Petition2Congress logo

14,581 Public Comments So Far

View More Comments:
7 years ago
Someone from Huron, SD signed.
7 years ago
Someone from Huron, SD writes:
Quotation mark icon
They also recieve free medical and don't have to worry about that either. Then the fathers have to pay for medical coverage as well. What do the women do? Raise the children. They can work part time, they can tape their soap opera's.
April 25, 2009
Someone from Huron, SD signed.
April 25, 2009
Someone from Huron, SD signed.
May 25, 2009
Someone from Converse, TX signed.
just now
Someone from Newport News, VA signed.
May 27, 2009
Someone from Chesterfield, VA signed.
just now
Someone from Sturtevant, WI writes:
Quotation mark icon
Child support needs to change! I see it as being biased and unfair. They are all for helping the mothers who have custody and are deadbeat and lazy, but never trying to help the fathers who have custody and trying to help their kids. Child support is quick to force payment of support due to state aided mothers, but not fathers? Quick to throw non custodial fathers in jail, but not noncustodial moms? Where is the fairness in this? Why is it the custodial and noncustodial fathers out there who are trying to do good for their children are suffering because of all those deadbeat dads?!?!? Something needs to change and quick!
June 26, 2009
Someone from Racine, WI signed.
7 years ago
Someone from Godfrey, IL writes:
Quotation mark icon
I don't understand the child support laws, they are totally unfair to parents who do take the responsibility and pay their support. I have four children, the oldest one resides with her father I had her at 16 years old(I have to pay support on this child), my youngest child is from my current marriage and my two middle children are from my ex- husband. My ex-husband owes $12,000 in child support and I can't get any of that support. However, I do pay child support for my oldest who does not reside with me and it seems as though no matter what I do, I can't do it right. For instance, I owed back child support because I have not had a job (due to care for my other three children and my completion of my college degree), but I was still ordered to pay $100 a month (by the way my current husband has been paying for me)....well I finally got a job after searching for a year post college graduation. I payed off $6,000 of back support...and i pay monthly....but I have to pay so many fees to three different states. because my daughter resides in South dakota and I live in Illinois and I work in Missouri I have to pay fees to all of those state so they can garnish my wages. But that is still not good enough the state of SD wants to reexamine my income and they want to know my whole life but who cares about the three other children I have to provide support for and the $50,000 student loan debt I am in and all my other financial responsibilties. I keep on getting pentalized for my responsibility and my ex-husband gets away with owing $12,000 in back child suppport which keeps on accumulating every month. I think congress in all states and across the country should allow the absent parent to not get taxed on the amount, all the laws are very unfair.
July 30, 2009
Someone from Orange Park, FL writes:
Quotation mark icon
Those who work for child support enforcement should be a little more apt to help when you call regardless if you are the custodial or non-custodial parent. They are rude and none of them care about their jobs.
August 4, 2009
Someone from Avoca, NY writes:
Quotation mark icon
(1) states reward women's lies with custody and excessive "child-support" in more than 90% of divorces (2) given considerable overlap in number of mothers awarded custody and documented incidence of egregious misconduct and criminal behavior by mothers, courts either award custody to an abusive parent or deny children access to a fit parent in most divorces (3) despite their contribution to domestic violence and child abuse, mothers are awarded custody and excessive "child-support" in more than 90% of divorces because states get about twenty cents from the federal government attached to laws like VAWA for every dollar collected (4) these federal subsidies benefit feminists and the divorce industry, including attorneys, judges, legislators, social workers, law guardians, marriage counselors, etc... (5) representatives of the divorce industry profit from promoting divorce and indulging lies by women and fraudulent propaganda by feminists (6) excessive orders for "support" by states reflect unconscionable pursuit of federal subsidies instead of children's best interest (7) current guidelines for "child-support" are based upon models prepared by unqualified professionals with conflict of interest and in violation of a decision by the Supreme Court (8) Robert Williams and Lenore Weitzman are mostly responsible for current "support" guidelines, but Williams owns a collection business and Weitzman misrepresented studies about standard of living after divorce, claiming that men's increases and women's decreases (9) actually, standard of living decreases for both, and is 30% less for non-custodial parents, mostly men (10) their testimony before Congress concerning guidelines should have been dismissed because it doesn't meet standards of evidence established by the Supreme Court (11) most qualified scientific professionals report that "child-support" should be one-third to one-fourth present orders, and in compliance with almost all responsible economic models (12) most men with custody do not receive "child-support" from their ex-wives, even when their ex-wives have greater incomes (13) even though they can, most women (~75%) ordered do not pay "child-support" (14) cost to state and federal gov'ts for collecting "child-support" can exceed amount collected by a multiple of ten when expenses by courts, law enforcement, "child-support" enforcement, prisons, etc... are considered (15) five-billion dollars were spent collecting $1.7-billion of "child-support" in New York State during 2008 (16) During 1999 in Virginia, 428,000 parents (almost all men) of 552,000 children (half the state's minors) were ordered to pay more than $1.6 billion "child-support" (17) During 1999, twenty-million fathers were ordered to pay almost $50 billion "child-support", begging the public to believe that half of fathers in America abandoned their children (18) Today, more than thirty-million men are or have been ordered to pay excessive "child-support" and more than seven-million are in arrears (19) most men in arrears are unable to pay, approximately 250,000 in arrears are imprisoned, and "child-support" has become a mechanism of indentured servitude in violation of civil and Constitutional rights (20) imprisoned or not, fathers are alienated from their children because myth of their alleged violence is perpetuated by women and states, real violence by women is ignored, hostility of mothers toward fathers is encouraged, shared parenting is discouraged, visitation is not enforced, and fathers are encumbered financially (21) more than 50% of children in the US haven't meaningful access to their biological fathers (22) in many studies, more than 40% of mothers confess to interfering with visitation and more than 75% confess they do not value input by fathers (23) further evidence of lacking respect for fatherhood and of the illegitimate reasons women divorce or have children is DNA evidence showing paternity fraud among 7-14% of children, adultery among 27-53% of married women and courts ordering fathers who are victims of both to pay "child-support" (24) without biological fathers and support of them by mothers, children are at greater risk of abuse, suicide, teenage pregnancy, drug addiction, poor academic performance, incarceration, and many other problems
August 8, 2009
Someone from Marshalltown, IA signed.
August 27, 2009
Someone from Huron, SD signed.
September 3, 2009
Someone from Walla Walla, WA signed.
September 7, 2009
Someone from Blackfoot, ID signed.
7 years ago
Someone from Dayton, OH signed.
7 years ago
Someone from Marshallville, GA signed.
September 24, 2009
Someone from Mesquite, TX signed.
October 3, 2009
Someone from Colorado Springs, CO writes:
Quotation mark icon
My husband and I had a two year old at the time the orders were made. He had a nine year old with a stay at home mom(remarried with two more children with second husband). He was grossing 1940/m. Child support was ordered 436/m with 50/m for arrears he didn't owe(provable with bank statements. he had been paying a volunteery amount agreed upon in writting with his ex) and 100/m to the moms attorney and 100/m to his attorney and 125/m for visitation costs(lived in another state) and 55/m for the attorney retainer put on a credit card. For the child with his ex he was spending 52.6% of his net income. He was left with $782/m to live off of and that had to include his half of our sons expenses which included $240/m for sons child care(work expense) It's a good thing I was grossing $1706/m instead of freeloading like his ex. But we still were unable to pay rent and were forced to move to a bad neighborhood because it was all we could afford. Oh, I forgot to mention the $50/m for braces he had to pay his ex. That's even more above 50% to his ONE other child.
October 5, 2009
Someone from Hayes, VA signed.
7 years ago
Someone from New York, NY signed.
7 years ago
Someone from Brownsville, TX signed.
7 years ago
Someone from Deming, NM writes:
Quotation mark icon
It is about time that that laws/rules for child support be changed. ex's (usually women)are sticking it to the other and the CSED is helping. with DNA, no one should pay child support without knowing for sure that the child is their child. And, no one should EVER have to continue to pay after they find out the child is not theirs (go after the real father or the lying women). The laws should be nation wide, no varying from state to state. Take into account the average income in a state(because you can make more $ depending on where you live) but have the same rules for emancipation (18 should be the age of emancipation nation wide, if the child can act as an adult at 18 the non-custodial parent shouldn't be responsible). I know this may be a bit out there but a good way to stop abuse of the system (and women trapping men) is to make it so no women can get child support unless her and the man were married when the child was born (or get married after child's birth). That would force women to make sure they do not get pregnant unless the time is right and both parties are ready/willing to support the child. There is a lot of easy women out there looking for a man to knock them up because they know that child is guaranteed income for 18 years. And why does a non-custodial parent have to pay back welfare. If the custodial parent is not working and on welfare it seems unfair that the NCP pays them back. the NCP is paying for the CP to do nothing? I could go on and on about all the problems with child support. just in case anyone was wondering I am a female. This is not the ranting of an angry man paying child support, just some common sense.
7 years ago
Someone from New Lenox, IL signed.
October 27, 2009
Someone from Bronx, NY signed.
just now
Someone from Aurora, CO signed.
October 29, 2009
Someone from Sykesville, MD writes:
Quotation mark icon
These laws need revision, they are way out of balance!
October 29, 2009
Someone from Orlando, FL writes:
Quotation mark icon
These laws are lopsided and allow a substantial amount of abuse of the system. These laws need to become fair for both parents and I don't understand why they haven't been updated to address the many issues. I hope many more people sign this petition and I will try and get more people to help support this that are in similar unfair situations.
October 29, 2009
Someone from Miami, FL writes:
Quotation mark icon
Child Support - How did this get this ugly. Oh, yea one side got a huge advantage. I am a Slave, at least for 10 more years. I am a good slave and pay my master her portion of my work. I was working part time to make extra money and my master found out. Now I pay more money and the extra work has run out. This is my fault for being a bad slave. Are you still enjoying the show Mr. Lincoln. Your brothers and now sisters have found a way to bring abuses back. I have my children 39.5% of the time by court order. Sounds good and it is, but this figure was determined to be the most time I can get without effecting child support. Wow, my time is based on the maximum benefit to the mother. That is FINE, at least I see my angels alot. The Lord has graced me in other ways. I sold my Ex her house, the one I told her we should sell and each of us get a condo, but she wanted the house.... I sold it to her at the TOP of the Market. So my child support pays for the house and I did not have a house for 3 years. Now who is on top. This is not the typical case and I feel for my brothers in chains. This will go down in history and the "ERA of the Slave Father" Women have much more control of child birth, pregnancy, and you never find a couple that the husband brought a child and passed it off as his wife's. HA HA, that is women should be held accountable. With the power comes the responsibility. Not so in this ERA, the power for the women by Nature and the responsibility to the man by the State. Abuse Abuse Abuse... Slavery will not last. Freedom for Fathers!!!!!!!! Freedom for Fathers!!!!!!!! Freedom for Fathers!!!!!!!! I have a Dream !!!!!! That one day a Father can enjoy the love of his children without the burden of supporting his Xwife's new family. Amen!!!!
November 1, 2009
Someone from Manassas, VA writes:
Quotation mark icon
The laws the way they are actually promote this women to be single mothers because they know the laws back them up 100%.In va they can take up to 65% of your income and you have no right to see how your childrens money is spent. Finacially the men pay the most but at the end of the year you cant claim them with out the mothers permission. It should be if you are responsible and are active in you childrens life you should be able to claim them. I don't know who makes these laws and with another man hater like justice sodaMayor it will be worse for responsible parents.
November 4, 2009
Someone from Spring Hill, FL signed.
November 8, 2009
Someone from Tarpon Springs, FL writes:
Quotation mark icon
I am one who is on both sides of this fence. My ex has not provided support for years. My new spouse is nearly bankrupt from excess support and award amounts to his ex. The shoe fits both men and women, it is not about father's, it is about what is fair and right. Child support should be based on actual costs, not some dreamed up number that sounds good to some researchers (but not all) thus giving the receiving party a windfall that allows them to not be financially responsible for anything. Fairness is what society allows for all parents to provide their children, not "oh yeah divorced - then you must provide more then would have if you didn't sign the dotted line."
November 9, 2009
Someone from Oceanside, NY signed.
November 12, 2009
Someone from Rancho Cordova, CA signed.
November 12, 2009
Someone from Rancho Cordova, CA signed.
just now
Someone from Rancho Cordova, CA writes:
Quotation mark icon
Me and my boyfriend had a son. Then the Ex-wife and Ex-girlfriend then decided to file childsupport. They didnt do it before we had our baby. That was 13 years ago. Now my son is 13 and the two he pay support for are 19 and 20. We are barely living as is. Ever since our son was born this support has made things hard. The 19 year old live in ATL. He came to visit after we had not see him in 13 years and he look like my boyfriends friend.He look nothing like him.This boy from Ex-wife.
7 years ago
Someone from Conway, AR writes:
Quotation mark icon
My husband is suffering from this issue now and pays his child support on time....hasn't seen his 3 year old daughter in 2 years. Why? Because we live out of state, the laws aren't tough enough on these custodial parents who get over on the system, nor can we afford to fly from Arkansas to Florida.
7 years ago
Someone from Milton, FL writes:
Quotation mark icon
I have notarized receipts from my son mom for payments and she told the Court that she lied and never received all said money, but only half of it. The Magistrate ruled that I owed her all the money from all past years not given me the money from the receipts, nor the money she said in Court that I had paid. So now I am told that I will be arrested if I do not pay her $1000,000 in a month. What is going on when a magistrate can make his own laws, and judgments. Now if I did not have a penis he would have excepted my notarized statements, and her telling him that I had only paid $20,000. But as I stated he did not even give me credit for the $20,000 that she told him that I paid in court. TALK ABOUT ONE SIDED JUSTICE!!! I could not even appeal his ruling, to a judge. I tried but the judge would not hear it... Fix the system, someone.
7 years ago
Someone from Hammond, IN writes:
Quotation mark icon
These child support laws can get real crazy!! In IN, a mother will soon be getting child support awarded for a child she does not even have in her physical custody, but is allowing her extended family to rear the child with mom not contributing a dime to the child's needs. Is this possible? Even the father's attorney doesn't have a clue what to do about this arrangement, except to say that the mother can leave the child with whomever she pleases, but the child support will go to her. Then, mom was collecting welfare benefits for the child not in her household, without dad's knowledge, but that's been overlooked also with dad being liable for whatever was paid, even if received fraudulently. In this state, it seems the courts side with mom, regardless of circumstances. If dad makes the attempt for custody, he will go to the cleaners trying to obtain it, while mom lies her butt off about what the true arrangements are. It's not even difficult to prove that the child does not live with the mother since he is of school age and goes to school in a whole another county than where mom lists her address. The situation would not be such a disaster if the child was at least being provided for financially by what he got in the past from dad, but that's not been the case. Obviously, her family is nary able to maintain his needs, either, but they won't speak up for the courts, either, to state the true situation, so hopefully, the individual actually caring for the child will get his support monies. According to the attorney, the child support belongs to the mother according to state law? Is this crazy, or what? Heck, even the court papers name the mother as the one entitled to the child support. Meanwhile, this poor child's school lunch money is difficult to come by, unless dad or somebody on his family's side pays for that directly to the school, outside of any child support arrangement. This whole child support shebang is CRAZY!!