parents income. This can be varying or flat.

The situation with parents not paying is not much better in Ireland. And for a while some parents got away with not paying child support after the age of seven. https://www.thejournal.ie/child-maintenance-3750905-Dec2017/Arrears in maintenanceare common.

Though they are getting though. https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/10-days-jail-for-dad-accused-of-not-paying-enough-maintenance-826118.html Last year this judge sent a father to jail for 10 days for failing to pay child maintenance.

Kristopherus · 05-06-2019 09:05PM

What's jain ???:D:D:D

_blaaz · 05-06-2019 09:08PM

Lads are sent to jail suprisingly regularly here for non paying maintenance

Its rarely ever reported as family courts matters are usually kept out of papers

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 06:18AM

_blaaz wrote: »

Lads are sent to jail suprisingly regularly here for non paying maintenance

Its rarely ever reported as family courts matters are usually kept out of papers

That many not paying to THAT extent?? Really?

That is nuts.

McMurphy · 06-06-2019 06:44AM

No, it would be easier and cheaper to just make an attachment order to their earnings.

Deduct at source.

It costs how much to house a prisoner per week?

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 06:46AM

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

No, it would be easier and cheaper to just make an attachment order to their earnings.

Deduct at source.

It costs how much to house a prisoner per week?

I was thinking that. Perhaps they don't surrender their info or go awall.

And obv its not just men. Any non custodial parent.

06-06-2019 06:47AM

any Irish figures at all at all

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 06:54AM

Deleted User wrote: »

any Irish figures at all at all

Difficult to say
Ireland has no state agency with responsibility for child maintenance payments.

machiavellianme · 06-06-2019 06:54AM

Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:01AM

_blaaz wrote: »

Lads are sent to jail suprisingly regularly here for non paying maintenance

Its rarely ever reported as family courts matters are usually kept out of papers

That isn't true actually in 2017 only three people were sent to jail for this.

That is not from papers but the prison service statistics.
The Irish Prison Service (IPS) confirmed yesterday that only three fathers were jailed for maintenance arrears last in2017 ; one in 2016 and this followed one in 2015 and five in 2014.

One of these men was working and found 6000k his first night in prison suddenly. He also was paying no rent where he lived.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/10-days-jail-for-dad-accused-of-not-paying-enough-maintenance-826118.html

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:03AM

machiavellianme wrote: »

Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.

1.Firstly that is psychotic. Its like you are saying a father should only be a father for what he can GET out of his children. Children are not there to give.

2.Of course he gets access.

3 There are plenty of non custodial parents who don't bother to turn up blaming the custodial parent. Then when the child is older living alone they still don't bother and the truth is revealed.

I know plenty of people who feel let down by the non custodial parent as adults who still cannot get hold of the non custodial parent even then ,whatever their gender.

Turtyturd · 06-06-2019 07:04AM

Send them to American prisons.

One eyed Jack · 06-06-2019 07:07AM

machiavellianme wrote: »

Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.

Some fathers do, some fathers don’t. Either way, access is unrelated to maintenance. Both parents are obligated to maintain their children regardless of whether or not they are granted access to their children through the courts. Custody and access issues are predicated upon what is determined by the Courts to be in the best interests of the children, not the best interests of the children’s parents.

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:09AM

Turtyturd wrote: »

Send them to American prisons.

Is sending them to prison really the best option though??

I mean is it really going to help an acrimonious family environment?

Couldn't we have some sort of attachment counseling program for non custodial parents with such emotional difficulties?

Its obviously not just money.

Post natal depression doesn't happen to just women and can affect the father /child bond.

banie01 · 06-06-2019 07:16AM

Access and Child Support payments all too often become conflated in people's head.

They are not and should not be seen as related.
Access for non custodial parents and their children is important, but that access should not be used as a weapon to punish non compliance, as IMO the child suffers more.

Without going into the vagaries of whether a non-custodial parent can't pay or just won't pay, it is important to ask if as a society we are willing to take such a regressive step?

We have moved far beyond using Jail as a means of punishing Debtors or of coercing their payment.
If we move towards jailing CS defaulters, we are criminalising what is at its very core a civil matter.

We are locking up someone who likely has no or a minor criminal history. We will be placing these people on a criminal register and sending them to what basically amounts to a criminal university given the current recidivism rates.

It is only a small step in real terms between locking someone up because they CS payments, to locking them up because they owe any other money!
It is a dangerous and reckless step that criminalises a non custodial parent regardless of the circumstances of their non-payment and that has the potential to creep in to other areas of debt enforcement.

TLDR: It's a bloody awful idea

06-06-2019 07:17AM

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

No, it would be easier and cheaper to just make an attachment order to their earnings.

Deduct at source.

It costs how much to house a prisoner per week?

something like between 2 and 6k.

Completely agree. Attatch earnings, why should the taxpayer pay twice?

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:19AM

machiavellianme wrote: »

Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.

Also i have just found something that confounds your theory.

In the UK 87% of non custodial parents see their kids regularly. But only 68% of non custodial parents pay child support.

Unsurprisingly of non custodial parents who don't see their kids regularly only 29% pay any child support.

Feisar · 06-06-2019 07:19AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Some fathers do, some fathers don’t. Either way, access is unrelated to maintenance. Both parents are obligated to maintain their children regardless of whether or not they are granted access to their children through the courts. Custody and access issues are predicated upon what is determined by the Courts to be in the best interests of the children, not the best interests of the children’s parents.

A1, call me psycho however if I'm every in that boat goodbye well paid job, hello rock and roll.

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:23AM

banie01 wrote: »

Access and Child Support payments all too often become conflated in people's head.

They are not and should not be seen as related.
Access for non custodial parents and their children is important, but that access should not be used as a weapon to punish non compliance, as IMO the child suffers more.

It is only a small step in real terms between locking someone up because they CS payments, to locking them up because they owe any other money!
It is a dangerous and reckless step that criminalises a non custodial parent regardless of the circumstances of their non-payment and that has the potential to creep in to other areas of debt enforcement.

TLDR: It's a bloody awful idea

Well first lets get real. Men emotionally link supporting a child with the emotional connection to them. And some men are not connected emotionally to children they don't live with.

Perhaps that connection can be nurtured.

I agree sending Daddy to jail for not paying child support is not best for the child imo.

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:24AM

Feisar wrote: »

A1, call me psycho however if I'm every in that boat goodbye well paid job, hello rock and roll.

What??

Kimsang · 06-06-2019 07:24AM

Us child-less are already footing the bills for child households.

I know this is Australia, but its very similar here.

corner of hells · 06-06-2019 07:24AM

Send the kids to jail, it would be handier all round.

banie01 · 06-06-2019 07:26AM

Just to add.
While there are many people jailed in Ireland for non payment of CS.

AFAIK, jail in those circumstances is because of breach of a court order rather than explicit non payment.
Similar to contempt of court, rather than non payment of CS itself being the offence.
It's a technical fudge that allows a judge to use jail as a compliance for court ordered maintenance.
Paying the CS purges the contempt and allows release.

I may be mistaken on this, if I am I do apologize and would appreciate any correction.

Feisar · 06-06-2019 07:26AM

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

What??

A1, CALL ME PHYCHO HOWEVER IF I'M EVER IN THAT BOAT GOODBYE WELL PAID JOB, HELLO ROCK AND ROLL.

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:30AM

Kimsang wrote: »

Us child-less are already footing the bills for child households.

I know this is Australia, but its very similar here.

Yes we do. Good lord THAT is shocking!

Single working parents poverty has doubled in Ireland in the last 5 years. So I imagine its the same here.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/poverty-rate-among-working-lone-parents-doubled-in-five-years-1.3814178?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fireland%2Firish-news%2Fpoverty-rate-among-working-lone-parents-doubled-in-five-years-1.3814178

Well now anytime single Dads who don't pay want to moan i can remind them i am paying for their kids.

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:34AM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

something like between 2 and 6k.

Completely agree. Attatch earnings, why should the taxpayer pay twice?

I assume its because there is currently no state body that handles this. You have to go through the courts and this is costly.

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:39AM

corner of hells wrote: »

Send the kids to jail, it would be handier all round.

06-06-2019 07:40AM

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I assume its because there is currently no state body that handles this. You have to go through the courts and this is costly.

Revenue already attaches the earnings of people and companies who are not tax compliant, including payment of the property tax. I'm pretty sure the Department of Social Protection can also deduct payments to welfare recipients, and certainly can do so on the direction of a court.

It seems reasonably straightforward.

Peregrinus · 06-06-2019 07:41AM

banie01 wrote: »

Just to add.
While there are many people jailed in Ireland for non payment of CS.

AFAIK, jail in those circumstances is because of breach of a court order rather than explicit non payment.
Similar to contempt of court, rather than non payment of CS itself being the offence.
It's a technical fudge that allows a judge to use jail as a compliance for court ordered maintenance.
Paying the CS purges the contempt and allows release.

I may be mistaken on this, if I am I do apologize and would appreciate any correction.

I think you are mistaken. There isn't a separate offence of "not paying court-ordered maintenance", for which people get tried and convicted. They're simply committed for non-compliance with a court order (to pay maintenance). And according to the newspaper report linked in post #10, this happens fairly rarely. (Which is what you'd expect, since committal to prison will not often be the most effective way to enforce payment obligations, as already pointed out by others in this thread.)

ILoveYourVibes · 06-06-2019 07:42AM

Feisar wrote: »

A1, CALL ME PHYCHO HOWEVER IF I'M EVER IN THAT BOAT GOODBYE WELL PAID JOB, HELLO ROCK AND ROLL.

Yeah that is truly psycho. It didn't mean anything in lower case letters either.

banie01 · 06-06-2019 07:46AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think you are mistaken. There isn't a separate offence of "not paying court-ordered maintenance", for which people get tried and convicted. They're simply committed for non-compliance with a court order (to pay maintenance).

That's what I thought I had explained?
Apologies if I laid it out incorrectly.

Yes the "offence" commited is breach of a court order.
No, there is not an offence of "not paying".

I had thought that jail was on the foot of breach of the order, as a contempt proceeding?
And payment purged the contempt?

Should non custodial parents be sent to jail for failing to pay child support

Comments